Search

Striving to remain a global leader in innovation, the United States continues prioritizing broadening participation in engineering and other STEM fields. For this reason, STEM outreach programs are increasingly popular and vital. However, few programs offer such outreach experiences at a large, national scale and intentionally situate those experiences in locations that enable access for African American youth. In this paper, we present a logic model that showcases the resources and components that can expand the reach of an effective program, outlining the programmatic components involved in executing the National Society of Black Engineers' Summer Engineering Experience for Kids (SEEK) program, which has effectively scaled to cities across the United States. Using SEEK as an instrumental case, we highlight what goes into offering a large-scale community-based STEM outreach program, emphasizing aspects that are most important to preserve during expansion into underserved communities. Key findings illustrate that maximizing the potential of recruiting and engaging youth from underserved populations may hinge on the ability of established programs to scale up their initiatives while establishing appropriate assessment plans to measure effectiveness. Additionally, embracing the ideals of collective impact provides an opportunity for such programs to progress their initiatives by replicating program designs in more communities.

There is an increasing emphasis on assessing student learning outcomes from study abroad experiences, but this assessment often focuses on a limited range of outcomes and assessment methods. We argue for shifting to assessing student learning "processes" in study abroad and present the critical incident technique as one approach to achieve this goal. We demonstrate this approach in interviews with 79 students across a range of global engineering programs, through which we identified 173 incidents which were analyzed to identify common themes. This analysis revealed that students described a wide range of experiences and outcomes from their time abroad. Students' experiences were messy and complex, making them challenging to understand through typical assessment approaches. Our findings emphasize the importance of using a range of assessment approaches and suggest that exploring students' learning processes in addition to learning outcomes could provide new insights to inform the design of study abroad programs.

Background: Engineers operate in an increasingly global environment, making it important that engineering students develop global engineering competency to prepare them for success in the workplace. To understand this learning, we need assessment approaches that go beyond traditional self-report surveys. A previous study (Jesiek et al., "Journal of Engineering Education" 2020; 109(3):1-21) began this process by developing a situational judgment test (SJT) to assess global engineering competency based in the Chinese context and administering it to practicing engineers. Purpose: We built on this previous study by administering the SJT to engineering students to explore what prior experiences related to their SJT performance and how their SJT performance compared with practicing engineers' performance on the SJT. Method: Engineering students completed a survey including the SJT and related self-report survey instruments. We collected data from three groups of students: those who had studied abroad in China; those who had studied abroad elsewhere; and those who had not studied abroad. Results: We found that students' SJT performance did not relate to their scores on the self-report instruments, but did relate to their participation in study abroad programs. The students also performed better on the SJT when compared to the practicing engineers. Conclusions: Our results highlight the need to use multiple forms of assessment for global engineering competence. Although building evidence for the validity of the Global Engineering Competency China SJT is an ongoing process, this data collection technique may provide new insights on global engineering competency compared to traditionally used assessments.

Although advising relationships are key for doctoral student success, little research has addressed how they form. Understanding the formation of advising relationships can help contextualize their later development and ultimately support a student's decision to persist in the doctorate. To understand relationship formation, the purpose of this qualitative study is to identify and describe the types of advisor-advisee selection processes that exist in engineering, science, and math doctoral programs and examine patterns across disciplines within those fields. We conducted interviews with doctoral program directors and engaged in document analysis of graduate student handbooks from 55 doctoral programs in the aforementioned fields in high research institutions across the United States. Using principal-agent theory as a theoretical lens, our findings showed that engineering programs tend to decentralize the advisor selection process by funding students across different funding sources upon enrollment. Contrariwise, science and math programs tended to fund all students in a cohort from a common funding source, which allowed students to have more time to gather information, meet, and select an advisor. These findings also show important nuances when comparing graduate education in these programs that directly impact the doctoral student experience and reiterates the necessity to study these fields separately.

Self-report assessments are used frequently in higher education to assess a variety of constructs, including attitudes, opinions, knowledge, and competence. Systems thinking is an example of one competence often measured using self-report assessments where individuals answer several questions about their perceptions of their own skills, habits, or daily decisions. In this study, we define systems thinking as the ability to see the world as a complex interconnected system where different parts can influence each other, and the interrelationships determine system outcomes. An alternative, less-common, assessment approach is to measure skills directly by providing a scenario about an unstructured problem and evaluating respondents' judgment or analysis of the scenario (scenario-based assessment). This study explored the relationships between engineering students' performance on self-report assessments and scenario-based assessments of systems thinking, finding that there were no significant relationships between the two assessment techniques. These results suggest that there may be limitations to using self-report assessments as a method to assess systems thinking and other competencies in educational research and evaluation, which could be addressed by incorporating alternative formats for assessing competence. Future work should explore these findings further and support the development of alternative assessment approaches.

