BackgroundThere have been calls to shift how engineering education researchers investigate the ex... more BackgroundThere have been calls to shift how engineering education researchers investigate the experiences of engineering students from racially minoritized groups. These conversations have primarily involved qualitative researchers, but an echo of equal magnitude from quantitative inquiry has been largely absent.PurposeThis paper examines the data analysis practices used in quantitative engineering education research related to broadening participation. We highlight practical issues and promising practices focused on “racial difference” during analysis.Scope/MethodWe conducted a systematic literature review of methods employed by quantitative studies related to Black students participating in engineering and computer science at the undergraduate level. Person‐centered analyses and variable‐centered analyses, coined by Jack Block, were used as our categorization framework, backdropped with the principles of QuantCrit.ResultsForty‐nine studies qualified for review. Although each article involved some variable‐centered analysis, we found strategies authors used that aligned and did not align with person‐centered analyses, including forming groups based on participant attitudes and using race as a variable, respectively. We highlight person‐centered approaches as a tangible step for authors to engage meaningfully with QuantCrit in their data analysis decision‐making.ConclusionsOur findings highlight four areas of consideration for advancing quantitative data analysis in engineering education: operationalizing race and racism, sample sizes and data binning, claims with race as a variable, and promoting descriptive studies. We contend that engaging in deeper thought with these four areas in quantitative inquiry can help researchers engage with the difficult choices inherent to quantitative analyses.
Abstract Design and construction professionals must make well-informed decisions for every projec... more Abstract Design and construction professionals must make well-informed decisions for every project that meets both industry standards and building codes and also the specific needs of building user...
In the spring of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted life around the world, including education... more In the spring of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted life around the world, including educational institutions. Schools and universities transitioned quickly from in-person instruction to emergency remote teaching. In the United States, faculty members in universities typically reorganized their classes in 1 week for online delivery, such as during spring break in March or between the winter and spring quarters. This unprecedented transition to emergency remote teaching offered a unique opportunity for research in engineering education. Seizing this opportunity, the Journal of Engineering Education issued an open call for papers on the effects of the pandemic on the engineering education community. Accepted papers would be published in special themed sections of regular issues of the Journal. The call was first announced in April 2020 with an original deadline of December 1, 2020, later extended to April 1, 2021. As the guest editors for the COVID-19 themed sections, we sought papers that would go beyond reporting how engineering teachers, administrators, and students responded to the pandemic. While their responses revealed implicit assumptions about engineering education that were revealed during the pandemic, we hoped that studies of these assumptions and their consequences would add to knowledge about engineering education more broadly. We received 31 full submissions to the special themed sections from institutions both inside and outside the United States. All submissions have subsequently undergone the Journal's standard review process, and we want to thank the peer reviewers for returning thoughtful evaluations under an accelerated schedule. In this issue of the Journal, we are pleased to present the first two COVID-19 articles, with future issues, including additional ones. All COVID-19 articles will be collected in an online virtual issue of the Journal, which will be updated as articles are accepted. The pandemic gave faculty the opportunity to become comfortable with online and hybrid modes of teaching and to explore their affordances. Thus, it is likely that the use of these modes will continue to grow long after the pandemic is over. While the use of instructional technology to deliver lectures is straightforward, it is less obvious how to use various active learning approaches in an online environment. The article by Magana et al., “Teamwork Facilitation and Conflict Resolution Training in Online and Hybrid Courses During the COVID-19 Pandemic,” addresses this issue. Using a situative learning perspective to guide both course design and their research, they investigated the use of cooperative teams in both fully in-person and hybrid (Hyflex) modalities with varying use of case studies, conflict resolution training, and student reflections. Their findings have important implications for implementing collaborative teams in an online class. One important lesson from the article by Magana et al. is that social presence and a sense of community, so important for learning, are hindered in the online environment. In their article, “Using Workplace Thriving Theory To Investigate First-Year Engineering Students' Abilities To Thrive During the Transition to Online Learning due to COVID-19,” Menold et al. expand on this point further, using Workplace Thriving Theory to understand the ways in which students attempted to succeed in an online class. Through interviews with first-year engineering students, the authors examined how the online environment both promoted and inhibited relationships with peers and professors. While their findings are based on online classes, similar problems can arise in in-person classes. Thus, the authors conclude with three recommendations for helping students thrive in any type of class. These two articles and the ones to come in future issues demonstrate the ability of engineering faculty to make changes quickly in a time of crisis. Within the engineering education community, we often have conversations about how to evoke change in general and transformative change in particular. These recurring conversations resulted in the Mann (1918) and Grinter (1955) reports of the 20th century and the publications of the National Academy of Engineering (2004), Jamieson and Lohmann (2009), and Sheppard et al. (2009) in this century. It is undeniable that the COVID-19 pandemic has evoked sweeping changes in engineering education—and in almost every other aspect of life—and we all share in the desire to get to a new normal. However, before doing so, it would be prudent for us to DOI: 10.1002/jee.20457
International Journal of Engineering Education, 2016
Massive Open Online Courses quickly infiltrated higher education, leaving little time for large-g... more Massive Open Online Courses quickly infiltrated higher education, leaving little time for large-group discussions on theirrole in engineering education. We argue that a research agenda around the role of MOOCs in engineering education isnecessary for fully leveraging them in our context. While four articles published between 2011–2015 outline futuredirections for MOOCs research, previous studies did not gather input from the community on the most pressing researchneeds, corresponding corresponding questions, or the research needs unique to engineering education. The purpose of thisstudy is to present a research agenda around the role of MOOCs in engineering education that is informed bymultidisciplinary perspectives (i.e., MOOCs, learning science, and engineering researchers and practitioners). ThreeNSF-funded workshops took place at engineering conferences throughout 2014 to facilitate the accomplishment of thisgoal. Thematic analysis of 65 workshop participants’ survey responses l...
Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 2019
To improve the impact engineering education research has on practice, there is a need to understa... more To improve the impact engineering education research has on practice, there is a need to understand how stakeholders (i.e. researchers, practitioners, administrators) currently engage with research. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the ways that various engineering education stakeholders engage with research and their perceptions of the impact of doing so. Twenty-seven engineering stakeholders located in the United States participated in 30-60 min semi-structured interviews. The interview participants' responses were analysed using thematic analysis. This analysis resulted in two types of findingsnamely seven ways engineering education stakeholders tend to engage with research; and four forms of influence that research has on engineering education practice. Both sets of findings were combined to create the Research Engagement Matrix, which maps characterisations of research activities along a continuum from consumer to producers and scopes of influence along a continuum from local to national level. Although the findings of this study are limited to insights from stakeholders in the United States, many of engagement activities and forms of influence may also describe members of the global engineering education community. This work has implications for bridging connections between research and practice among all engineering education stakeholders.
International Journal of Engineering Education, 2018
Impact is a topic of interest among a wide range of stakeholders interested in engineering workfo... more Impact is a topic of interest among a wide range of stakeholders interested in engineering workforce development but is onein which there is a dearth of scholarship. While existing literature includes two dimensions of research impact (scientific,and societal), this qualitative study proposes and focuses on the third dimension—contextual impact. Using Toulmin’sModel and theCommon Guidelines for Education Research and Development, this study uses content analysis to explorehow researchers on National Science Foundation-funded STEM education RD special attention is given to engineering education research.Findings reveal eight claims that are commonly discussed when Principal Investigators articulate research impact; twothemes relate to how their claims are supported. The findings also indicate that the discipline associated with the study andthe project focus has more to do with the types of impact PIs claim than the amount of funding awarded to the project. TheproposedSCS Impact Frameworkresulted from identifying the points of alignment between PIs’ perspectives on impactand existing literature. This conceptual lens describing impact in this context is useful for researchers, practitioners, andpolicymakers around the world interested in the scientific, contextual, and societal dimensions of engineering educationR&D.
In her research, she is interested in understanding how engineering students develop their profes... more In her research, she is interested in understanding how engineering students develop their professional identity, the role of emotion in student learning, and synergistic learning. A recent research project uncovers the narratives of exemplary engineering faculty who have successfully transitioned to studentcentered teaching strategies. She co-designed the environmental engineering synthesis and design studios and the design spine for the mechanical engineering program at UGA. She is engaged in mentoring early career faculty at her university and within the PEER National Collaborative. In 2013 she was selected to be a National Academy of Engineering Frontiers of Engineering Education Faculty Member.
ests relate to comparative study methods and frameworks in engineering education, global engineer... more ests relate to comparative study methods and frameworks in engineering education, global engineering, professional development, and mentoring of engineering graduate students. She is a student member of American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE).
The increasing presence of entrepreneurship within many engineering curricula requires a compleme... more The increasing presence of entrepreneurship within many engineering curricula requires a complementary tool to assess the impact on learners. An instrument was developed based on the Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network's 3Cs-Curiosity, Connections, and Creation of Valueframework to assess entrepreneurial mindset. The instrument was designed to target twelve total mindsets. Items were pilot tested four times with undergraduate students at a large southwestern public institution. Results in this paper are given for the last of four pilots in Spring 2017. Exploratory factor analysis was utilized to identify the number of emergent factors and overall importance of each item. The ensuing instrument contained 34 items within seven factors. The developed instrument and results of this study provide a foundation to support the accurate assessment of engineering student entrepreneurial mindsets before, during, and after an entrepreneurial experience.
