Search

Ethics in engineering has long been an important element in engineering programmes, however these subjects are often taught at a basic learning level with little attempt to connect to demonstrative learning outcomes. In recent years there has been a step change in the importance of ethics as an integral part of engineering programmes and is reflected in the text of accreditation documents. In this paper we expand our analysis from an earlier study, which focused on four European countries, to understand the role of ethics on a more global scale. We conducted a multi-country analysis on how and where ethics features in accreditation documents in twelve countries across five continents (Belgium, Canada, Colombia, France/Switzerland, Ireland, Japan, Romania, South Africa, Sweden, UK and USA). We identified explicit or implicit references to ethics education, extracted verbs relating to learning outcomes, and compared definitions of key terms. A comparison to Bloom’s taxonomy showed considerably higher frequency of verbs linked to ethics teaching associated to lower levels of cognitive learning. Definitions of terms relating to the process of accreditation were often lacking in documents, highlighting a need for setting terms of reference. This study highlights differences in how ethics is described in accreditation documents. However, more needs to be done to explicitly highlight ethics as an integral part of engineering education. Relying on implicit links to ethics leaves the role of ethics open to interpretation, resulting in uneven emphasis in the translation of ethics within programme designs.

This paper is of methodological nature. We present the empirical research methodology of a study that focuses on student learning experiences, in particular of mathematics students in an innovative learning environment, such as Challengebased Education (CBE) at a Dutch university of technology. In this study, we present the case study of CBE in an innovative mathematics course on modelling, the mathematics “Modelling Week”. We draw attention to the methodology used to study this modelling course, where we investigated students’ learning experiences in a monodisciplinary CBE-oriented master course. We explain the design of the study and the associated data collection strategies regarding students’ use of resources (Schematic Representation of Resource system- SRRS) and their learning processes. In the poster presentation, we will show selected results that come from the different instruments to help us understand student learning experiences in innovative/CBE related mathematics courses.

For our students to work on the global challenges facing humankind, they should be raised to appreciate the importance of science and engineering in real-life contexts. Challenge-based learning (CBL) courses have merit in accomplishing this goal by facilitating students’ innovative solutions to authentic, complex problems. The fundamental characteristics of CBL include real-world challenges, collaboration, and multidisciplinarity. The presented work describes a CBL course where applied physics and mechanical engineering students worked in multidisciplinary teams. An instrumental case study was conducted to identify factors that influence multidisciplinary teamwork in this CBL course. Data were collected using interviews, reflection reports, and observations of team meetings. Transcribed video recordings were searched for instances of demonstrating the codes revealed with analysis of interview transcripts and reflection reports. The research results showed the significant factors influencing multidisciplinary teamwork: a) disciplinary connections to the challenge, b) receiving tutor guidance, c) making presentations in teams, d) exchanging science and engineering perspectives, e) readings and videos on course Canvas, and f) student motivation. Implications are discussed, and suggestions for future research and practice are presented.

Challenge-based learning (CBL) seeks to help students acquire skills necessary for collaborative real-world problem solving. It generally favours self-learning, in which students should seek out their own role in a problem-solving environment and choose their own set of skills to develop which are relevant to the challenge. However students from traditional degree programmes may enter with an expectation that their disciplinary expertise will count and be valued in the context of a project, but face a situation that the problem chosen by a group or the dynamics of a group render their expertise less relevant. In survey-based studies of two CBL modules, we explore the relationship between the roles students play and their levels of motivation. We find no evidence that the lack of a disciplinary role strongly affects student motivation. Rather the data suggests that if a CBL environment is properly framed around selfdevelopment and multiple potential learning goals students can relax any commitments or expectations related to their expertise, and take on different roles. This is good news for the CBL aims and goals. That said students do have a tendency to revert to disciplinary roles over the course of projects and are against their disciplinary roles being excluded when they are clearly relevant. Instructors can potentially avoid problems by having students evaluate their role choices against desired project outcomes.

Project and challenge-based learning typically require students to navigate personal and professional relationships within a team, in order to collaboratively solve authentic problems. These collaborations are often interdisciplinary in nature – an arrangement that adds increased complexity to the team’s functioning. This is due to distinctions in approaches, epistemologies, ethos or jargon. The ability to provide (and receive) appropriate and constructive feedback to peers, within the team, is a key skill that can enhance team functioning and ultimately, output. Furthermore, it is a competence that aids in lubricating social and work impediments that may be causing bottlenecks to creativity, or the manifestation of ideas. The aim of this study, set within three different interdisciplinary bachelor modules, is to determine to what extent the use of the ‘Buddycheck’ application for peer review, is appreciated by students and teachers. The application, hosted within the learning management system of the university, allows students to rank their peers’ performance according to teacher-set criteria, as well as through flexible open-format feedback; in order to facilitate opportunities for enhanced communication and expectation alignment. We wish to ascertain to what degree team functioning is enhanced through the scaffolded communication opportunities, by highlighting and creating openings to discuss undesirable behaviours, through the feedback application. Preliminary results appear to favour this mode of feedback facilitation, albeit with certain caveats, detailed later. Since teamwork is universal in tertiary education, these insights may be helpful for educators attempting to further improve the evaluation of the process of their projects or challenges.