Multiple reports suggest that future engineering work will be conducted by globally diverse teams for globally diverse customers. Despite the demonstrated benefits of study abroad opportunities to develop such global competencies, undergraduate engineers participate at low rates. The Rising Sophomore Abroad Program presented in this paper describes an integrated class experience combined with an international field trip that has experienced rapid growth over the past few years and effectively scaled up to enroll 135 students in the 2017 program (8% of the incoming first-year engineering cohort). Program evaluation demonstrates that students achieved a range of global learning outcomes in both the class as well as the short-term study abroad module, and this blended approach may overcome some of the deficiencies of short-term programs while promoting future international engagement among undergraduate engineers. We outline unique program elements that other institutions might implement as they seek to expand students' international opportunities.

To make the transfer student pathway viable to meet workforce needs, it is essential to think beyond simply linking two institutions and getting students in the door--students need to be supported throughout the adjustment period. In this article, we address the "support" aspect of the problem by reporting findings from 306 engineering transfer students' responses to open-ended survey items that focused on factors that helped students adjust and how their sending and receiving institutions could have helped ease the transition; our sample, which is largely Hispanic/ Latino (88%), includes both vertical and lateral transfer students who proceeded to enroll in 4-year Hispanic-Serving Institutions. Six themes emerged related to elements that helped students make the adjustment: individual/self, personal network, familiarity with the environment, polite/helpful atmosphere, institutional resources, and student involvement. Student recommendations on how sending institutions could have helped ease their transition focused on information, academic curriculum, and institutional process, and recommendations for receiving institutions included students' requests for more assistance with getting involved on campus, building personal networks, and understanding institutional resources. While themes were consistent across sub-groups within the sample, in this article we highlight some of the few observed differences based on type of transfer pathway and student status as Hispanic/Latino. Within the current system and operating structure of higher education, statewide and/or system wide efforts to collaborate and coordinate between institutions must occur at the college level, and more often at the department or program level, to properly address many of the long-standing issues that appear to be more acute for degree plans in engineering disciplines and for transfer students who pursue these pathways.

There is an increasing emphasis on assessing student learning outcomes from study abroad experiences, but this assessment often focuses on a limited range of outcomes and assessment methods. We argue for shifting to assessing student learning processes in study abroad and present the critical incident technique as one approach to achieve this goal. We demonstrate this approach in interviews with 79 students across a range of global engineering programs, through which we identified 173 incidents which were analyzed to identify common themes. This analysis revealed that students described a wide range of experiences and outcomes from their time abroad. Students' experiences were messy and complex, making them challenging to understand through typical assessment approaches. Our findings emphasize the importance of using a range of assessment approaches and suggest that exploring students' learning processes in addition to learning outcomes could provide new insights to inform the design of study abroad programs., Author(s): Kirsten A. Davis [sup.1] , David B. Knight [sup.2] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.169077.e, 0000 0004 1937 2197, School of Engineering Education, Purdue University, , West Lafayette, IN, USA (2) [...]

Background: Numerous efforts worldwide have been made to increase diversity in engineering and computer science (ECS), fields that pay well and promote upward mobility. However, in the United States (U.S.), females and students from underrepresented racial/ethnic minority groups (URM) still pursue ECS training far less than do their peers. The current study explored sex and racial/ethnic differences in ECS college enrollment as a function of math and verbal SAT score patterns (balanced or imbalanced) using an intersectional approach within a U.S. context. Data represented a census of students who took the SAT, graduated from all Virginia public high schools between 2006 and 2015, and enrolled in a 4-year college (N = 344,803). Results: Our findings show, within each sex, URM students were at least as likely as their non-URM peers to enroll in ECS programs when they scored within similar SAT score ranges. Students were more likely to enroll in ECS programs if their SAT profile favored math, compared to students with similar math and verbal SAT scores (balanced profile). This overall pattern is notably less pronounced for URM female students; their propensity to major in ECS appeared to be largely independent of verbal scores. Conclusions: Our findings inform strategies to diversify ECS enrollment. If programs continue to emphasize SAT scores during admission decisions or if more systemic issues of resource allocation in secondary schools are not addressed, other efforts to broaden participation in ECS programs may fall short of goals. Our findings also highlight the importance of considering the intersection of sex and race/ethnicity for recruitment or other educational promotions.

