More Like this

1. Consequential agency in chemical engineering laboratory courses

   Wilson-Fetrow, M.; Chi, E.; Brown, J.; Wettstein, S.; Svihla, V. (January 2022, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exhibition)

   In contrast to the dynamic treatment of other aspects of the curriculum, and despite being at the center of chemical engineering education, laboratory experiments have remained largely unchanged for decades. To characterize the potential impact changes to laboratory courses could have, we explored student perceptions across a department and characterized the kinds of opportunities students have to use their agency in these courses across universities. We used a survey to measure students’ sense of agency across several laboratory courses in a chemical engineering department. We found students in laboratory courses across the chemical engineering laboratory sequence, including those engaged in authentic course-based research did not perceive the experiments as agentive or authentic. We infer students draw upon abundant low-agency experiences in laboratory experiments. We report on the agency that instructors report students possessing across two chemical engineering departments to understand variation across institutions. Maximizing learning in laboratory courses may hinge on clearer communication about authentic experiments or systematic redesign of earlier courses. 

   more » « less
2. Assessing Emotional Balance in Higher Education: Lessons from an Engineering Department in the United States

   Appelhans, S; Thomas, R; Thomas, S; Thompson, M S; Cheville, RA (September 2024, Human Development and Capability Association)

   In the wake of COVID-19, student mental health has become a cause for concern in American universities, given rising rates of anxiety and depression amongst college-age youth. Faculty and administrators are beginning to take note of longstanding calls for a more holistic view of student life, acknowledging the impact that students’ emotional well-being has on their ability to learn. The capabilities approach is well suited to this challenge, offering a holistic account of opportunities and barriers students experience in college. Emotions are a prominent factor in many capabilities lists, including that of “emotional balance”, meaning the “ability to deal with challenges and stress”, or the “ability to be happy” (Walker et al. 2022:58). Education literature demonstrates that students’ ability to learn is significantly influenced by their emotional state (Immordino-Yang 2007, Phye et al. 2007). Positive emotions can stimulate students’ motivation to learn, while negative emotions such as anxiety or fear may cause students to withdraw. Emotional states are difficult to measure, which creates a need for assessment tools to evaluate students’ emotional capabilities in higher education. In this paper, we draw upon focus group outcomes and life-history interviews (n=24) with college seniors in an Electrical & Computer Engineering department in the United States to develop an assessment tool for emotional balance. We conducted a content analysis of the focus group and interview data, using qualitative codes that correspond with our capabilities list, material resources, and conversion factors. We then selected four case studies that demonstrate the importance of emotional balance, which were reviewed by the research team using consensus coding techniques (Stemler 2019, Harry et al. 2005). These case studies reveal the complex intersections between “emotional balance” and other higher education capabilities. Emotional imbalance may be exacerbated by a lack of structural support for emotional wellbeing on campus. However, in some cases, students may find more emotional support in campus environments than they find at home, making the university a place where emotional resilience is fostered. From this qualitative data, we generated an assessment tool that can be adapted for use by higher education administration. The assessment tool includes a survey element for collecting responses from students, along with a structural analysis to understand whether adequate support exists to help students navigate moments of emotional distress. This research will help operationalize the capabilities approach to make it more easily adaptable to other universities. 

   more » « less
3. Vulnerability and Transformation: The Impact of Student Experiences of Vulnerability on the Development of Capabilities in Higher Education

   Sarah Appelhans, Stewart Thomas (July 2023, Human Development & Capability Association Conference)

