2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

This work-in-progress paper is part of the Innovation through Propagation Round Table Discussion session.

Motivation and Background:
A series of blue ribbon reports has laid out a challenge for engineering education, raising awareness for both what is needed to change and the context (e.g., K12 versus higher education). As documented in a 2012 ASEE also lacking is successful propagation, including a challenge to funding agencies to better exert their role in the propagation of proven successful efforts. That is, propagation should not be simply the dissemination component of research, but also part of the research. Sponsored by the National Science foundation, this is one of three commissioned papers that are focused on developing a research agenda for engineering education focused on propagating documented innovations. As such it addresses four major questions concerning using technology to enhance learning and propagation:

1. What accomplishments have been produced to date? What new innovations have occurred over the past one to one-in-half decades that have lasting value in engineering education?

2. To what extent have innovations been propagated? Have meta-analyses of certain funded innovations across the key areas gleaned useful understanding of how propagation has or has not occurred?

3.What remains to be done? What are the gaps in the research? What are potential root causes as to why the particular innovations have not proliferated across engineering schools?

4.How best can future work be propagated? What type of research agenda is needed over the next five to ten years to facilitate that innovations in engineering education spread across different types of engineering schools, engineering disciplines and engineering coursework? What evidence is required to document a successful innovation?

Methods
At the 2015 ASEE session, the results of a Delphi study were presented, and additions and critiques from the over 75 participants were sought. From the Delphi study results, three writing teams, each addressing a critical area (learning in and out of the classroom, pipeline, and technology), have been commissioned. The initial findings of the writing teams were presented at a workshop with leading engineering education researchers (October 2015). The workshop has enabled the writing teams to refine and redefine their ideas based on the multiple perspectives of the participants. Consequently, at the ASEE 2016 national meeting the teams will be presenting their working drafts which will be included in the Proceedings.

Anticipated Results
Themes that the paper will address include how best to:

• Determine how technology can best be integrated into the learning process

• Document how technology can best be used to enhance assessment of learning

• Determine how technology impacts learning, both positive and negative, in context

• Encourage the replication of reported research to further validate and disseminate - propagate

• Document the ways that technology and educational developments can be used to improve outside the classroom student-faculty interactions

Significance
As stated above, this project is funded by the NSF to develop a roadmap for engineering education research and the propagation of that research with the potential of becoming a national agenda
To most effectively accomplish this, it is necessary to capture needs and potential solutions through a number of different approaches that actively involve the larger engineering education community. This will be the fifth step in that process; the first three being: a Delphi study with subject matter experts from across the research and administrative spectrum, a highly interactive session at the ASEE 2015 Conference, and an invited workshop with recognized leaders in the field participating, and YouTube videos regarding the results to date (spring 2016) for wide distribution and comment. This special session will provide another needed opportunity to bring together a large, diverse body of interested engineering faculty, educational researchers and administrators from which to obtain serious feedback on the substantial findings that will be presented. Placing the three papers in a regular session would fragment the project substantially, not allowing for 1.) “promoting” this evolving agenda, 2.) engaging the broader engineering education community, nor 3.) examining the three critical areas in a gestalt manner.