Background: Supporting undergraduate students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) has been a persistent need. However, assessing the impact of support efforts can prove challenging as it is difficult to operationalize student support and subsequently monitor the combined impacts of the various supports to which students have access simultaneously. Purpose/Hypothesis: This paper describes the development of the STEM student perspectives of support instrument (STEM-SPSI) and explores how perceptions of student support constructs vary across engineering students. Design/Method: Following best practices for instrument development, forming the STEM-SPSI consisted of an iterative cycle of feedback from various STEM stakeholders and two rounds of pilot testing with students at multiple institutions. We employed factor analysis to identify student-support constructs and conduct validation procedures on the instrument. Results: Results suggest that student support can be conceptualized as a combination of 12 constructs. The STEM-SPSI can help engineering educators evaluate their student-support mechanisms at an academic-unit level. Conclusions: The practical contribution of the STEM-SPSI is to assist colleges in monitoring the extent to which their portfolio of support mechanisms is perceived as helpful by undergraduate students. This work makes a theoretical contribution to the model of cocurricular support that undergirds the instrument by producing empirical evidence for its constructs.

Community college scholars and practitioners consistently seek ways to support vertical transfer from community colleges to four-year institutions. An emerging practice to streamline coursework transfer is the use of tailored, intrusive pre-transfer advising to increase information access for students still enrolled at the community college. In this article, we explore how one pre-transfer program--the Virginia Tech Network for Engineering Transfer Students (VT-NETS)--improved the transfer pathway in engineering through early integration programming and advising structures that help to streamline vertical transfer. Using a quasi-experimental design, we compare the experience of transfer students who participated in VT-NETS with transfer students that did not participate in the pre-transfer program. Based on our findings, we make practical recommendations that may be useful to community colleges and university partners seeking to establish, improve, or scale up early-integration programs for prospective transfer students.

This article provides engineering educators with a comprehensive overview of engineering leadership assessment and evaluation for undergraduate engineering students to help instigate positive change for the future of the field.

Situated in the second year of an engineering curriculum, undergraduate engineering mechanics courses represent a significant barrier to persistence in engineering. This study seeks to inform and improve these educational environments by examining academic performance paths over time in a course and explore how students in each path compare in the learning strategies they employ to engage with course content. Through online surveys, we gathered data on self-reported time spent engaging with course content before high-stakes testing in four large sections of a Statics course that were all taught by the same instructor. Cluster analysis identified groups exhibiting distinct performance paths, and one-way Welch's F-tests with post-hoc comparisons explored differences between these clusters based on time spent engaging with course content through specific learning strategies. Differences across performance clusters were found primarily in the ways in which students spent time rather than total time spent. Solving problems independently was a strategy employed significantly more often by the highest-performing cluster of students. In contrast, a group of unsuccessful students in the course spent comparably less time solving problems independently but comparably more time solving problems with peers. From these results, we suggest how leveraging these findings might impact educational practice and guide future research.

Expanding and enhancing transfer pathways may help broaden participation in engineering. However, colleges of engineering have primarily focused their recruitment and retention efforts on students who matriculate directly from high school. Our research increases understanding of the transition experiences for engineering transfer students at 4-year institutions so that programs may better support their unique needs. We explore survey data of over one thousand engineering transfer students across four Texas institutions to identify problems post-transfer and students' perceptions of their receiving institutions and disaggregate findings by transfer pathway, institutional enrollment policies, Hispanic/Latino status, and first-generation college student status. Cost of attendance, credit transfer, and academic expectations surfaced as top problems for engineering transfer students. Although perceptions of their receiving institutions were generally positive, disaggregated analyses show that transfer students should not be considered as a homogeneous population--subgroups of transfer students face different problems and have different needs.