   In higher education, our students experience a wide range of vulnerabilities, which we define as a lack of physical, social, and emotional security. Vulnerabilities are unevenly distributed and stratified by race, gender, and socioeconomic status. What is the role of vulnerability in facilitating the development and expansion of capabilities, a core mission of higher education in many Western nations? On the one hand, a lack of resources can substantially undermine students’ abilities to learn and integrate new knowledge. On the other hand, vulnerability has been theorized as a catalyst for transformation, a condition of suffering and fragility that engenders change. Operational definitions of vulnerability in higher education need to acknowledge its dual-sided nature and potential to help and harm student growth. In this paper we ask what kinds of vulnerability facilitate and inhibit students’ development of capabilities? To guide our thinking, we analyze the life history interviews of three engineering students attending a liberal arts college in the Northeastern United States: one American student of above-average academic performance (representing the normative case), one immigrant student of color of above-average academic performance, and one immigrant student of color of below-average academic performance. Utilizing qualitative structured coding methods, we coded each interview using Walker’s (2006) capabilities list for higher education contexts. We also inductively coded instances of vulnerability that arose during the interviews, which often overlapped with one or more of Walker’s capabilities, and noted their proximity to other capabilities at that time in their lives. Coding was performed by three members of the research team using consensus coding techniques to reduce individual biases. We suggest that vulnerability acts as a conversion factor, which both enables and inhibits capability development. Vulnerability is often the product of structural factors, which distribute vulnerability unequally by gender, race, social class, and country of origin. However, the valence of vulnerability is mediated by individual agency, through which individuals may experience transformation through reframing vulnerability as personal triumph over adversity. We argue that the capabilities approach offers a better balance between structure and agency than two competing models, shame resilience theory and psychological safety. This study contributes to new ways of conceptualizing and measuring vulnerability and human development at the micro-level in universities. Higher education systems are central to citizens’ capability development, and understanding student vulnerabilities helps such systems respond to rapid societal changes. 

   more » « less
4. EC2000 Viewed through Amartya Sen’s Capability Framework

   R. A. Cheville (July 2023, ASEE Annual Conference proceedings)

   Most engineering programs in the United States are accredited by ABET under the guidelines known as EC-2000. The EC-2000 framework is broadly based on the continual quality management (CQM) movement in industry where programs are striving to constantly improve the quality of their output, in this case the skills of graduates. Broadly speaking, ABET evaluates engineering programs on eight different criteria; some are related to processes, some to resources, but those central to CQM are program educational objectives, that define hoped for long-term accomplishments of graduates, and outcomes which articulate what students can do when they graduate. Degree programs must convince ABET they have a documented and effective process to improve outcomes to gain accreditation. CQM of course is not the only framework by which educational development can be framed or measured. This paper explores ABET processes through the lens of the economist Amartya Sen’s capability approach, which is broadly applied in the developing world in areas of inequity, poverty, and human rights. The capability approach is often used when a focus on diverse individuals is desirable for understanding aspects of development. Central to Sen’s approach are capabilities and functionings. Capabilities are the resources and supports in an individual’s environment that provide opportunities to pursue a life they value. Functionings are what they actually become and do. Thus capabilities can be thought of as the potential for functionings; alternatively capabilities are opportunities and functionings are outcomes. This paper compares ABET’s accreditation criteria with a published set of capabilities in education. The comparison shows there are some areas where criteria overlap with capabilities, but also several areas where the overlap is low. The capabilities that aligned most with ABET criteria overlap with engineering epistemologies and a view of students as the ‘product’ of engineering education. 

   more » « less
5. EC2000 Viewed through Amartya Sen’s Capability Framework

   R. A. Cheville (July 2023, ASEE Annual Conference proceedings)

   Most engineering programs in the United States are accredited by ABET under the guidelines known as EC-2000. The EC-2000 framework is broadly based on the continual quality management (CQM) movement in industry where programs are striving to constantly improve the quality of their output, in this case the skills of graduates. Broadly speaking, ABET evaluates engineering programs on eight different criteria; some are related to processes, some to resources, but those central to CQM are program educational objectives, that define hoped for long-term accomplishments of graduates, and outcomes which articulate what students can do when they graduate. Degree programs must convince ABET they have a documented and effective process to improve outcomes to gain accreditation. CQM of course is not the only framework by which educational development can be framed or measured. This paper explores ABET processes through the lens of the economist Amartya Sen’s capability approach, which is broadly applied in the developing world in areas of inequity, poverty, and human rights. The capability approach is often used when a focus on diverse individuals is desirable for understanding aspects of development. Central to Sen’s approach are capabilities and functionings. Capabilities are the resources and supports in an individual’s environment that provide opportunities to pursue a life they value. Functionings are what they actually become and do. Thus capabilities can be thought of as the potential for functionings; alternatively capabilities are opportunities and functionings are outcomes. This paper compares ABET’s accreditation criteria with a published set of capabilities in education. The comparison shows there are some areas where criteria overlap with capabilities, but also several areas where the overlap is low. The capabilities that aligned most with ABET criteria overlap with engineering epistemologies and a view of students as the ‘product’ of engineering education. 

   more » « less