BackgroundThere have been calls to shift how engineering education researchers investigate the ex... more BackgroundThere have been calls to shift how engineering education researchers investigate the experiences of engineering students from racially minoritized groups. These conversations have primarily involved qualitative researchers, but an echo of equal magnitude from quantitative inquiry has been largely absent.PurposeThis paper examines the data analysis practices used in quantitative engineering education research related to broadening participation. We highlight practical issues and promising practices focused on “racial difference” during analysis.Scope/MethodWe conducted a systematic literature review of methods employed by quantitative studies related to Black students participating in engineering and computer science at the undergraduate level. Person‐centered analyses and variable‐centered analyses, coined by Jack Block, were used as our categorization framework, backdropped with the principles of QuantCrit.ResultsForty‐nine studies qualified for review. Although each article involved some variable‐centered analysis, we found strategies authors used that aligned and did not align with person‐centered analyses, including forming groups based on participant attitudes and using race as a variable, respectively. We highlight person‐centered approaches as a tangible step for authors to engage meaningfully with QuantCrit in their data analysis decision‐making.ConclusionsOur findings highlight four areas of consideration for advancing quantitative data analysis in engineering education: operationalizing race and racism, sample sizes and data binning, claims with race as a variable, and promoting descriptive studies. We contend that engaging in deeper thought with these four areas in quantitative inquiry can help researchers engage with the difficult choices inherent to quantitative analyses.
Abstract Design and construction professionals must make well-informed decisions for every projec... more Abstract Design and construction professionals must make well-informed decisions for every project that meets both industry standards and building codes and also the specific needs of building user...
In the spring of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted life around the world, including education... more In the spring of 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted life around the world, including educational institutions. Schools and universities transitioned quickly from in-person instruction to emergency remote teaching. In the United States, faculty members in universities typically reorganized their classes in 1 week for online delivery, such as during spring break in March or between the winter and spring quarters. This unprecedented transition to emergency remote teaching offered a unique opportunity for research in engineering education. Seizing this opportunity, the Journal of Engineering Education issued an open call for papers on the effects of the pandemic on the engineering education community. Accepted papers would be published in special themed sections of regular issues of the Journal. The call was first announced in April 2020 with an original deadline of December 1, 2020, later extended to April 1, 2021. As the guest editors for the COVID-19 themed sections, we sought papers that would go beyond reporting how engineering teachers, administrators, and students responded to the pandemic. While their responses revealed implicit assumptions about engineering education that were revealed during the pandemic, we hoped that studies of these assumptions and their consequences would add to knowledge about engineering education more broadly. We received 31 full submissions to the special themed sections from institutions both inside and outside the United States. All submissions have subsequently undergone the Journal's standard review process, and we want to thank the peer reviewers for returning thoughtful evaluations under an accelerated schedule. In this issue of the Journal, we are pleased to present the first two COVID-19 articles, with future issues, including additional ones. All COVID-19 articles will be collected in an online virtual issue of the Journal, which will be updated as articles are accepted. The pandemic gave faculty the opportunity to become comfortable with online and hybrid modes of teaching and to explore their affordances. Thus, it is likely that the use of these modes will continue to grow long after the pandemic is over. While the use of instructional technology to deliver lectures is straightforward, it is less obvious how to use various active learning approaches in an online environment. The article by Magana et al., “Teamwork Facilitation and Conflict Resolution Training in Online and Hybrid Courses During the COVID-19 Pandemic,” addresses this issue. Using a situative learning perspective to guide both course design and their research, they investigated the use of cooperative teams in both fully in-person and hybrid (Hyflex) modalities with varying use of case studies, conflict resolution training, and student reflections. Their findings have important implications for implementing collaborative teams in an online class. One important lesson from the article by Magana et al. is that social presence and a sense of community, so important for learning, are hindered in the online environment. In their article, “Using Workplace Thriving Theory To Investigate First-Year Engineering Students' Abilities To Thrive During the Transition to Online Learning due to COVID-19,” Menold et al. expand on this point further, using Workplace Thriving Theory to understand the ways in which students attempted to succeed in an online class. Through interviews with first-year engineering students, the authors examined how the online environment both promoted and inhibited relationships with peers and professors. While their findings are based on online classes, similar problems can arise in in-person classes. Thus, the authors conclude with three recommendations for helping students thrive in any type of class. These two articles and the ones to come in future issues demonstrate the ability of engineering faculty to make changes quickly in a time of crisis. Within the engineering education community, we often have conversations about how to evoke change in general and transformative change in particular. These recurring conversations resulted in the Mann (1918) and Grinter (1955) reports of the 20th century and the publications of the National Academy of Engineering (2004), Jamieson and Lohmann (2009), and Sheppard et al. (2009) in this century. It is undeniable that the COVID-19 pandemic has evoked sweeping changes in engineering education—and in almost every other aspect of life—and we all share in the desire to get to a new normal. However, before doing so, it would be prudent for us to DOI: 10.1002/jee.20457
International Journal of Engineering Education, 2016
Massive Open Online Courses quickly infiltrated higher education, leaving little time for large-g... more Massive Open Online Courses quickly infiltrated higher education, leaving little time for large-group discussions on theirrole in engineering education. We argue that a research agenda around the role of MOOCs in engineering education isnecessary for fully leveraging them in our context. While four articles published between 2011–2015 outline futuredirections for MOOCs research, previous studies did not gather input from the community on the most pressing researchneeds, corresponding corresponding questions, or the research needs unique to engineering education. The purpose of thisstudy is to present a research agenda around the role of MOOCs in engineering education that is informed bymultidisciplinary perspectives (i.e., MOOCs, learning science, and engineering researchers and practitioners). ThreeNSF-funded workshops took place at engineering conferences throughout 2014 to facilitate the accomplishment of thisgoal. Thematic analysis of 65 workshop participants’ survey responses l...
Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 2019
To improve the impact engineering education research has on practice, there is a need to understa... more To improve the impact engineering education research has on practice, there is a need to understand how stakeholders (i.e. researchers, practitioners, administrators) currently engage with research. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the ways that various engineering education stakeholders engage with research and their perceptions of the impact of doing so. Twenty-seven engineering stakeholders located in the United States participated in 30-60 min semi-structured interviews. The interview participants' responses were analysed using thematic analysis. This analysis resulted in two types of findingsnamely seven ways engineering education stakeholders tend to engage with research; and four forms of influence that research has on engineering education practice. Both sets of findings were combined to create the Research Engagement Matrix, which maps characterisations of research activities along a continuum from consumer to producers and scopes of influence along a continuum from local to national level. Although the findings of this study are limited to insights from stakeholders in the United States, many of engagement activities and forms of influence may also describe members of the global engineering education community. This work has implications for bridging connections between research and practice among all engineering education stakeholders.
International Journal of Engineering Education, 2018
Impact is a topic of interest among a wide range of stakeholders interested in engineering workfo... more Impact is a topic of interest among a wide range of stakeholders interested in engineering workforce development but is onein which there is a dearth of scholarship. While existing literature includes two dimensions of research impact (scientific,and societal), this qualitative study proposes and focuses on the third dimension—contextual impact. Using Toulmin’sModel and theCommon Guidelines for Education Research and Development, this study uses content analysis to explorehow researchers on National Science Foundation-funded STEM education RD special attention is given to engineering education research.Findings reveal eight claims that are commonly discussed when Principal Investigators articulate research impact; twothemes relate to how their claims are supported. The findings also indicate that the discipline associated with the study andthe project focus has more to do with the types of impact PIs claim than the amount of funding awarded to the project. TheproposedSCS Impact Frameworkresulted from identifying the points of alignment between PIs’ perspectives on impactand existing literature. This conceptual lens describing impact in this context is useful for researchers, practitioners, andpolicymakers around the world interested in the scientific, contextual, and societal dimensions of engineering educationR&D.
In her research, she is interested in understanding how engineering students develop their profes... more In her research, she is interested in understanding how engineering students develop their professional identity, the role of emotion in student learning, and synergistic learning. A recent research project uncovers the narratives of exemplary engineering faculty who have successfully transitioned to studentcentered teaching strategies. She co-designed the environmental engineering synthesis and design studios and the design spine for the mechanical engineering program at UGA. She is engaged in mentoring early career faculty at her university and within the PEER National Collaborative. In 2013 she was selected to be a National Academy of Engineering Frontiers of Engineering Education Faculty Member.
ests relate to comparative study methods and frameworks in engineering education, global engineer... more ests relate to comparative study methods and frameworks in engineering education, global engineering, professional development, and mentoring of engineering graduate students. She is a student member of American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE).
The increasing presence of entrepreneurship within many engineering curricula requires a compleme... more The increasing presence of entrepreneurship within many engineering curricula requires a complementary tool to assess the impact on learners. An instrument was developed based on the Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network's 3Cs-Curiosity, Connections, and Creation of Valueframework to assess entrepreneurial mindset. The instrument was designed to target twelve total mindsets. Items were pilot tested four times with undergraduate students at a large southwestern public institution. Results in this paper are given for the last of four pilots in Spring 2017. Exploratory factor analysis was utilized to identify the number of emergent factors and overall importance of each item. The ensuing instrument contained 34 items within seven factors. The developed instrument and results of this study provide a foundation to support the accurate assessment of engineering student entrepreneurial mindsets before, during, and after an entrepreneurial experience.
Uploads
Papers by Jeremi London