Contribution: This article details the potential impacts of a curricular revision at a four-year institution on electrical and computer engineering (ECE) vertical transfer students using Heileman et al.'s curricular complexity framework. Background: The curriculum refresh was prompted by a National Science Foundation funded program called "Revolutionizing Engineering Departments"--encouraging departments to radically shift their curricula and cultures such that it is not possible to complete a one-to-one mapping between the former curriculum and new curriculum. The purpose of the study was to examine the extent to which transfer students could integrate into the new curriculum. Research Questions: This article addresses the following research question, "how did the structural complexities of the transfer student pathways into the ECE degree programs change from their previous iterations?" Methodology: Plans of the study were collected from 12 community colleges that had articulated pathways into ECE bachelor's degree programs ( n = 24 plans of study) at a four-year institution and aligned those plans with the university pathways both before and after the radical curricular change. The complexities of transfer degree pathways of the old and new curriculum were compared using Heileman et al.'s structural complexity metric. Findings: All transfer pathways in ECE increased in complexity by 84% on average. We found Computer Engineering to be a much less supported transfer pathway throughout the state's community college system compared to Electrical Engineering. Moreover, we found considerable variation in the community college system, raising concerns of consistency across partnerships in the state's system. Other programs can adopt the approach presented here to evaluate the complexity of their curricula.

Background: Transfer students in engineering must navigate a myriad of information sources to obtain accurate information on how to matriculate into a 4-year institution. Although some institutional and state-level initiatives attempt to streamline the transfer process, students still report difficulties. Purpose: This article explores the extent to which web-based transfer information is fragmented across institutional websites and written using communicative strategies that could limit comprehension. Accordingly, this study characterizes information asymmetries--gaps in information--that affect transfer students in terms of two constructs: fragmentation and language. Method: We employed a convergent fully integrated mixed-methods design with a stratified random sample of 38 US engineering degree-granting institutions. The connections between the webpages were transformed into networks and clustered using k-means and partitioning around medoids with measures of dispersion and centrality. A purposeful nested sample of 16 institutions was taken based on the clusters and explored using a two-cycle mixed-methods coding protocol to understand how fragmentation and language interact to create information asymmetries. The resulting themes from each construct were integrated to develop narratives across the sampled institutions. Conclusions: We found the web-based information for transfer students to be a messy web of loosely connected structures with language that complicates understanding. We identified four fragmentation themes illustrating how transfer information is organized and six language themes capturing linguistic patterns across the webpages. We offer strategies for researchers and practitioners based on the narratives we developed.

This study explores STEM doctoral student agency with respect to funding as it relates to degree completion and career preparation. We interviewed 39 graduate students in chemistry, physics, and engineering at two large, public, research-intensive institutions in the USA. Although STEM doctoral students have a high expectation of full funding, instability of funding and unavailability of desired funding types limit the agency of some students. When several types of funding are available, advisors can encourage student agency in pursuing opportunities to gain skills or networking connections through teaching assistantships, research assistantships, or internships. However, students were not able to articulate specific ways that assistantships prepared them for nonacademic positions, which is an important direction for future work.

In this paper, we introduce 'Concept Questions,' a weekly writing assignment that has been incorporated into multiple upper-level engineering courses at a single university with the intent of enhancing students' conceptual understanding of the course content. To explore the influence of this activity on students in these courses, we compared students' scores on the Concept Question assignments with their final exam scores, analysed students' open-ended responses to questions regarding their learning in the course, and surveyed students who had taken these courses in previous semesters to understand how the Concept Question assignments may have influenced their learning approaches in subsequent courses. Our analysis revealed that students highlighted a variety of learning outcomes from the Concept Questions assignments and their performance on the assignments was correlated with their final exam scores. However, most students did not report that these assignments had changed their learning approaches overall. This paper supports prior work suggesting that such assignments can be helpful in individual engineering courses, but further work is needed to explore student learning across courses.

A central challenge in engineering education is providing experiences that are appropriate for and accessible to underserved communities. However, to provide such experiences, we must better understand the process of offering a geographically distributed asset-based out-of-school program. This paper focuses on a collaborative research project that examined the broad implementation of the Summer Engineering Experiences for Kids (SEEK) program organized by the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE). SEEK is a three-week summer program that engages participants in hands-on, team-based engineering design projects. NSBE's goal is to make SEEK culturally sustaining, community-connected, and scalable. The purpose of this paper is to provide a retrospective reflection on various aspects of our collaborative project and highlight a series of tradeoffs that must be carefully considered to offer and examine the effectiveness of an intervention designed both to affirm cultural background as well as to broaden access. Guided by Yosso's community cultural wealth (CCW) framework, we engaged in individual reflection and group discussions about the evolution of our three-year project. We considered the six types of capital outlined in CCW to examine various program design elements and tradeoffs. By illuminating the tradeoffs that are required, we hope this paper can help other program designers and researchers to intentionally, preemptively, and proactively consider such tradeoffs.

