More Like this

1. What is the impact of aminoglycoside exposure on soil and plant root-associated microbiota? A systematic review protocol

   https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-022-00274-y  

   Coates, Jessica ; Bostick, Kathleen J. ; Jones, Brooke A. ; Caston, Nymeer ; Ayalew, Mentewab ( May 2022 , Environmental Evidence)

   Aminoglycosides are potent bactericidal antibiotics naturally produced by soil microorganisms and are commonly used in agriculture. Exposure to these antibiotics has the potential to cause shifts in the microorganisms that impact plant health. The systematic review described in this protocol will compile and synthesize literature on soil and plant root-associated microbiota, with special attention to aminoglycoside exposure. The systematic review should provide insight into how the soil and plant microbiota are impacted by aminoglycoside exposure with specific attention to the changes in the overall species richness and diversity (microbial composition), changes of the resistome (i.e. the changes in the quantification of resistance genes), and maintenance of plant health through suppression of pathogenic bacteria. Moreover, the proposed contribution will provide comprehensive information about data available to guide future primary research studies. This systematic review protocol is based on the question, “What is the impact of aminoglycoside exposure on the soil and plant root-associated microbiota?”.

   A boolean search of academic databases and specific websites will be used to identify research articles, conference presentations and grey literature meeting the search criteria. All search results will be compiled and duplicates removed before title and abstract screening. Two reviewers will screen all the included titles and abstracts using a set of predefined inclusion criteria. Full-texts of all titles and abstracts meeting the eligibility criteria will be screened independently by two reviewers. Inclusion criteria will describe the eligible soil and plant root-associated microbiome populations of interest and eligible aminoglycosides constituting our exposure. Study validity will be evaluated using the CEE Critical Appraisal Tool Version 0.2 (Prototype) to evaluate the risk of bias in publications. Data from studies with a low risk of bias will be extracted and compiled into a narrative synthesis and summarized into tables and figures. If sufficient evidence is available, findings will be used to perform a meta-analysis.

    

   more » « less
2. Emotions in engineering education: Preliminary results from a scoping review

   Lönngren, Johanna ; Bellocchi, Alberto ; Bøgelund, Pia ; Direito, Inês ; Huff, James ; Mohd-Yusof, Khairiyah ; Murzi, Homero ; Tormey, Roland ( December 2021 , Proceedings of the Research in Engineering Education Symposium & Australasian Association for Engineering Education Conference)

   CONTEXT There is today a broad consensus that emotions influence all forms of teaching and learning, and scholarship on Emotions in Engineering Education (EEE) is an emerging and rapidly growing field. However, this nascent research is currently very dispersed and not well consolidated. There is also a lack of knowledge about the state of the art, strengths, and limitations of the existing literature in the field, gaps, and future avenues for research. PURPOSE We have conducted a scoping review of EEE research, aiming to provide a first overview of the EEE scholarship landscape. We report here on preliminary findings related to (1) the status of the field, (2) geographical representation of authors, and (3) emerging hot spots and blind spots in terms of research approaches, contexts, and topics. METHODS The scoping review is part of a larger, systematic review of the EEE literature. Using an inclusive search strategy, we retrieved 2,175 items mentioning emotions and engineering education, including common synonyms. Through abstract screening and full text sifting, we identified 184 items that significantly focus on engineering education and emotion. From these items, we extracted and synthesized basic quantitative and qualitative information on publication outlets, author origins, keywords, research approaches, and research contexts. PRELIMINARY RESULTS Surprised by the large number of EEE publications, we found that EEE is a rapidly expanding, but internationally dispersed field. Preliminary results also suggest a dominance of research on higher education, often exploring students’ academic emotions or emotional competences. Research on emotional intelligence and anxiety is particularly common while studies focusing on cultural and sociological aspects of EEE are largely absent. CONCLUSIONS The EEE literature is expanding exponentially. However, the field is not well consolidated, and many blind spots remain to be explored in terms of research approaches, contexts, and foci. To accelerate the development of the field, we invite current and prospective EEE researchers to join our emerging, international community of EEE researchers. 

   more » « less
3. Is an Effective Team an Equitable Team? Protocol for a Scoping Review

   https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE56618.2022.9962452  

   Moffat, Andrew D. ; Fowler, Robin ; Matz, Rebecca L. ; Jeffrey, Madison ( October 2022 , Frontiers in Education)

   This full paper sets out a methodological protocol for conducting a scoping review of literature relating to teamwork effectiveness and equity. The goal of the study is to understand how academic discourse over the five-year period prior to the study being carried out has conceptualized teamwork success in educational and professional contexts, and to what extent equitable team practices are embedded within such conceptualizations. In line with ongoing initiatives to promote transparency in research, this protocol paper is intended for dissemination prior to the conduct of the study itself. The research context, questions, and rationale are set out, and a detailed methodology described, outlining procedures for data retrieval, screening, extraction, and analysis. The paper concludes with an outline of intended reporting methods for the study, including the reporting of deviations from the procedures set out herein. This paper contributes to the scoping review methodology, and especially its application in the field of engineering education research and education research more broadly. 