Recently, there has been a significant increase in the use of peer feedback in higher education. However, the evidence of the effect of peer feedback on students' academic achievement does not seem conclusive and, to our knowledge, there has not yet been a meta-analysis of the effect of peer feedback on general academic achievement in the STEM fields of higher education. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to determine whether peer feedback is beneficial to STEM higher education students' academic achievement. The final data set for the meta-analysis consisted of 286 effect sizes from 90 independent samples in 75 studies, with a total of over 14,000 participants. All effect sizes were calculated as Cohen's d values. A random-effects model used to synthesise the effect sizes indicated a significant positive summary effect size (d = .421, SE = .037, 95% CI = .350, .493, p = .000). The variance of the true effect sizes (T2) was.069. The Qw value of 644.167 was significant (p = .000) and the I2 value of 88.512 was high. Therefore, in order to identify the source of the between-study heterogeneity, moderator analyses were conducted to evaluate the influence of various methodological quality characteristics and peer feedback intervention characteristics on the effect of a peer feedback intervention. The results of this study will provide researchers, policy makers and practitioners with the information they need to decide whether or not to use peer feedback and to be able to design peer feedback interventions for maximal effectiveness.

The gender divide for women in the engineering domain in academia is still very large today, even though most institutions are committed to changing this. Although there are slow improvements in the number of women working in academic positions in Engineering, the Netherlands, in particular, is still lagging badly behind the rest of Europe with women making up only 17.6% of all full professors in the engineering domain and for 25.7% in the entire academic domain. This is despite many efforts across the board to improve this situation. The situation is even worse in the field of Aerospace Engineering and within this field, the lack of progress is not unique to the Netherlands with similar issues being reported in the United States of America and wider afield. This paper reports on research on the capacity building among women required within the aerospace engineering domain to reach the commonly defined critical mass percentage of 30% of women full professors using metrics on career progress and on as well as labour market data on the career development of Aerospace graduates to show where potential new interventions can be made.

In tertiary mathematics education for engineers (hereafter called service mathematics education, SME), there is a long-lasting controversy on what and how to teach. The goal of SME is to provide a base for engineering-specific courses and to develop mathematical competencies needed for academic success and professional practice. A leading question in engineering education is how to take mathematical competencies into account when designing content. Mathematical competencies are employed to understand, judge, do, and use mathematics in a variety of mathematical contexts and situations in which mathematics could play a role [1]. Although mathematical competencies have been introduced for about two decades, Alpers [2] noted that research in engineering higher education had focused chiefly on the modelling competency and less on other competencies. By means of a scoping review, the current study aims to examine how mathematical competencies are investigated in higher education research. The main research question is “To what extent and in what ways have mathematical competencies been examined in higher engineering education research?” Papers were retrieved and qualitatively reviewed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta- Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic search yielded 166 records, of which, 65 unique records were relevant to engineering education and screened for eligibility. A synthesis of 23 studies reviewed showed that problem-solving and modelling were the most investigated mathematical competencies and were often investigated together or with other mathematical competencies. The inconsistencies in the terminologies used suggest a need for clearer conceptualizations to advance research and inform practice on mathematical competencies.

Challenge-based learning (CBL) offers students in engineering programmes an opportunity to develop communicative and collaborative skills, apply disciplinary knowledge and develop boundary-crossing competencies. Mono-disciplinary approaches to CBL are generally regarded too limited, but whether multi-disciplinary, interdisciplinary, or transdisciplinary approaches should be used is open to discussion. Often, these concepts are used interchangeably, but there are notable differences. In literature, knowledge integration is mostly mentioned to make a distinction, but because of difficulties in applying this concept to education, we focus on tangible differences in educational practices, related to learning objectives, assessment, and the design of challenges. The different forms of CBL are illustrated by three casestudies carried out at a research university in the Netherlands. We found similarities, but also some subtle differences between multi-, inter- and transdisciplinary approaches to CBL. Multidisciplinary CBL projects are relatively pre-structured, with an indication of the knowledge that is to be applied, deepened, or combined. Interdisciplinary CBL is more open-ended, with students made responsible for connecting their disciplinary backgrounds to the project and for integrating disciplinary perspectives. Transdisciplinary CBL focuses more on impact than on integrating disciplinary contributions. Challenges are open-ended from a content and stakeholder perspective, while structure emerges in the interactions between students, teachers and stakeholders. Which form of CBL can best be employed in a course or programme is dependent on the intended learning objectives. Educators should be aware of tradeoffs and of the specific teacher competences required to design and support these different forms of CBL.