States and institutions employ articulation agreements to streamline curricular pathways. We investigate the efficacy of that streamlining by considering how course sequences, enacted through pre- and co-requisites, relate to graduation rates for transfer students at different time intervals. Applying a curricular complexity framework that quantifies the complexities of curriculum pathways, we compared the curricular complexities of transfer and first-time-in-college (FTIC) pathways in engineering and correlate those complexity scores with graduation rates at different time intervals. The institutions examined in this study include a mid-Atlantic research university and four of its largest feeder community colleges geographically distributed across the state. We found that, in aggregate, transfer student pathways are less complex than FTIC pathways, although complexity metrics vary across engineering disciplines and sending institutions. Although curricular complexity correlates with graduation rates for FTIC students at different time intervals, the same relationship does not hold for transfer students. The curricular complexity metric is useful for understanding the complexity FTIC students encounter in engineering and correlates with their graduation rates at different time intervals. However, the tool falls short of capturing some nuances of curricular complexity for transfer students. We suggest ways to enhance the metric to depict complexities in curriculum for transfer students.

States and institutions increasingly rely on articulation agreements to streamline vertical transfer, although the effectiveness of those policies on transfer student outcomes remains unclear. To better understand this effectiveness, we explored a partnership between the College of Engineering at a mid-Atlantic research university and two community colleges located within the same state. We interviewed engineering faculty and academic advisors (i.e., the street-level bureaucrats who implement policy) to explore how an articulation agreement influences processes and policies related to coursework transfer. Our results revealed complexities in the implementation of the articulation policy as it collides with an enrollment management university policy that differs in purpose. Their collision has challenging implications for transfer students and for the faculty and advisors responsible for interfacing with those students.

Background: Determining the root causes of persistent underrepresentation of different subpopulations in engineering remains a continued challenge. Because place-based variation of resource distribution is not random and because school and community contexts influence high school outcomes, considering variation across those contexts should be paramount in broadening participation research. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study takes a macroscopic systems view of engineering enrollments to understand variation across one state's public high school rates of engineering matriculation. Design/Method: This study uses a dataset from the Virginia Longitudinal Data System that includes all students who completed high school from a Virginia public school from 2007 to 2014 (N=685,429). We explore geographic variation in four-year undergraduate engineering enrollment as a function of gender, race/ethnicity, and economically disadvantaged status. Additionally, we investigate the relationship between characteristics of the high school and community contexts and undergraduate engineering enrollment across Virginia's high schools using regression analysis. Results: Our findings illuminate inequality in enrollment in engineering programs at four-year institutions across high schools by gender, race, and socioeconomic status (and the intersections among those demographics). Different high schools have different engineering enrollment rates among students who attend four-year postsecondary institutions. We show strong associations between high schools' engineering enrollment rates and four-year institution enrollment rates as well as moderate associations for high schools' community socioeconomic status. Conclusions: Strong systemic forces need to be overcome to broaden participation in engineering. We demonstrate the insights that state longitudinal data systems can illuminate in engineering education research.

Post-course instructor ratings are a common practice at universities in Europe, Australia, and North America. Rather than solely describing teaching practice, however, such ratings may be associated with a range of non-pedagogical factors. We explored engineering students' instructor ratings at a large United States institution, investigating relationships between overall instructor rating and some of those non-pedagogical factors, including subject area, class size, and students' course grades. Instructor ratings were more favourable in humanities courses than in science or math courses, and students gave higher ratings to instructors who taught smaller class sizes. The strongest relationship existed between overall rating and students' course grades: students who received A's rated instructors an average 0.84 points higher on a 6-point scale than students who received F's. Students who withdrew from a course provided the lowest instructor ratings. When instructor ratings are used as metrics of teaching ability in discussions related to promotion, tenure, or salary adjustments, there is an inherent inequity in the system that must be acknowledged beyond already well-documented biases, as non-pedagogical factors often outside of the instructor's control may be significantly associated with those ratings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates how first-year engineering undergraduates and their instructors describe the potential for learning analytics approaches to contribute to student success. Results of qualitative data collection in a first-year engineering course indicated that both students and instructors emphasized a preference for learning analytics systems to focus on aggregate as opposed to individual data. Another consistent theme across students and instructors was an interest in bringing data related to time (e.g., how time is spent outside of class) into learning analytics products. Students' and instructors' viewpoints diverged regarding the "level" at which they would find a learning analytics dashboard useful. Instructors remained focused on a specific class, but students drove the conversation to a much broader scope at the major or university level but in a discipline-specific manner. Such practices that select relevant data and develop models "with" learners and teachers instead of "for" learners and teachers should better inform development of and, ultimately, sustainable use of learning analytics-based models and dashboards.

