skip to main content


Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Jensen K"

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. This theory paper focuses on a research methodology, using an autoethnographic approach to reflect on the use of cognitive interviewing (CI) as a method of increasing the quality and validity of questionnaires in pre-validation design and development stages. We first provide a brief review of cognitive interviewing, sometimes called “cognitive think-aloud interviewing” or “think-aloud interviewing,” before presenting a summary of two studies conducted by the authors that used CI. Differences between these two studies are discussed as comparative cases and advice is given to scholars considering the use of CI in their own research. While this paper is not an explicit guide to conducting CI, we do intend to provide advice and wisdom for researchers who are unfamiliar with CI as a method, grounded in our experience with the method. This paper is written with a particular focus on the use of CI in engineering education research (EER) but may be more broadly applicable to other social sciences domains. 
    more » « less
    Free, publicly-accessible full text available June 1, 2024
  2. Drawing from the results of this study and a review of the literature on graduate student stressors, we developed in Year 2 the Stressors for Doctoral Students Questionnaire for Engineering (SDSQ-E) and administered it twice, in fall 2022 and in spring 2023. The SDSQ-E measures the severity and frequency of stressors including advisor-related stressors, class-taking stressors, research or laboratory stressors, campus life and financial stressors, and identity-related or microaggression-related stressors. We present a description of our project and updates on its progress in its second year, including survey results from our 2022-2023 data collection. 
    more » « less
    Free, publicly-accessible full text available June 1, 2024
  3. This research paper study was situated within a peer review mentoring program in which novice reviewers were paired with mentors who are former National Science Foundation (NSF) program directors with experience running discipline-based education research (DBER) panels. Whether it be a manuscript or grant proposal, the outcome of peer review can greatly influence academic careers and the impact of research on a field. Yet the criteria upon which reviewers base their recommendations and the processes they follow as they review are poorly understood. Mentees reviewed three previously submitted proposals to the NSF and drafted pre-panel reviews regarding the proposals’ intellectual merit and broader impacts, strengths, and weaknesses relative to solicitation-specific criteria. After participation in one mock review panel, mentees could then revise their pre-review evaluations based on the panel discussion. Using a lens of transformative learning theory, this study sought to answer the following research questions: 1) What are the tacit criteria used to inform recommendations for grant proposal reviews among scholars new to the review process? 2) To what extent are there changes in these tacit criteria and subsequent recommendations for grant proposal reviews after participation in a mock panel review? Using a single case study approach to explore one mock review panel, we conducted document analyses of six mentees’ reviews completed before and after their participation in the mock review panel. Findings from this study suggest that reviewers primarily focus on the positive broader impacts proposed by a study and the level of detail within a submitted proposal. Although mentees made few changes to their reviews after the mock panel discussion, changes which were present illustrate that reviewers more deeply considered the broader impacts of the proposed studies. These results can inform review panel practices as well as approaches to training to support new reviewers in DBER fields. 
    more » « less
    Free, publicly-accessible full text available June 26, 2024
  4. Peer review of grant proposals is critical to the National Science Foundation (NSF) funding process for STEM disciplinary and education research. Despite this, scholars receive little training in effective and constructive review of proposals beyond definitions of review criteria and an overview of strategies to avoid bias and communicate clearly. Senior researchers often find that their reviewing skills improve and develop over time, but variations in reviewer starting points can have a negative impact on the value of reviews for their intended audiences of program officers, who make funding recommendations, and principal investigators, who drive the research or want to improve their proposals. Building on the journal review component of the Engineering Education Research Peer Review Training (EER PERT) project, which is designed to develop EER scholars’ peer review skills through mentored reviewing experiences, this paper describes a program designed to provide professional development for proposal reviewing and provides initial evaluation results. 
    more » « less
    Free, publicly-accessible full text available June 26, 2024
  5. This paper describes the Engineering Education Research (EER) Peer Review Training (PERT) project, which is designed to develop EER scholars’ peer review skills through mentored reviewing experiences. Supported by the National Science Foundation, the overall programmatic goals of the PERT project are to establish and evaluate a mentored reviewer program for 1) EER journal manuscripts and 2) EER grant proposals. Concurrently, the project seeks to explore how EER scholars develop schema for evaluating EER scholarship, whether these schema are shared in the community, and how schema influence recommendations made to journal editors during the peer review process. To accomplish these goals, the PERT project leveraged the previously established Journal of Engineering Education (JEE) Mentored Reviewer Program, where two researchers with little reviewing experience are paired with an experienced mentor to complete three manuscript reviews collaboratively. In this paper we report on focus group and exit survey findings from the JEE Mentored Reviewer Program and discuss revisions to the program in response to those findings. 
    more » « less
  6. This is the first of a series of studies that explore the relationship between disciplinary background and the weighting of various elements of a manuscript in peer reviewers’ determination of publication recommendations. Research questions include: (1) To what extent are tacit criteria for determining quality or value of EER manuscripts influenced by reviewers’ varied disciplinary backgrounds and levels of expertise? and (2) To what extent does mentored peer review professional development influence reviewers’ EER manuscript evaluations? Data were collected from 27 mentors and mentees in a peer review professional development program. Participants reviewed the same two manuscripts, using a form to identify strengths, weaknesses, and recommendations. Responses were coded by two researchers (70% IRR). Our findings suggest that disciplinary background influences reviewers’ evaluation of EER manuscripts. We also found evidence that professional development can improve reviewers’ understanding of EER disciplinary conventions. Deeper understanding of the epistemological basis for manuscript reviews may reveal ways to strengthen professional preparation in engineering education as well as other disciplines. 
    more » « less
  7. Worsaae, Katrine (Ed.)
    The three members of the lecanicephalidean tapeworm family Eniochobothriidae are unusual among tapeworms in that they lack a vagina and possess a series of expanded proglottids forming a trough at the anterior end of their body. They exclusively parasitise cownose rays of the genus Rhinoptera (Myliobatiformes: Rhinopteridae). New collections from six of the nine known species of cownose rays from the waters off Australia, Mexico, Mozambique, Senegal, Taiwan and the United States (off Mississippi, Louisiana and South Carolina) yielded eight new species and a new genus of eniochobothriids. Here we erect Amiculucestus, gen. nov. and describe six of the eight new species – four in the new genus and two in Eniochobothrium – expanding the number of genera in the family to two and the number of described species in the family to nine. Morphological work was based on light and scanning electron microscopy. The tree resulting from a maximum likelihood analysis of sequence data for the D1–D3 region of the 28S rDNA gene for 11 species of eniochobothriids supports the reciprocal monophyly of both genera. The mode of attachment to the mucosal surface of the spiral intestine of the host was investigated using histological sections of worms in situ. These cestodes appear to use the anterior trough-like portion of their body, which consists of an unusual series of barren proglottids, rather than their scolex, to attach to the mucosal surface. Based on our new collections, we estimate that the total number of eniochobothriids across the globe does not exceed 27 species. ZooBank LSID: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:0740EC72‐AC3F‐43AA‐BD41‐B9820BA9D0CE 
    more » « less