Challenge-based learning (CBL) for engineering ethics tasks students with identifying ethical challenges in cooperation with an external partner, e.g., a technology company. As many best-practice parameters of such courses remain unclear, this contribution focuses on a teacher-centric introduction into deploying CBL for engineering ethics. Taking Goodlad’s curriculum typology as a point of departure, we discuss practical issues in devising, maintaining and evaluating CBL courses for engineering ethics both in terms of the temporal dimension (before, during and after the course) as well as in terms of the people involved. We will discuss selecting learning objectives, forms of knowledge acquisition, supporting self-organization, and fostering discursive etiquette, as well as cooperative, yet critical attitudes. Additionally, we will delve into strategic matters, e.g., ways to approach potential external partners and maintain fruitful cooperations.

Educational innovation often builds on existing practices, and focuses on improvement, rather than a radical change. One current example of educational innovation is Challenge-Based Learning (CBL). At university [blinded] the approach is a curriculum wide implementation of CBL based on a integrated programme that combines implementation of bottom-up innovation projects with research. The result of this research contributes to the translation of CBL to practice, thus helping curriculum designers and teachers in designing and executing their courses. In the process evidence is collected about principles of CBL, learning behaviour, learning outcomes, and didactical aspects of CBL, such as coaching and self-directed learning, assessment, pedagogies, and design of challenges, and facilitating structures. The goal of this paper is to explore the development of a research agenda, which aligns research and practice, and to contribute to evidence for successful CBL implementation as result. The CBL research agenda shows which topics and aspects of CBL are addressed by research and practice, and which are overlooked. It is a systematic way of collecting strategic and practical problems related to CBL implementation, and how these are translated into research questions, methods, and results. The CBL research agenda leads to dialogue, which in turn guides our CBL programme. This integrated programme, including the research agenda is governed by a Taskforce CBL and supported by programme management, and a university wide research community. This approach enables the curriculum wide implementation and research of CBL as a concept for educating engineers of the future and strengthening on-campus education.

This workshop is part of the ERASMUS+ project: RAPIDE: on Relevant Assessment and pedagogies for Inclusive Digital Education (https://rapide-project.eu) and is open to anyone who is interested in implementing or improving peer assessment in their courses. At the end of the workshop, participants will be able to make an informed decision on a suitable form of Peer Assessment for their courses. Over the past few years, many of us have faced operating in a frequently changing teaching environment which has made evaluating and assessing students’ learning outcomes and more importantly giving students feedback on their learning much more complicated. One pedagogical tool that has been increasingly used is that of peer assessments where students give each other feedback and assess each other’s work. In this workshop, participants will be introduced to many different types of peer assessment that can be used in engineering education, such as peer reviewing (each other’s work), peer grading(continuous feedback on mastery), and peer evaluation (group work) whether face-to-face, hybrid or in a fully online environment and how to do so in an inclusive way thus maintaining the important safe place that education should be. Participants will then in small groups discuss what types of peer evaluations they use or want to use in their courses and brainstorm on ideas for implementation in their own specific case or for one of the general cases that the facilitators will have available. At the end of the workshop participants will present their main findings back to the whole group so that they may also learn from each other. We aim for participants to leave feeling inspired at the end of the workshop to implement or improve peer assessment in their own courses. The aggregated main findings and ideas contrived in the workshop on how to implement peer assessment will also be shared with a wider audience through the conference proceedings and the RAPIDE project website.

Challenge-based learning gains popularity in engineering education for allowing students to transcend academic and disciplinary boundaries and to fully engage in real-world problems, but it is largely underexplored how to improve specific designs of such educational practices to promote interdisciplinary learning experiences and competencies. This paper describes two studies that together in two steps make up an evidence-based redesign of a challenged-based course featuring group-work projects in an undergraduate program combining engineering with liberal arts and sciences. A first study based on observation and interviews collects different and varying learning experiences throughout students’ learning activities. The results showed that interdisciplinary experiences are constructed in complex dynamics between students’ disciplinary identity formation and the interdisciplinary and collaborative course configuration. Such dynamics may result in positive learning experiences (engagement and interdisciplinary enrichment) as well as negative ones (disengagement and frustration). Especially regarding the discrepancy between common experiences across the three phases of tackling the challenge (mapping, mitigating, integrating), representatives of parties important for the course were invited to a roundtable session in a second study to discuss and reflect on the first study’s findings and what they can mean for the course design. Understandings achieved in the session are used as input for upcoming course redesign towards a more desirably organized challenge-based learning. The two-step approach towards redesign is an example of involving researchers and students in evidence-based educational redesign, exemplifying the value of naturalistic research and educational co-creation in understanding and optimizing students’ learning experience to achieve fruitful challenge-based learning.