Bolstering transfer pathways to a 4-year degree can help fill the country's increasing need for innovative, diverse, skilled workers within engineering. Drawing on survey data from a sample comprised of a disproportionately large percentage of Hispanic/Latino students, this study focuses on understanding engineering transfer students' reasons for starting at a different institution. Financial/Affordability, Nonacademic Commitments, and Academic Flexibility were top reasons for starting at a different institution with multiple differences across subpopulations like Hispanic/Latino status.

Doctoral student recruitment is a dynamic, complex, and under-researched phenomenon. There is steep competition between programs for recruiting students with large amounts of resources at stake, especially within the STEM fields, and programs do not operate in isolation within such environments. In this paper, we explore how graduate programs position themselves relative to other programs as they recruit STEM doctoral students. Drawing from 47 interviews with graduate program leaders, 49 interviews with graduate students, and 63 questionnaire responses from graduate program staff and administrators, this research analyzes common recruitment practices of STEM doctoral programs alongside student perspectives about their decision processes. We reveal how competitive forces may lead programs to adopt non-evidence-based recruitment strategies that may not align with either program leaders' stated values or students' priorities. Although program leaders expressed the importance of students prioritizing academic factors in their decisions, our data revealed that programs commonly utilize financial resources as their main recruitment mechanism in practice. By demonstrating this incongruence, our paper aims to illuminate a potential blind spot so programs might choose to change seemingly institutionalized processes that may be out of alignment with their own stated values and those of the students they are seeking to recruit.

Background: Mixed methods research designs in engineering education often frame the "mixed" aspect of the design from the perspective of data collection. However, intentional mixing throughout the research design--particularly during data analysis--may enable richer meta-inferences about a phenomenon. Purpose: This paper provides examples of strategies for mixing during data analysis in mixed methods program evaluation in engineering education. Although the context is program evaluation, the procedures are applicable in engineering education research more broadly. Scope/Method: This review presents examples of mixed methods analysis strategies in the context of a data set with qualitative and quantitative data from a global engineering program at a large Mid-Atlantic university. The structure of the examples presents mixed research questions, pragmatic purposes for such studies, and examples of different mixing strategies for the analysis stage. The mixing strategies highlighted include extreme case sampling, converting, creating a blended variable, blending variables and themes across strands, and cross-case comparison. Conclusions: This review of mixed methods in program evaluation prompted a reflection of processes in the design of studies, how the designs are described beyond the usual taxonomies in the mixed methods literature, and implications for the greater community of engineering education researchers. Five mixed methods designs were formulated around the mixing strategies.

This study investigated the experiences of engineering students who participated in a cultural simulation activity to promote cross-cultural communication skills. A sample of 138 post-activity short reflections from a global engineering practice course were analyzed using qualitative inquiry. Results suggest that students recognize parallels between acclimating to the simulated culture in the cultural simulation activity and adjusting to a different country's culture while traveling abroad. Although the simulation was embedded in a pre-departure course for study abroad, the cultural simulation could also be used to develop cross-cultural communication in the classroom without traveling abroad.

The purpose of this study was to examine community college engineering students' perceptions of their classroom climate and how these perceptions are related to fundamental skills in engineering. The study was guided by the following research question: How are community college engineering students' perceptions of their fundamental engineering skills related to their perceptions of classroom climate? Data from a 2009 National Science Foundation sponsored project, "Prototype to Production: Processes and Conditions for Preparing the Engineer of 2020" (P2P), which contains information from students in 15 pre-engineering community college programs, were examined. Measures of classroom climate and fundamental skills related to engineering were first established through an exploratory factor analysis. In order to explore differences in student perceptions by individual characteristics and by institution, hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) was used. Results indicated that for community college engineering students, a warmer perception of classroom climate was associated with a higher perception of fundamental engineering skills. At community colleges, class sizes are generally smaller, especially compared to introductory courses at universities, and may provide a warmer climate for students considering beginning their engineering degrees. Given the diversity within community colleges, these institutions may provide an important pathway for underrepresented groups in engineering.

