Search for: All records

Quantum Information Science and Engineering (QISE) is rapidly gaining interest across a wide range of disciplines. As QISE continues to evolve, engineering will play an increasingly critical role in advancing quantum technologies. While efforts to characterize introductory QISE courses are underway, a comprehensive understanding of QISE education across the United States remains lacking. Developing a broad understanding of the QISE education landscape is crucial for addressing the needs of the growing quantum industry and ensuring equitable access for a diverse range of participants. This paper presents part of an ongoing effort to characterize the current landscape of QISE courses and degree programs in higher education in the US. To achieve this, we used publicly available information from university and college websites to capture information on over 8000 courses that address quantum in some way and nearly 90 QISE specific programs (e.g., degrees, minors, certificates). The majority of these programs are interdisciplinary and include engineering; 14 of them are housed exclusively in engineering departments. We find most programs are offered at research intensive institutions. Our results showcase an opportunity for program developers at non-research intensive institutions to justify the creation of QISE programs, which would also address calls from different stakeholders in QISE education for a more diverse QISE workforce. We suggest strategies based on the findings of this study such as integrating QISE into existing courses, investing in the development of QISE courses and programs at non-PhD-granting institutions, and making courses with QISE content accessible to students from a variety of majors. 

Research-based assessments (RBAs; e.g., the Force Concept Inventory) that measure student content knowledge, attitudes, or identities have played a major role in transforming physics teaching practices. RBAs offer instructors a standardized method for empirically investigating the efficacy of their instructional practices and documenting the impacts of course transformations. Unlike course exams, the common usage of standardized RBAs across institutions uniquely supports instructors to compare their student outcomes over time or against multi-institutional data sets. While the number of RBAs and RBA-using instructors has increased over the last three decades, barriers to administering RBAs keep many physics instructors from using them.1,2 To mitigate these barriers, we have created full-service online RBA platforms (i.e., the Learning About STEM Student Outcomes [LASSO],3 Colorado Learning Attitudes About Science Survey for Experimental Physics [E-CLASS],4 and Physics Lab Inventory of Critical thinking [PLIC]5 platforms) that host, administer, score, and analyze RBAs. These web-based platforms can make it easier for instructors to use RBAs, especially as many courses have been forced to transition to online instruction. We hope that this editorial can serve as a guide for instructors considering administering RBAs online. In what follows, we examine common barriers to using RBAs, how online administration can remove those barriers, and the research into online administration of RBAs. In the supplementary material,6 we also include a practical how-to for administering RBAs online and sample student email wording.