Search for: All records

Engineering education research has long been rich in behavioral observations and inquiries. These investigations span a range of levels, from individual behaviors to group dynamics to organizational influences. Such behavioral research delves into the complex interplay of behaviors and actions, exploring their origins and impacts on educational environments and structures. Topics encompass learning, identity development, engagement, and professional practices, among others, that benefit from understanding behavioral choices and their underlying motivations. Ultimately, behavioral research in engineering education aids in comprehending and predicting how individuals operate, form habits, and transform themselves and their surroundings through their chosen actions. Regrettably, behavioral research in engineering education has traditionally relied on a limited set of frameworks, like EVT, SDT, and self-efficacy, thereby restricting the analytic depth of behavioral choice. These frameworks primarily focus on whether individuals feel they can perform a certain behavior or which behaviors are most salient in given situations while overlooking the justifications, or the why, that drive behavioral choices – a critical aspect of the complete picture. Justifications are important; behaviors are context-specific and dynamic, closely tied to an individual's interpretations of their surroundings, expectations, self-concept, and goals, among other factors. Therefore, understanding why behaviors are performed yields a more nuanced image that combines these influences with their eventual outcomes. In an effort to explore behavioral choices and investigate why they are, or are not, performed, this paper presents the Reasoned Action Approach (RAA) framework. This approach emphasizes the pivotal role of intention in individuals' behavioral choices. It proposes that personal beliefs, norms, and abilities are the key determinants of intentionality. Whether or not an individual performs a behavior is therefore contingent upon their beliefs about performing the behavior, specifically their behavioral, normative, and control beliefs. These beliefs reveal their feelings toward a behavior, their expectations of social acceptability, and their perceived capability to execute the behavior. As a result, the RAA transcends contextual constraints and can be applied to a wide spectrum of behaviors, environments, and systems, shedding light on how individuals perceive actions and decide whether to act upon them. We introduce the RAA to offer engineering education research a substantive theory for extracting and investigating the determinants behind individuals' preferential behaviors. Further, the RAA broadens existing behavioral analysis by emphasizing the factors behind behavioral choices, specifically focusing on the intricate interplay between beliefs and social norms in the decision-making process. In this context, the RAA represents a distinctive and novel approach to conceptualizing behavior, which will benefit fellow researchers. This paper begins with a review of pertinent engineering and higher education literature to situate the RAA within similar behavioral choice studies. It then explores the components of the RAA, delving into their significance and implications. The paper concludes with select research both within and beyond the engineering education domain to underscore the applicability, utility, and relevance of the RAA and provide examples for future inquiries. 

This project explores the collaborative skills occurring within engineering education and practice. While technical competence is crucial, collaborative skills are paramount in engineering enterprises, and current evidence suggests working in teams does not ensure the development of effective collaboration behaviors among engineers. Yet, lifelong learning requires engineers to navigate complex interactions within diverse design teams, emphasizing the need for a nuanced understanding of collaboration. To address this gap, our study aims to identify the least-performed effective collaboration behaviors in engineering capstone teams and explore the reasons behind this occurrence. This investigation is part of a larger study that employs the Reasoned Action Approach1 where we seek to uncover individual beliefs and factors influencing the performance of target behaviors. These insights serve as tools for engineers, students, educators, and managers to assess and enhance collaboration skills, fostering effective teamwork in engineering settings. Ultimately, this overarching goal of advancing professional formation in engineering distills into the key question: Why do individuals exhibit variations in performing effective collaboration behaviors in engineering teams? 

Research suggests that engineers generally undergo socialization through two sets of socialization processes when they are newly hired to an organization: (1) initiating proactive behaviors and (2) participating in company-initiated actions, called organizational tactics. This study provides a first-look at socialization in the U.S. aerospace and defense (A&D) industry by examining how newly-hired engineers at A&D organizations initiate proactive behaviors and participate in organizational tactics to adjust to their new jobs and organizations. First, the relationships between two sets of socialization processes and socialization outcomes of new engineers were examined. Second, holistic profiles that best characterize newly hired engineers’ socialization processes, and whether engineers with different types of profiles present varying socialization outcomes were identified. A total of 86 new engineers who had less than two years of working experience in their A&D organizations were included in this study. Multiple regression and Latent Profile Analyses (LPA) were employed. Study findings show that newly-hired engineers in the A&D industry frequently rely on social interactions to adjust to their job position and organization, and they often participate in organizational tactics more than proactive socialization behaviors. Implications of these findings in the context of A&D workplaces and aerospace engineering education settings are discussed. 

Turnover plays a significant role in the productivity of any organization and is especially vital within the initial adjustment period of new hires. Organizations seek to develop strategies to reduce turnover to help solve this issue, but these strategies require knowledge of what influences the retention and satisfaction of the employees. The objective of this research is to identify the factors that managers perceive to affect the retention and the satisfaction of newly hired aerospace engineers so that managers or employers can create strategies to reduce turnover within this group. While research has been conducted on general retention and satisfaction, no research has been specific to the aerospace engineering field and its newly hired employees. These aspects are important because unique factors can arise within specific fields. The current study used qualitative research methods to analyze seven semi-structured interviews with experienced managers of newly hired aerospace engineers. These interviews were analyzed to find key factors that managers consider to affect retention and satisfaction. This research identified six themes for retention factors: local and national economic trends, personal factors unique to each newcomer, the quality of work assigned to the newcomer, the social environment of the workgroup, benefits offered to employees, and the newcomer’s role and how it fits in with the workgroup. This study also identified six themes for satisfaction factors: the quality of work assigned to the newcomer, management styles and actions, general work environment, benefits, fit with a mentor, and expectations for the aerospace industry.