The Journal of Engineering Education (JEE) is a respected publication that covers a wide range of topics and methods related to engineering education. The journal aims to be a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners in the field. The William Elgin Wickenden Award is given annually to an outstanding article that is thought-provoking and inspiring, with broad transferability or transformative potential. The 2023 award was given to Brooke Coley and Katreena Thomas for their article on the experiences of Black engineering graduate students. Additionally, three articles received honorable mentions. The JEE also recognizes "Star Reviewers" who provide exceptional feedback to authors. The editorial board expresses gratitude to all contributors and announces the departure of Assistant Editor Matilde Sánchez-Peña. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Enrollment of US students in engineering graduate programs is declining, the proportion of underrepresented groups being even lower at the graduate level than it is at undergraduate levels. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore engineering undergraduate student perceptions about graduate study, how these perceptions impact their decisions to pursue graduate study, and whether or how these differ by sex and race/ethnicity. Design/Method: We administered a survey about graduate study to 1082 undergraduate engineering students from four US institutions. Student characteristics included sex, race/ethnicity, and year in college. Exploratory Factor Analysis identified factors related to Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT). We created multinomial logistic regression models to predict intention to pursue a master's or PhD degree. Results: Identified factors were Self-efficacy, Outcome expectations, Supports, Barriers, and Choice actions. Model fit statistics indicate a strong model. Only Choice actions was not significant. Few sex and race/ethnicity differences held once factors were added to the models. Hispanic students were more than twice as likely to indicate they were planning on enrolling in a master's program relative to no graduate school. Conclusions: Self-efficacy most strongly influenced graduate school intention. For every one-unit increase in students' self-efficacy, they were over 8 times more likely to plan to enroll in a master's program and 13 times more likely to enroll in a PhD program, relative to not attending graduate school. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Graduate education in engineering is an extremely challenging, complex entity that is difficult to change. The purpose of this exploratory research paper was to investigate the applicability of the Collective Impact framework, which has been used within community organizing contexts, to organize the change efforts of a center focused on advancing equitable graduate education within engineering. We sought to understand how the conditions of Collective Impact (i.e., common agenda, backbone organization, mutually reinforcing activities, shared measurement system, and continuous communication) could facilitate the organization of equity-focused change efforts across a college of engineering at a single institution. To achieve this, we took an action research approach. We found the Collective Impact framework to be a useful tool for organizing cross-sectional partnerships to facilitate equity-focused change in graduate education; we also found the five conditions of Collective Impact to be applicable to the higher education context, with some intentional considerations and modifications. Through coordinated efforts, the Collective Impact framework can support the goal of reorienting existing decentralized structures, resource flows, and decision processes to foster bottom-up and top-down change processes to advance equitable support for graduate students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Transfer student capital (TSC) helps community college students realize the potential for the transfer pathway to serve as a lower-cost option to a bachelor's degree. However, students' accrual of TSC depends on the quality and quantity of information networks and infrastructure; information asymmetry in these networks can impede students' transfer progress. Methods: Using interview data from stakeholders who support engineering transfer students at one research university and two community college partners, we apply a methodology that combines qualitative coding techniques (i.e., descriptive, process, and evaluative coding) with network and pathway analyses to explore an information network for coursework transfer in engineering. Results: Our findings illustrate the disjointed and complex web of information sources that transfer students may use to accrue TSC. We highlight pathways fraught with information asymmetry as well as information sources and processes that give promise to students' ability to accrue TSC and successfully navigate transfer of coursework vertically. Conclusions: An abundance of information sources and paths does not equate to a better transfer system. Utilizing network analysis to visualize and evaluate information sources and processes provides an additional method for evaluating information systems for transfer. Consolidating information sources or improving processes linking information sources could improve inefficiencies in transfer students' transitions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Burgeoning college enrolments and insufficient funding to higher education have expanded the use of large lecture courses. As this trend continues, it is important to ensure that students can still learn in those challenging learning environments. Within education broadly and undergraduate engineering specifically, active learning pedagogies have been developed to overcome some of those issues in a traditional classroom setting. However, active learning has not been well established in large, lecture-hall classroom environments. This study investigates an active learning approach that was used for an introductory environmental engineering course of 269 students in a tiered lecture hall. Analyses using normalised gain scores illuminate statistically significant differences between learning gains in content delivered using the active learning method versus a traditional, lecture-only delivery. There were no significant interaction effects across different student characteristics.