Students in engineering-science programmes often struggle with theoretical concepts, while they tend to adopt a surface approach to learning. We suggest that this can be tackled by promoting a specific higher-order thinking skill (HOTS) that enables drawing connections between physical phenomena and theoretical concepts representing them. We designed an intervention to support students in achieving deep insight into electrochemical phenomena, while developing this HOTS. Such intervention aims to scaffold students’ learning and development by introducing conceptual modelling as an essential thinking skill of engineering-scientists, and as a strategy to build scientific understanding of natural phenomena. Therefore, conceptual modelling constitutes a main learning objective of this novel course. This paper reports an empirical investigation into how students deal with concepts and complexity, and to what extent the intervention has any measurable effects on the learning outcomes. This phenomenological investigation integrates considerations from various disciplines, and relies on multiple data sources, i.e., students’ documents (lab journals and reports), observations of students in action (in discussions with their tutors and while performing lab experiments), and video stimulated-recall interviews. The results show little effect of the intervention, as implemented, suggesting how challenging it is for students (and instructors) to shift from traditional learning-and-teaching approaches, towards an epistemology of knowledge construction for specific problems. The findings are informative for revision of the intervention and generate specific recommendations. Concurrently, our operationalisation of the conceptual framework proves powerful in detecting qualitative differences in HOTS. Plausible implications for research and educational practice in science-engineering education are discussed.

To adequately prepare engineering students for their professional career, educational institutions offer projects in which students collaboratively solve engineering design problems. It is known from research these projects can lead to a variety of learning outcomes and student experiences. However, studies that provide insights in the influence of different features of an educational design are rare. In the current study we use Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) as analytical framework to understand how different elements of an educational design affect students’ experience. Additionally, we use the notion of contradictions to identify opportunities for structural course improvement. Focus groups were conducted with 12 Master students in Aerospace Engineering, that participated in a collaborative engineering design course. During the course, students applied Systems Engineering (SE) and Concurrent Engineering (CE) and worked in the Collaborative Design Laboratory (CDL), which is a state-of-the-art facility that holds a variety of industry relevant tools. It was found that students valued the guidance of their coach and experts, co-located collaboration and the freedom to structure their own process. However, they perceived challenges with regard to adoption of tools in the CDL, sharing their progress with their supervisor, coordination of collaborative efforts and scheduling issues. An analysis using CHAT revealed what contradictions caused these challenges. Finally, recommendations are given on how course structure can be structurally improved.

The SEFI 2021 annual conference committee provided me the opportunity to publish this text based on the SEFI Francesco Maffioli Award. I am happy to use this opportunity to sketch the Engineering Ethics Education (EEE) and Challenge-Based Learning (CBL) research I have been doing the last seven years. I will focus here on the redesign of a large first-year’s course for ethics and history of technology as an example. I will conclude with expressing my confidence that the dynamic communities working on for CBL and EEE can tackle the future challenges I list here.

There is a growing recognition that the world’s emerging complex problems require perspectives from multiple disciplines to be properly addressed. For higher education, it is imperative to develop well-rounded graduates with both a depth and breadth of knowledge and skills to integrate perspectives across disciplines. A mixed-methods study was conducted to describe the implementation of an interdisciplinary module with students from nine bachelor programs across science, engineering and social sciences who worked on a challenge-based learning assignment. This module involved external partners setting the ‘challenges’, and the student groups worked on devising an interdisciplinary solution. For students, multiple available options for support such as tutors, lecturers and challenge partners were found to be an enabling factor. At the same time, the minimally structured learning activities, and ambiguity of expectations were the limiting factors. At the staff level, the lack of cohesion within the teaching team and minimal support for guiding student groups were limiting factors. In terms of collaboration in the groups, students recognized the role of the other disciplines, improved their communication, and integrated disciplinary knowledge at varying levels. They faced difficulties such as an unequal distribution of workload and disciplinary differences, causing tension. Lastly, the key competencies developed in the module were perspective-taking, communication, collaboration, reflection, and confidence in existing skills and knowledge. Main recommendations for improving the module are scaffolding support for students, developing the interdisciplinary teaching team, and guiding the challenge definition process.

