Bevlee A. Watford

Pursuing and Adjusting to Engineering Majors: A Qualitative Analysis

This study extends prior social cognitive career theory research by using discovery methods to examine factors that (a) facilitate and hinder first-year students’ adjustment to engineering majors and (b) inform their self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations regarding pursuit of engineering careers. Participant responses to a series of open-ended questions were coded and interpreted using content analysis and consensual qualitative research methods. Participants reported experiencing several types of academic, social, and financial hurdles during their first semester. They also described factors that facilitated their academic progress—such as university programs, social support from peers, and development of personal resources—and cited other resources that, if available, could have further assisted their adjustment. In addition, participants identified experiential sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations relative to completing an engineering degree. Gender and racial group differences in coping resources and sources of self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations were examined.

Reflections on the messiness of initiating a systematic literature review on broadening participation in engineering and computer science

The rigorous, structured, and transparent review of literature on a particular topic can lead to promising insights about research directions, practical solutions, and potential policies. While the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is a well-established methodology, it is rarely used in the field of engineering education. Though the use of the term “systematic” suggests a clear-cut process and there are resources available to describe the major steps of the method, the initial steps of a SLR are inherently messy — i.e., they heavily rely on the researchers judgement and decision-making. Unfortunately, the messiness embedded in these steps is rarely discussed or described in existing resources. In this study, we reflect on the “messiness” of initiating a SLR on broadening participation in engineering and computer science. Informed by two existing approaches to reflection, we used the STAARA (Situation-Task-Affect-Action-Result-Aftermath) framework to reflect on the ways in which we resolved important decisions associated with one overarching situation and several corresponding tasks, affects, actions; the aftermath is also discussed. This paper includes insights from our experience that can help other researchers navigate the initial steps of a SLR.

Developing innovative thinking among engineering undergraduates: Examining the role of slate enabled technology

This paper reports the planned implementation for a NSF sponsored study that is being undertaken to examine whether effective use of instructional technology, specifically slate enabled technology, has an impact on the innovative thinking skills among engineering undergraduates enrolled in large lecture classes. The methodology used in this study a quasi-experimental mixed method approach utilizing a control and treatment group. Findings from the planned study can be used to improve innovative thinking skills through effective pedagogical approaches which may include employment of various forms of slate enabled instructional technology.

Special session - strengths and weakness in NSF curriculum development proposals as identified by reviewers and strategies for dealing with them

The goal of the session is to enable the participants to prepare more competitive curriculum development NSF proposals by making them aware of the role that reviewers play in the proposal decision process, the factors that reviewers consider in processing proposals, and approaches for anticipating and responding to these factors. The session is based on an analysis of the engineering proposals submitted in the CCLI Phase 1 competition in 2005 and 2006. The analysis will identify the most common strengths and weaknesses cited by the review panels in discussing the proposals. The interactive session will be structured so that the participants will develop an understanding of these data and identify approaches for enhancing these strengths and dealing with these weaknesses as they prepare future proposals.