An official website of the United States government
The paper overviews a new IUSE:EDU project to develop a social network analysis (SNA) instrument that will allow STEM education centers to assess the otherwise intangible concept of STEM education capacity. STEM education capacity refers to the ability and empowerment of STEM educators to adapt to changing needs and collectively achieve shared objectives of their organizations. STEM education capacity is an important property of any academic system in STEM disciplines. It characterizes the readiness of the system’s members, communities, and the organization as a whole to adapt educational practices effectively to changing circumstances. However, it is also a latent system property, meaning that STEM education capacity can only be observed when it is in action. Most commonly, academic units see capacity in action during times of crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic. In such times of crisis, it is too late to intervene and develop capacity to more effectively deal with the crisis. We argue that STEM education capacity can be more proactively be observed in mundane interactions between peers. SNA is a promising tool to be able to capture and quantify these interactions, allowing STEM education leaders to anticipate capacity development opportunities to better prepare for times of crisis or change. The project is in its first phase of three, in which we use qualitative interviewing to identify the kinds of relationships and interactions that matter to STEM education capacity building. We interviewed fifteen engineering faculty and staff involved in the teaching and learning process in one university’s College of Engineering. We aimed to understand who they talked to about teaching and learning, how their relationships developed, and what kinds of conversation they have most often. These interviews helped us deduce how engineering educators grow, learn, change, and help others through their interactions with other educators. The results of this phase of research yielded important insights about the ways networks of educators grow and solidify in STEM higher education. They also revealed the kinds of interactions relevant to individual growth and systemic capacity building. The next project phase will develop a SNA instrument that can capture the kinds of interactions relevant to STEM education capacity building. The final project phase will validate the instrument via its deployment across the entire College of Engineering. At the end of the project, STEM education leaders will have a tool they can use to assess, study, and grow STEM education capacity in their contexts. We call this tool the CATENA Instrument (Capacity Assessment, Tracking, & Enhancement through Network Analysis). This paper and NSF grantees poster will introduce the project as a whole, and also describe our Phase 1 results.
more »
« less
Building capacity in engineering education research through collaborative secondary data analysis
This paper proposes the use of collaborative secondary data analysis (SDA) as a tool for building capacity in engineering education research. We first characterise the value of collaborative SDA as a tool to help emerging researchers develop skills in qualitative data analysis. We then describe an ongoing collaboration that involves a series of workshops as well as two pilot projects that seek to develop and test frameworks and practices for SDA in engineering education research. We identify emerging benefits and practical challenges associated with implementing SDA as a capacity building tool, and conclude with a discussion of future work.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2039864
- PAR ID:
- 10505317
- Publisher / Repository:
- Taylor & Francis
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Australasian Journal of Engineering Education
- Volume:
- 28
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 2205-4952
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 8 to 16
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)As the field of engineering education continues to evolve, the number of early career scholars who identify as members of the discipline will continue to increase. These engineering education scholars will need to take strategic and intentional actions towards their professional goals and the goals of the engineering education community to be impactful within their positions. In other words, they must exercise agency. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to investigate how the agency of early career, engineering education scholars manifests across different contexts. Our overarching research question is: How do institutional, individual, and disciplinary field and societal features influence early career engineering education faculty member’s agency to impact engineering education in their particular positions? To investigate how faculty agency manifests across different contexts, we adopted a longitudinal research approach to focus on our own experiences as engineering education scholars. Due to the complexity of the phenomenon, more common approaches to qualitative research (e.g., interviews, surveys, etc.) were unlikely to illuminate the manifestation of agency, which requires capturing the nuances associated with one’s day-to-day experiences. Thus, to address our research purpose, we required a research design that provided a space to explore one’s acceptance of ambiguity, responses to disappointments, willingness to adapt, process of adapting, and experiences with collaboration. The poster presented will provide a preliminary version of the model along with a detailed description of the methods used to develop it. In short, we integrated collaborative inquiry and collaborative autoethnography as a means for building our model. Autoethnography is a research approach that critically examines personal experience to explore a cultural phenomenon. Collaborative autoethnography, which leverages collective sense-making of the data, informed the structure of our data collection. Specifically, we documented our individual experiences over the course of six semesters by (1) completing weekly, monthly, pre-semester, and post-semester reflection questions; (2) participating in periodic activities and discussions focused on targeted areas of our theoretical framework and relevant literature; and (3) discussing the outcomes from both (1) and (2) in weekly meetings. Collaborative inquiry, in contrast to collaborative autoethnography, is a research approach where people pair reflection on practice with action through multiple inquiry cycles. Collaborative inquiry guided the topics of discussion within our weekly meetings and how we approached challenges and other aspects of our positions. The combination of these methodologies allowed us to deeply and systematically explore our own experiences, allowing us to develop a model of professional agency towards change in engineering education through collaborative sense-making. By sharing our findings with current and developing engineering education graduate programs, we will enable them to make programmatic changes to benefit current and future engineering education scholars. These findings also will provide a mechanism for divisions within ASEE to develop programming and resources to support the sustained success and impact of their members.more » « less