In 2019, a course at a Dutch University of Technology was redesigned towards challenge-based and modular education. The course was received positively by students and their learning outcomes (grades and engagement) increased compared to previous years. This redesign was quite intensive, and case-specific. It did not deliver a specific set of design principles that can easily be used to redesign other courses within the university or even other universities. Therefore, a follow-up project was started, that aims to deliver a framework to scale-up the course redesign tested in the previous study (CMODE; Challenge-based Modular On-demand Digital Education). This framework will be designed using practical principles and will be evidence-informed. The project consists of three stages: (1) informal interviews with key actors at our university, experienced in studying and/or designing modular instruction, a systematic literature review on challenge-based education and modular instruction; (2) a test of the design principles that were developed using the interviews and literature review; and (3) a test of the CMODE-up framework that was built on the results from the second stage, using think-out-loud protocols. In the current study we specifically focus on the first stage. A first look at the already existing literature around challenge-based education and modular instruction shows us that both concepts have been around for a long time in higher engineering education. Since education has become more and more digitized (and the development of MOOCs), it appears that the concepts have taken a quick increase in relevance. However, both concepts have only been studied minimally in relation to each other. We deem it thus highly relevant to first build a clear and proper view on both concepts, the strengths and weaknesses, and where both (can) meet. So that anyone who has intentions like ours - to implement both in higher education - can do this in an evidence-informed manner.

Many universities introduced Challenge-Based Education (CBE) as a way to innovate engineering education. Typically, in CBE students develop and use their knowledge in order to solve real-world problems in society, in multi-disciplinary groups and often in collaboration with external stakeholders. For departments of mathematics and physics innovations such as CBE are often not straightforward. In their strive for depth, they struggle for example with the multi-disciplinary nature of CBE. This study focused on the Bachelor Final Project in an innovation lab (IBFP) at a university of technology in the Netherlands. We have investigated the affordances and constraints for mathematics and physics students to participate in such IBFPs, and how these can be understood in terms of successful innovations in engineering education. Students from all departments can participate in IBFP, but mathematics and physics students have been practically absent. We investigated the reasons for this absence by studying university documents and interviewing stakeholders (N=13). We identified themes emerging from this data, which show that organizational issues played a role, but also factors related to educational innovations and the particular nature of mathematics and physics education. The study helps to understand innovation efforts towards CBE, involving mathematics and physics students.

Integration is key characteristic of Interdisciplinary learning and often also of Challenge based Education. The definition and operationalisation in Engineering Education is, however debated widely. In this study we explored the tacit knowledge of Engineering Lecturers in HE education by doing semi-structured interviews. It yields suggestions for operationalising integration, boundary conditions and a peak insight into the beliefs and match with theoretical literature.

Power, as enacted in educational practices, is a critical issue that shapes all aspects of engineering education. Yet, there is little research within engineering education on how power manifests itself in what we teach and how we teach it. In this paper we use engineering ethics education as an exemplar to interrogate how power tacitly influences the practice of engineering ethics education. To infer the status of engineering ethics as an academic subject we examine, theorize, and elaborate on two aspects of power: (1) the internal power relations affecting the education of engineering ethics and how they manifest within engineering institutions, and (2) the exerting power of key external actors in and ways in which they impact engineering ethics education. Our methodological approach relies on autoethnographic data rooted in the perspective of the three authors. The autoethnographic cases are grounded in the authors’ own teaching and research practices in engineering ethics education set in the US, Irish and Dutch context. We perform a cross-comparative analysis to reflect further on the impact of power relations on ethics as an academic subject and make recommendations for engineering ethics education research and practice.

1.1 Background To educate future competent engineers, it is crucial to adopt teaching and learning approaches that support students in dealing with highly complex problems [1]. One strategy is to enhance service mathematics in higher engineering education by shifting from outcome-centered to competence-centered approaches [2]. This strategy is examined and adopted in a large-scale innovation programme of mathematics education (PRIME) at TU Delft to design effective service mathematics courses in higher engineering education. As mathematics is at the core of engineering education, we will, in this workshop, explore how to create a viable and resilient educational model for developing mathematical competencies, described in the Framework of Mathematics Curricula in Engineering Education [2, 3]. Additionally, we will discuss how the development of mathematical competencies can be facilitated by leveraging technology in blended and remote learning environments. The aim of this workshop is to start a process via a living document which serves to share and create material and expertise in teaching, learning and assessing the mathematical competencies.

We propose a workshop on creating Open Educational Materials for teaching ethics to engineering students, based on a project encouraging the reuse, creation and open publication of Case-Based Exercises within a community of ethics and philosophy of technology scholars in the Netherlands.