   more » « less
4. Is an Effective Team an Equitable Team? Protocol for a Scoping Review

   Moffat, A. D. ; Fowler, R. R. ; Matz, R. L. ; Jeffrey, M. P. ( January 2022 , Frontiers in education)

   This full paper sets out a methodological protocol for conducting a scoping review of literature relating to teamwork effectiveness and equity. The goal of the study is to understand how academic discourse over the five-year period prior to the study being carried out has conceptualized teamwork success in educational and professional contexts, and to what extent equitable team practices are embedded within such conceptualizations. In line with ongoing initiatives to promote transparency in research, this protocol paper is intended for dissemination prior to the conduct of the study itself. The research context, questions, and rationale are set out, and a detailed methodology described, outlining procedures for data retrieval, screening, extraction, and analysis. The paper concludes with an outline of intended reporting methods for the study, including the reporting of deviations from the procedures set out herein. This paper contributes to the scoping review methodology, and especially its application in the field of engineering education research and education research more broadly. 

   more » « less
5. Activating social change together: A qualitative synthesis of collaborative change research, evaluation and design literature

   https://doi.org/http:dx.doi.org/10.5130/ijcre.v12i1.6693  

   Busch, Melida D ; Jean-Baptiste, Elizabeth ; Person, Pamela F ; Vaughn, Lisa M. ( December 2019 , Gateways)

   Researchers, evaluators and designers from an array of academic disciplines and industry sectors are turning to participatory approaches as they seek to understand and address complex social problems. We refer to participatory approaches that collaboratively engage/ partner with stakeholders in knowledge creation/problem solving for action/social change outcomes as collaborative change research, evaluation and design (CCRED). We further frame CCRED practitioners by their desire to move beyond knowledge creation for its own sake to implementation of new knowledge as a tool for social change. In March and May of 2018, we conducted a literature search of multiple discipline-specific databases seeking collaborative, change-oriented scholarly publications. The search was limited to include peerreviewed journal articles, with English language abstracts available, published in the last five years. The search resulted in 526 citations, 236 of which met inclusion criteria. Though the search was limited to English abstracts, all major geographic regions (North America, Europe, Latin America/Caribbean, APAC, Africa and the Middle East) were represented within the results, although many articles did not state a specific region. Of those identified, most studies were located in North America, with the Middle East having only one identified study. We followed a qualitative thematic synthesis process to examine the abstracts of peer-reviewed articles to identify practices that transcend individual disciplines, sectors and contexts to achieve collaborative change. We surveyed the terminology used to describe CCRED, setting, content/topic of study, type of collaboration, and related benefits/outcomes in order to discern the words used to designate collaboration, the frameworks, tools and methods employed, and the presence of action, evaluation or outcomes. Forty-three percent of the reviewed articles fell broadly within the social sciences, followed by 26 percent in education and 25 percent in health/medicine. In terms of participants and/ or collaborators in the articles reviewed, the vast majority of the 236 articles (86%) described participants, that is, those who the research was about or from whom data was collected. In contrast to participants, partners/collaborators (n=32; 14%) were individuals or groups who participated in the design or implementation of the collaborative change effort described. In terms of the goal for collaboration and/or for doing the work, the most frequently used terminology related to some aspect of engagement and empowerment. Common descriptors for the work itself were ‘social change’ (n=74; 31%), ‘action’ (n=33; 14%), ‘collaborative or participatory research/practice’ (n=13; 6%), ‘transformation’ (n=13; 6%) and ‘community engagement’ (n=10; 4%). Of the 236 articles that mentioned a specific framework or approach, the three most common were some variation of Participatory Action Research (n=30; 50%), Action Research (n=40; 16.9%) or Community-Based Participatory Research (n=17; 7.2%). Approximately a third of the 236 articles did not mention a specific method or tool in the abstract. The most commonly cited method/tool (n=30; 12.7%) was some variation of an arts-based method followed by interviews (n=18; 7.6%), case study (n=16; 6.7%), or an ethnographic-related method (n=14; 5.9%). While some articles implied action or change, only 14 of the 236 articles (6%) stated a specific action or outcome. Most often, the changes described were: the creation or modification of a model, method, process, framework or protocol (n=9; 4%), quality improvement, policy change and social change (n=8; 3%), or modifications to education/training methods and materials (n=5; 2%). The infrequent use of collaboration as a descriptor of partner engagement, coupled with few reported findings of measurable change, raises questions about the nature of CCRED. It appears that conducting CCRED is as complex an undertaking as the problems that the work is attempting to address. 

   more » « less