Search for: All records

Abstract BackgroundGenerative artificial intelligence (AI) large‐language models (LLMs) have significant potential as research tools. However, the broader implications of using these tools are still emerging. Few studies have explored using LLMs to generate data for qualitative engineering education research. Purpose/HypothesisWe explore the following questions: (i) What are the affordances and limitations of using LLMs to generate qualitative data in engineering education, and (ii) in what ways might these data reproduce and reinforce dominant cultural narratives in engineering education, including narratives of high stress? Design/MethodsWe analyzed similarities and differences between LLM‐generated conversational data (ChatGPT) and qualitative interviews with engineering faculty and undergraduate engineering students from multiple institutions. We identified patterns, affordances, limitations, and underlying biases in generated data. ResultsLLM‐generated content contained similar responses to interview content. Varying the prompt persona (e.g., demographic information) increased the response variety. When prompted for ways to decrease stress in engineering education, LLM responses more readily described opportunities for structural change, while participants' responses more often described personal changes. LLM data more frequently stereotyped a response than participants did, meaning that LLM responses lacked the nuance and variation that naturally occurs in interviews. ConclusionsLLMs may be a useful tool in brainstorming, for example, during protocol development and refinement. However, the bias present in the data indicates that care must be taken when engaging with LLMs to generate data. Specially trained LLMs that are based only on data from engineering education hold promise for future research. 

Abstract BackgroundShame is a deeply painful emotion people feel when they perceive that they have fallen short of socially constructed expectations. In this study,professional shamerefers to shame experiences that stem from people's perceptions that they have failed to meet expectations or standards that are relevant to their identities in a professional domain. While socially constructed expectations placed on engineering students have been implicitly addressed in the engineering education literature, they have rarely been the subject of specific inquiry. PurposeAs part of a broader study on professional shame in engineering, we investigated the co‐construction of social worlds that place expectations on engineering students. MethodWe conducted 10 ethnographic focus groups with undergraduate engineering students from two universities. These groups were either heterogeneous or homogeneous, regarding racial and gender identity, to examine multiple social realities. ResultsWe present significant findings related to engineering students' collective noticing, defining, and experiencing of social worlds. The findings give a sense of overlapping but distinct social realities among student groups and highlight how failing to meet expectations can contribute to deeply painful emotional responses. We also note when students' responses reproduce, resist, or redefine the broader cultural norms in which the students are embedded. ConclusionsThe study has implications for the theoretical exploration of shame, engineering education research on identity and diversity and inclusion, and the messaging and interactions in which the engineering education community engages. 

Abstract BackgroundAlthough prior research has provided robust descriptions of engineering students' identity development, a gap in the literature exists related to students' emotional experiences of shame, which undergird the socially constructed expectations of their professional formation. PurposeWe examined the lived experiences of professional shame among White male engineering students in the United States. We conceptualize professional shame to be a painful emotional state that occurs when one perceives they have failed to meet socially constructed expectations or standards that are relevant to their identity in a professional domain. MethodWe conducted unstructured interviews with nine White male engineering students from both a research‐focused institution and a teaching‐focused institution. We used interpretative phenomenological analysis to examine the interview transcripts. ResultsThe findings demonstrated four themes related to how participants experienced professional shame. First, they negotiated their global, or holistic, identities in the engineering domain. Second, they experienced threats to their identities within professional contexts. Third, participants responded to threats in ways that gave prominence to the standards they perceived themselves to have failed. Finally, they repaired their identities through reframing shame experiences and seeking social connection. ConclusionsThe findings demonstrate that the professional shame phenomenon is interwoven with professional identity development. In experiencing professional shame, White male students might reproduce the shame experience for themselves and others. This finding has important implications for the standards against which members from underrepresented groups may compare themselves and provides insight into the social construction of engineering cultures by dominant groups.