TU/e innovation Space offers an environment for students to work in interdisciplinary teams on societal problems. These problems ask for development of a shared language for interdisciplinary collaboration and to facilitate learning processes. Little is known about design characteristics for these problems, and what is needed to support interdisciplinarity in student teams. The educational concept Challenge-based learning (CBL) uses authentic societal problems ('challenges') to urge student learning. The main research question for this case study is: What design characteristics of innovation Space challenges support interdisciplinary student collaboration? Data collection consisted of analysis of learning materials, interviews with teachers and students, student surveys about motivation and collaborative learning in four courses and two honour’s tracks. The results show how teachers ask for competence development in supporting students, especially in assessing and integrating discipline knowledge. Students reported high motivation combined with anxiety for open and complex challenges. Over time this anxiety decreases, as students develop knowledge to solve the challenge. Students also reported a need for a clear mapping of learning goals to activities and assessment. For students it appeared often unclear how and on what criteria they are assessed. Yet, students also reported support in developing ownership, self-directed learning, and collaborative learning. This study confirms existing literature that emphasises difficulties in students developing rigorous discipline knowledge in CBL and interdisciplinary assessment. This study increases our understanding Of challenge design and how interdisciplinarity can be situated in this design. It offers starting Points for research on motivation and collaborative learning in CBL.

This paper describes, at raw-data level, the results of a workshop at SEFI 2021 on “comparing institutional strategies for engineering ethics education in regional, national and European contexts”. It uses the curriculum typology of Goodlad. The results indicate the diversity of answers at the European scale for the ideal, formal, perceived and operational curriculum. Although there were some first contextual differences noticeable, the set of answers was too small to give an in-depth analysis, but it opens up a promising area for future research.

We present a framework that connects identified competence areas with Indented Learning Outcomes (ILO’s). Such a framework is likely to be useful for the design of inter-program Challenge-Based Learning (CBL) in engineering education. The framework was developed out of a need to increase the constructive alignment (CA) of ILO's, learning/teaching activities, and assessment of the Innovation Space Bachelor End Project (ISBEP); an inter-program CBL initiative at Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e). The framework was developed based on a co-creation session, and set up around the definition of ILO’s as departing point to reach CA. We contribute a comprehensive framework listing the ILO’s associated with inter-program CBL at the third-year, bachelor level, and identify three categories related to design and research processes, professional skills, and professional identity and self-directed learning. Furthermore, we illustrate our findings with practices from ISBEP, highlighting the influence of ILO’s on our efforts to reach alignment. Finally, we discuss the implications for CBL design, propose future work, and draw attention to possible limitations in the use of the framework.

With mono-disciplinary courses, students might have difficulties in understanding the role of the content and methods of multiple disciplines in solving complex problems, such as climate change and global health. Considering existing evidence that interdisciplinary learning environments contribute to student progress in e.g., learning, improving skills, a timely review on their impacts can serve as a comprehensive and convincing rationale for the development of these courses in higher engineering education. This systematic literature review aimed to examine peer-reviewed articles reporting on the impacts of interdisciplinary courses on students. The methods used for the review comprised of three phases: 1) search and inclusion of articles, 2) individual study review, and 3) a cross-study comparison. The key search terms identified to locate articles included “interdisciplinary” and “engineering”. The first phase ended with a screening to eliminate articles using the identified exclusion criteria. We completed the second phase that led to a rubric guided by our inclusion criteria (e.g., goals related to student outcomes, courses in engineering education). Part of the rubric included separate sections for student learning outcomes in the domains; knowledge/understanding, skills, and affect. The rubric then was finalized in the third phase following a cross-study comparison. The results can provide a conceptual basis for improving the current state of interdisciplinary courses in higher engineering education. Finally, researchers will be invited to think of new ways to improve the less positive outcomes that were identified, to assess these outcomes and to enhance interdisciplinary courses for online environments.

The present study is concerned with the modularization of courses in engineering education, in particular mathematics modules in/for physic education, at a Dutch university of technology. One of the project objectives is to develop and validate a framework to support teachers with their modular course design; another to provide supporting tools for students to navigate through a modularized system. This paper draws attention to the first stage of the project, which focuses on a state-of-the-art literature review regarding modularization. After a thorough literature review conducted in a systematic manner, with specific keywords, all relevant research papers were categorized under the following three dimensions: instructional activities and learning materials for modular courses; assessment procedure; and supporting systems needed within modular systems. According to the results from selected countries (e.g. UK, Ireland, Australia, Netherlands, and Germany), we have chosen to highlight those where modular system experiences were shared from the point of new instructional methods and learning materials created. Another group of articles were concerned with feedback mechanisms and assessment tools used in the modular courses. The last group concentrates on the ways how both students and instructors are supported in a modular system. This study reports on an overview of articles in terms of the three key criteria required to develop and validate a framework to support teachers at TU/e with their modular course design.