-
Given the infancy of engineering education as an established field and the recent increase in early career faculty aligning themselves with the discipline, it is imperative that the community better understand the experiences of these new faculty members. As a result, we will be able to enhance national efforts to train and develop faculty prepared to drive change in engineering education. Accordingly, this two-phased study will investigate how institutional context influences the agency of our research team and other early career engineering education faculty as it relates to facilitating change in engineering education. Faculty agency is important because faculty play a central role in making change, and there is a need to further understand the factors that influence their ability to do so. This work leverages collaborative inquiry and collaborative autoethnography to explore the lived experiences of our research team, which consists of six engineering education faculty with different roles and responsibilities who are positioned in varied settings at different institutions. We represent diverse perspectives with regard to our goals, visions, and training in engineering education. This project officially started in May 2017; however, we have been collecting data since August 2015. Our poster will present a summary of our current progress, which includes the use of the Q3 Research Quality Workshop to guide our plans for data collection and analysis. This was important to our work, because in Phase I of our study we are combining elements from auto ethnography and collaborative inquiry to explore our research questions. In addition to our study’s methodological impact, the results will provide the engineering education community with evidence-based insights on conditions that facilitate change efforts by early career engineering education faculty. By sharing our findings with current and developing engineering education graduate programs, we will enable them to make programmatic changes to benefit future faculty. These findings also provide a mechanism for divisions within the American Society of Engineering Education to develop programming and resources to support the sustained success of their members.more » « less
-
Given the infancy of engineering education as an established field and the recent increase in early career faculty aligning themselves with the discipline, it is imperative that the community better understand the experiences of these new faculty members. As a result, we will be able to enhance national efforts to train and develop faculty prepared to drive change in engineering education. Accordingly, this two-phased study will investigate how institutional context influences the agency of our research team and other early career engineering education faculty as it relates to facilitating change in engineering education. Faculty agency is important because faculty play a central role in making change, and there is a need to further understand the factors that influence their ability to do so. This work leverages collaborative inquiry and collaborative autoethnography to explore the lived experiences of our research team, which consists of six engineering education faculty with different roles and responsibilities who are positioned in varied settings at different institutions. We represent diverse perspectives with regard to our goals, visions, and training in engineering education. This project officially started in May 2017; however, we have been collecting data since August 2015. Our poster will present a summary of our current progress, which includes the use of the Q3 Research Quality Workshop to guide our plans for data collection and analysis. This was important to our work, because in Phase I of our study we are combining elements from auto ethnography and collaborative inquiry to explore our research questions. In addition to our study’s methodological impact, the results will provide the engineering education community with evidence-based insights on conditions that facilitate change efforts by early career engineering education faculty. By sharing our findings with current and developing engineering education graduate programs, we will enable them to make programmatic changes to benefit future faculty. These findings also provide a mechanism for divisions within the American Society of Engineering Education to develop programming and resources to support the sustained success of their members.more » « less
-
This Work-in-Progress paper in the Research Category explores the unique challenges and opportunities of interdisciplinary education in computational modeling for life sciences student researchers at emerging research institutions (ERIs), specifically in predominantly undergraduate institutions (PUIs), and minority serving institutions (MSIs). Engineering approaches such as computational modeling have underappreciated potential for capacity building for the biomedical research enterprises of ERIs. We perform a bibliometric analysis to assess the prevailing use of computational modeling in life sciences research at MSIs, and PUIs. Additionally, we apply Social and Cognitive Theory to identify unique attitudinal, social and structural barriers for student researchers in learning and using computational modeling approaches at each of these types of institutions. Specifically, we use quantitative retrospective pre- and post-survey data and qualitative interviews of students who have attended a short-format computational modeling training course. We supplement these data with qualitative interviews of the students' faculty sponsors. Upon completion, this study will provide deeper understanding of issues related to computer science and engineering education at non-Research I institutions.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2023.2214462
