More Like this

1. Converging on Key Topics for Collaborative Learning in K12 Practice Using the Delphi Method

   Dragnić-Cindrić, Dalila; Fusco, Judi (June 2024, International Conference of the Learning Sciences)

   We brought researchers and educators together to participate as panelists in a Delphi Method study and rate the importance of research topics in computer-supported collaborative learning for K12 STEM practice. At the end of the Delphi Method, researchers and practitioners converged on seven key topics. Researchers and practitioners will further explore these topics in the next project phase to develop resources to connect research to practice in classrooms. 

   more » « less
2. Key CSCL research topics for K-12 practice: A modified Delphi study with practitioners and researchers

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2025.100265  

   Dragnić-Cindrić, Dalila; Fusco, Judi (June 2025, Computers and Education Open)

   Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) is effective in improving students’ learning outcomes, yet CSCL research is rarely translated to classroom practice. To identify key CSCL research topics for K-12 STEM practice, we conducted a modified Delphi method study with a panel of practitioners and researchers. We relied on a knowledge mobilization framework to draw on expertise from both researchers, who produce new knowledge, and practitioners, who combine it with their pedagogical wisdom and use it in classrooms. We used the Delphi method because of its potential to address the power imbalances among panelists and modified it to facilitate knowledge mediation between knowledge production and use. The panelists identified seven key CSCL topics for translation from research into practice: Classroom discourse; Diversity, equity, and inclusion; Teacher preparation and professional development; Socially shared regulation of learning; Argumentation; Classroom orchestration and scripts; and Student and teacher identities. We also investigated panelists’ ideas on effective practitioner-researcher partnerships to inform the next stage of our project, where researchers and practitioners will jointly translate research from selected topics into practical guidance. We discuss our findings and the affordances and limitations of the Delphi method in knowledge mediation. 

   more » « less
3. Human-AI teaming for COVID-19 response: A practice & research collaboration case study

   Hughes, A.; Stephens, K. K.; Peterson, S.; Purohit, H.; Harris, A. G.; Senarath, Y.; Jarvis, S. A.; Montagnolo, C. E.; Nader, K. (May 2022, Proceedings of the 19th International ISCRAM Conference)

   Practice and research collaborations in the disaster domain have the potential to improve emergency management practices while also advancing disaster science theory. However, they also pose challenges as practitioners and researchers each have their own culture, history, values, incentives, and processes that do not always facilitate collaboration. In this paper, we reflect on a 6-month practice and research collaboration, where researchers and practitioners worked together to craft a social media monitoring system for emergency managers in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The challenges we encountered in this project fall into two broad categories, job-related and timescale challenges. Using prior research on team science as a guide, we discuss several challenges we encountered in these two categories and show how our team sought to overcome them. We conclude with a set of best practices for improving practice and research collaborations. 

   more » « less
4. Building a Framework to Understand the Impact of Entrepreneurship Support Programs on the Formation of Engineers

   Adams, C. (June 2023, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION)

   Entrepreneurship Support Programs (ESP) in engineering provide education, mentoring, and advising for emerging entrepreneurs and their ventures. The impact of ESPs on engineering students’ professional formation and the acquisition of different attributes—such as creativity, risk-taking, empathy, and curiosity—is largely unknown. Though the social sciences have a strong and robust history of studying many of the attributes, such as creativity and problem-solving, typically associated with entrepreneurship, there has been little connection between this foundational research and the work of ESPs. In fact, two separate systematic reviews have shown that most published work in STEM entrepreneurship education is not theoretically grounded and does not follow standards of quality research approaches in the social sciences. In an effort to bridge the gap between social scientists and engineering entrepreneurship practitioners, the authors are conducting a two-phase study. Phase 1 of the study involves conducting a Delphi study to identify the top entrepreneurial attributes of professionals and researchers who lead ESPs. Phase 2 of the study includes conducting workshops with social scientists who study the attributes and ESP leaders. The goal of the workshops is to identify assessment frameworks grounded in social science theory and literature that will guide the measurement of the attributes. This session will focus on the results of the Delphi phase. Delphi study is a common research technique used to achieve consensus among experts (Hasson, Keeney, and McKenna, 2000). Seventy-three participants who lead or have led an ESP, have conducted research in entrepreneurship education, or act as administrators for relevant entrepreneurship programs were invited to participate in the Delphi study. Of the 73 invited, 14 completed at least two rounds of the Delphi study. All participants were experts in the field of engineering entrepreneurship education. The Delphi Study comprised three rounds- brainstorming, narrowing, and ranking. Each phase of the Delphi asked participants to think about three different sets of attributes: 1) entrepreneurial attributes that they thought were important in the development of an entrepreneur, 2) attributes in becoming a successful professional, and 3) attributes in working in an inclusive workspace. In the brainstorming phase, participants were sent an online questionnaire and were asked to brainstorm as many attributes as they could think of. The results of the brainstorming questionnaire were consolidated and used to develop the narrowing questionnaire, where participants were asked to narrow all attributes to the top 10 key attributes The results from the narrowing questionnaire were then used to develop a ranking questionnaire, where participants were asked to rank the items on a scale of importance with 1 being the most important to 10 being the least important for each set of attributes. The results of the phase 3 questionnaire were analyzed to identify the attributes that were ranked the highest among a majority of the participants. This paper discusses the findings of the Delphi Study and its implications in assessing the impact of ESP on entrepreneur formation. 

   more » « less
5. Advancing the scholarship and practice of stakeholder engagement in working landscapes: a co-produced research agenda

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s42532-022-00132-8  

   Eaton, Weston M.; Burnham, Morey; Robertson, Tahnee; Arbuckle, J. G.; Brasier, Kathryn J.; Burbach, Mark E.; Church, Sarah P.; Hart-Fredeluces, Georgia; Jackson-Smith, Douglas; Wildermuth, Grace; et al (December 2022, Socio-Ecological Practice Research)

   Abstract Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research–practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among ‘on-the-ground’ practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes. 

   more » « less