Although cultural diversity of students is inspiring, teachers need to consider the variation in educational and cultural backgrounds as well as the different characters of the students. One strategy can be the application of student-centred learning. However, this may affect students that have been accustomed to different teaching strategies. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to assess the appreciation of international students for different teaching methods. A survey and a workshop were held to ask students for their experiences with different teaching methods before coming to ITC, their appreciation of student-centred learning, and to determine personal character traits. We found that differences between nationalities were rather small, although there were some suggestions that there are differences in attitude between individuals from different continents. The workshop revealed that teachers should better explain and justify their teaching methods as students do not always understand the reason why certain teaching methods are chosen. Besides, with a mixed group of cultures, teachers must stay aware that students sometimes prefer to give polite rather than honest indications on their learning.

Programming tutorials are self-regulated learning activities where students are responsible for their own work pace and learning experience. They are working on programming assignments under supervision of teaching assistants (TAs), where help seeking is an essential skill. Especially, the ability to formulate specific questions contributes to higher test results. In addition, the likelihood of seeking help can be increased by electronic measures, as it is perceived as less threatening. During programming tutorials at the University of Twente the queue management system TA-help.me is used. In order to improve the quality of the learning process, this system was expanded by the following features: 1. Students had to choose a category to which their question belongs. 2. Students had to formulate their question or select a previously asked question. The extentions resulted from a Creative Technology Design process. For evaluation, quantitative data were gathered to measure the quality of the help seeking of students and the acceptance of the tool. Furthermore, TAs were interviewed to check if the tool improved the efficiency and quality of the help seeking and giving. The data indicate that the amount of improvident help seeking reduced, the categories were perceived as useful by the students. Furthermore, adding categories to the questions offered the TAs the opportunity to select topics and to spread their attention more effectively. Typing out the questions did, however, not increase the amount of more specific questions asked. Future research includes how to guide students to ask better questions.

Formative assessment can be understood as assessment for learning rather than of learning. Research has demonstrated that formative assessment/feedback is strongly and causally related to students' achievement in higher education. At Avans University of Applied Sciences, the first-year course Mechanics of Materials 2 (MoM2) does not contain formative assessment due to constrained personnel and financial resources. In this study, we introduced formative assessment in the MoM2 course using an innovative ICT tool. This tool provides students with personalized feedback on both task and process level to improve their learning and to enhance adaptive teacher class instruction. To assess the impact of the ICT based formative assessment, we obtained the final course exam pass rate, the average grade and student satisfaction on the 2018-2019 course MoM2. We compared these outcomes to those in the previous 3 runs of this course (2017-2018, 2016-2017, 2015-2016). These courses were identical to the most recent version of MoM2 but they did not include ICT based formative assessment. In addition, we compared the 2018-2019 run of MoM2 with the 2018-2019 run of Mechanics of Materials 1 (MoM1), which is a highly similar course, which does contain a form of non-ICT based formative assessment. The results show that the use of ICT based formative assessment did not improve academic achievement in the course MoM2 2018/2019 compared with previous runs of the same course and did not improve academic achievement compared to the similar course MoM1 2018/2019.

Universities are embracing 'challenge-based learning' (CBL) to engage students in contributing to real-life societal challenges. In CBL learning takes places through identification, analysis and collaborative design of sustainable and responsive solutions to these challenges. One aspect of CBL is working in interdisciplinary student-teams. Hence, implementation of Interdisciplinary Engineering Education (IEE) is sought, with the aim to train students to bring together expertise from different disciplines in a single context. To support this implementation of IEE, this paper presents a review that synthesizes IEE research with a focus on characterizing vision, teaching practices, and support. We aim to show how IEE is conceptualized, implemented and facilitated in higher engineering education at the levels of curricula and courses. Ninety-nine studies were included for analysis. Results indicate challenges in identifying clear learning goals and assessments (Vision). Furthermore, developing interdisciplinary skills, knowledge, and values needs sound pedagogy and teaming experiences that provide students with authentic ways of engaging in interdisciplinary practice (Teaching). Finally, a limited understanding exists of barriers that hinder the development of engineering programs designed to support interdisciplinarity (Support). This review contributes a level of awareness that allows teachers and educational leadership to take the next step towards interdisciplinarity in CBL.