Background: Although interdisciplinarity has been a subject of interest and debate for decades, few investigations of interdisciplinary education exist. Existing studies examine the effects of interdisciplinary experiences on students' development of generic cognitive skills but not the development of interdisciplinary competencies. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study sought to explore how engineering students' characteristics, college experiences, and engineering faculty beliefs relate to students' reports of interdisciplinary competence. Design/Method: The study used a nationally representative survey sample of 5,018 undergraduate students and 1,119 faculty members in 120 U.S. engineering programs at 31 institutions. Using hierarchical linear modeling, we investigated the relationships among students' curricular and co-curricular experiences and faculty beliefs regarding interdisciplinarity in engineering education on students' reports of interdisciplinary competence. Results: This study found that a curricular emphasis on interdisciplinary topics and skills, as well as co-curricular activities, specifically, participating in nonengineering clubs and organizations, study abroad, and humanitarian engineering projects, significantly and positively relate to engineering students' reports of interdisciplinary skills. Faculty members' beliefs regarding interdisciplinarity in engineering education moderated the relationships between particular co-curricular experiences and students' interdisciplinary skills, as well as between curricular emphasis and students' interdisciplinary skills. Conclusions: This study identified a small set of experiences that are related to students' reported development of interdisciplinary competence. The study points to the critical role of the curriculum in promoting interdisciplinary thinking and habits of mind, as well as the potential of co-curricular opportunities that bring engineering students together with nonmajors to build interdisciplinary competence.

Background: Multiple reports call for undergraduate programs to develop engineers who have leadership abilities. Such preparation requires understanding how the undergraduate experience relates to student leadership abilities. Limited research has shown disagreement among faculty members and administrators about effective approaches for engineering leadership development. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this research was to understand what precollege characteristics and experiences, university experiences, and undergraduate engineering program contexts relate to undergraduate engineers' self-reported leadership skills. Design/Methods: Using hierarchical linear modeling, this quantitative study examined the variance of students' self-reported leadership skills as explained by their precollege characteristics and undergraduate experiences. The study drew from a nationally representative survey-based dataset of 5,076 undergraduate engineers from 150 undergraduate engineering programs from 31 colleges and universities. Results: Although multiple facets of the undergraduate experience significantly relate to students' self-reported leadership skills, curricular emphases on core engineering thinking, professional skills, and broad and systems perspectives explain the greatest amount of variance. The lack of significant relationships at the program level suggests a lack of formal leadership development within the undergraduate curriculum at large. Conclusions: Results indicate that entrusting the leadership development of undergraduate engineering students to the co-curriculum is an inefficient method of developing leadership skills for undergraduate engineers. The curriculum more strongly relates to engineering students' leadership skills. Identifying ways for faculty members to enhance this curricular focus could further development of technologically adept engineering leaders.

The article discusses the importance of the peer review process in the Journal of Engineering Education. The authors emphasize that peer reviewers play a crucial role in vetting and improving ideas, research designs, and findings, as well as in enhancing communication within the community. They provide tips for reviewers, such as noting both the strengths and areas for improvement in a manuscript, offering feedback on the written paper rather than personal preferences, and providing higher-level, conceptually geared feedback. The authors also highlight the importance of being kind and respectful in providing feedback to authors. The article concludes by announcing new members of the JEE Editorial Board and promotions within the board. [Extracted from the article]

Background: Engineers operate in an increasingly global environment, making it important that engineering students develop global engineering competency to prepare them for success in the workplace. To understand this learning, we need assessment approaches that go beyond traditional self‐report surveys. A previous study (Jesiek et al., Journal of Engineering Education 2020; 109(3):1–21) began this process by developing a situational judgment test (SJT) to assess global engineering competency based in the Chinese context and administering it to practicing engineers. Purpose: We built on this previous study by administering the SJT to engineering students to explore what prior experiences related to their SJT performance and how their SJT performance compared with practicing engineers' performance on the SJT. Method: Engineering students completed a survey including the SJT and related self‐report survey instruments. We collected data from three groups of students: those who had studied abroad in China; those who had studied abroad elsewhere; and those who had not studied abroad. Results: We found that students' SJT performance did not relate to their scores on the self‐report instruments, but did relate to their participation in study abroad programs. The students also performed better on the SJT when compared to the practicing engineers. Conclusions: Our results highlight the need to use multiple forms of assessment for global engineering competence. Although building evidence for the validity of the Global Engineering Competency China SJT is an ongoing process, this data collection technique may provide new insights on global engineering competency compared to traditionally used assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]