Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this paper we report on an in‐depth study of engineering design processes. Specifically, we extend our previous research on engineering student design processes to compare the design behavior of students and expert engineers. Nineteen experts from a variety of engineering disciplines and industries each designed a playground in a lab setting, and gave verbal reports of their thoughts during the design task. Measures of their design processes and solution quality were compared to pre‐existing data from 26 freshmen and 24 seniors. The experts spent significantly more time on the task overall and in each stage of engineering design, including significantly more time problem scoping. The experts also gathered significantly more information covering more categories. Results support the argument that problem scoping and information gathering are major differences between advanced engineers and students, and important competencies for engineering students to develop. Timeline representations of the expert designers' processes illustrate characteristic distinctions we found and may help students gain insights into their own design processes.

Background While previously researching the educational impacts of single‐course and cross‐curricular portfolios, investigators noted that student participants described their portfolio activities as positively impacting their growing identities as engineering professionals. These impacts were seen particularly in studies regarding cross‐curricular portfolios.  Purpose (Hypothesis) This study was designed to explicitly investigate identity‐related impacts of cross‐curricular portfolios and to explore the processes students employed during portfolio construction to identify themselves as budding engineers and as future professionals. Design/Mscethod Engineering undergraduate students attended four weekly workshops where they wrote a professional statement, selected artifacts that demonstrated their engineering abilities, and wrote annotations that explained how the artifacts served as concrete examples of their claims for professional standing. Online surveys were administered at each workshop asking participants about their ongoing experiences of creating their portfolios and sharing these portfolios with their peers. Results Analysis of the survey responses revealed that participants had two primary frames of reference for the construction of professional identity during portfolio creation. The external frame of reference focused on students' understanding of the expectations of potential employers and recruiters. The internal frame of reference, which accounted for twice as many responses as the external frame coding, focused on students' emerging realizations of their own values and interests as professional engineers. Conclusions As engineering educators, we often support the external frame of reference in terms of building professional identity. We need to provide students with opportunities to engage the internal frame of reference with which our participants were particularly concerned.

Computer-mediated discussion forums (such as newsgroups or those in instructional management software environments) are becoming common in higher education. Such forums are interesting because they are not only one of the easiest technologies to add to a class but may also provide an important learning opportunity for students. However, simply making a discussion forum available does not mean that it will be used effectively to enable learning. In this paper, we explore the idea that specific features of a discussion forum may increase the likelihood of effective discussions taking place within the forum. We define effective discussions as those that are sustained and are focused on topics related to class learning goals. We then describe the specifications for an electronic discussion forum-a computer-mediated anchored discussion forum-that we propose makes sustained on-topic discussion more likely. We report on the results of two studies that support this proposal. We end by exploring implications for research into computer-supported discussion tools for learning and their design.

Background This paper contributes to the growing body of scholarship on engineering students' conceptions of core concepts in engineering, including their conception of engineering itself. Understanding how students view engineering practice can provide guidance into student responses to course features such as collaborative projects. Purpose (Hypothesis) The research question addressed in this study is: What do student portfolios reveal about student constructions of engineering? Design/Method Texts from portfolios created by mechanical engineering undergraduates were analyzed qualitatively using concepts drawn from discourse analysis. This approach makes it possible to examine conceptions through close reading of linguistic structure of a body of writing. Results Students conceived of engineering practice as “the real world,” with most students not conceiving school experiences as integral to practice. Students conceived of engineering practice in terms of strongly contrasting elements rather than as a system of intrinsic elements. Two major aspects in student conceptions were present in the portfolios: values in engineering practice and the role of other people. Largely missing also from the student discourse was the sense that engineering is inherently collaborative. Conclusion Student conceptions formed continua which bear further study to more completely characterize student views. Conceptions of engineering leaders and engineering educators deserve greater attention as well as contrasts and models for comparison to student conceptions. The benefits of understanding conceptions more completely include understanding student resistance to exercises, predicting student difficulties with exercises, and understanding the distance between what educators are trying to teach students and what students are “hearing.”

The teaching concerns of engineering educators offer one lens for thinking about how to support engineering educators' efforts to improve their teaching. In this study, we collected narrative accounts of teaching consultations between engineering educators and an instructional consultant. Transcripts of these accounts were coded for individual teaching concerns, which were then interpreted from the perspective of existing models and also aggregated into themes. We discuss our findings by using them to highlight ways in which engineering educators are already thinking effectively, to suggest how the adoption of innovation and professional problem‐solving can serve as promising frameworks for thinking about teaching activity, and to suggest that additional research on engineering teaching take advantage of distributed cognition models to truly understand how our students are taught.

Participants employing an external frame of reference submitted responses that revealed three processes of professional identity construction: framing themselves as job applicants, particularly focusing on what others will expect of them when that role is enacted; creating a persuasive case, an argument to others about their preparedness for professional practice; and comparing themselves to others in order to make better sense of their standing with their peers regarding their progression toward being professionals. Participants employing the internal frame of reference submitted responses that revealed six processes underlying professional identity construction: reframing events in their persona! history and increasing the relevance of these events to participants' development as engineers, defining themselves as engineers and claiming membership in the field of engineering, constructing their future trajectories toward becoming professional engineers, realizing and articulating their own values as engineers, defining their interpretation of engineering practice, and developing their abilities to construct narratives about themselves.

In this article, we aim to convey our excitement for credit-based directed research groups, explain why we believe that they are becoming institutionalized in our curriculum, and provide information to help those interested in this subject to understand how to implement and support such groups. The first section of the article presents a brief description of two of our earliest research groups, to provide a framework and point of departure for understanding the several variant forms that have since been adopted. The second section discusses in more detail the basic structure and rationale for the groups. The third section looks at variations in the format of the groups and discusses the advantages of maintaining flexibility in how such groups are implemented. The fourth section discusses the outcomes of the research groups in terms of participation, breadth of topical coverage, and scholarly productivity, followed by a discussion of the impacts on learning in the fifth section. Finally, after reflecting on some of the challenges and unintended effects of the innovation, we close with a brief look to the future.

This edited collection deals with intersecting axes of power and privilege in order to advance conversation on motherhood across disciplines. Mother-scholar contributors explore theoretical and disciplinary approaches to academic motherhood, examine its critical and cultural territory, and articulate the challenges of their dual identity.

What could we know about engineering student knowing? The answer to this question represents a form of scholarship of discovery in engineering education and a valuable complement to scholarship of teaching work in the field. To illustrate the state of this scholarship, we present twelve studies and analyze these studies across aspects of knowledge, level of experience, and research approach. We then use these analyses to identify trends in the existing research and opportunities for future research.