In preparing and executing labwork, students experience cognitive overload in understanding their lab work and keeping an overview of the lab experiment. In addition, giving just-in-time feedback to students causes peak loads in working hours for lab-teachers. We investigated the additional value of an inquiry based lab education software tool LabBuddy® on the learning and preparation of students and the peak loads of the lab-teachers. In LabBuddy®, students co-operated in groups of 4 to prepare a (visual) block diagram representing their protocol and plan of approach for Creating Biological Tissue. Students were in their 2nd yr bachelor within the Biomedical Engineering programme. Students were further prepared by videos and pictures in LabBuddy®. The lab-teacher gave in-line feedback on students' documents. on the lab, tablets and computer screens were available so that students could access their protocol, answer questions and make notes in the digital labjournal. Data was collected by observations on the lab, focusgroup sessions (with teaching assistants), a questionnaire (41 items) and by comparing students' final test results (70 students). Compared to last year (all preparations and notes on paper), students now feel better prepared for the lab work, have a good overview of the whole experiment while working on the lab and make more notes on their observations. The final reports are improved as students now follow more closely the research cycle. The peak load in working hours for students and labteachers is decreased. Students find LabBuddy® an intuitive system and would like to use the system for other labwork too.

To be able to contribute to societal challenges, engineering students need to learn how to interact with societal stakeholders and incorporate their viewpoints in technology development. This proves to be difficult, especially when it concerns newly emerging technologies, which are characterized by uncertainty and ambiguity. This paper presents a novel educational method - Theatrical Technology Assessment - which combines insights from Constructive Technology Assessment and improvisational theater in a role-play simulation that enables engineering students to explore the socio-technical dynamics and alternative futures of emerging technologies. This method is tested with bachelor students at the University of Twente. Students were involved as players of the role-play simulation, but also as co-designers and role-instructors. The pilot study corroborates that a role-play simulation is a powerful means for students to learn about the complexity of societal interactions around emerging technologies. They learn about differences in stakeholder perspectives and ways to anticipate or transcend these, and about general patterns in socio-technical dynamics.

The Natk4all program is a well appreciated set of physics courses for engineers preparing for physics teaching. The blended learning format suits the students who combine a teaching job and teacher training program. The setup and execution of the Natk4all program has received continuous support from all universities involved. As a by-product intake procedures for new physics teachers were synchronised. The conceptual approach aimed for was implemented by the teachers embedding this within a foundation approach covering the content and procedures of relevant physics subdomains at an academic level well above the secondary school exam level.

Many Higher Education Institutes intend to implement interdisciplinarity in their engineering programs to help students prepare for future work. Realizing interdisciplinary education is not easy and requires good educational leadership. In former research by Leithwood et al, four broad categories of leadership practices have been identified as important for leadership success: setting direction, developing people, developing the organization, and managing the educational program. In our research, we study the role of educational leadership in designing and implementing interdisciplinary engineering education. Context is the Smart Solution Semester of Saxion University of Applied Sciences, where third-year students from three or more disciplines work together in project teams on large (25 ECTS) projects, provided by research groups and business partners. Research questions are: - How has interdisciplinary engineering education been implemented? - What were leadership behaviors, practices and actions in this process? In the first phase of this qualitative, exploratory project, five key stakeholders, identified as being educational leaders, were interviewed through semi-structured interviews, focusing on the educational leadership practices. All interviews were recorded and written down verbatim. Data were coded and analyzed with Atlas.ti. Findings are that all leadership practices were -though not equally- visible; Implementation success depends on the amount to which the educational change has been a bottom-up initiative; For interdisciplinary work, it is important to get to know each other's discipline, including the structure of underlying knowledge. Students are not supervised in this process, nor are the teachers working together.

The ability to cross boundaries is considered fundamental to the ability of scientists, engineers and others to solve modern real-world problems. As with other educational fields engineering higher education needs to find suitable interdisciplinary approaches to meet these requirements. While there is much current study of interdisciplinary learning it remains a challenge to formulate general strategies for implementing interdisciplinary education in a way that students become skilled collaborative problem-solvers. At the University of Twente there are currently opportunities to explore different responses educators have to this challenge, through the study of the High Tech Human Touch minors: a programme which offers minor courses to meet interdisciplinary learning objectives. This case study performs a comparison between the 10 HTHT minor courses relying on the education model ADDIE, to elicit similarity and diversity, and related challenges, with respect to how instructors in each course have responded to their interdisciplinary task. To make this comparison the student-perspective has been taken into account through interviews and evaluations, in addition to desk-research and semi-structured interviews with teachers. In current literature there is little information about how students perceive interdisciplinary education, yet such information can help understand the complexity needed for an interdisciplinary 'pedagogy'. Comparing the 10 HTHT minors, a range of different interdisciplinary educational designs can be identified, with distinct challenges to each, beyond the canonical model of collaboration-based designs. Especially noteworthy is the fact that students consciously opt for these HTHT minors to learn from other disciplines, but that this is not often the learning outcome, signalling a frequent gap between student expectations and educational outcomes.