Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-5lx2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-01T00:26:06.824Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 19 - Translating Research to Widespread Practice in Engineering Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2015

By
Thomas A. Litzinger  and
Lisa R. Lattuca
Edited by
Aditya Johri  and
Barbara M. Olds
Thomas A. Litzinger
Affiliation:
Penn State University
Lisa R. Lattuca
Affiliation:
University of Michigan’s Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education
Aditya Johri
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Barbara M. Olds
Affiliation:
Colorado School of Mines
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Governmental, academic, and professional organizations around the world have pointed to the need for changes in engineering education to meet global and national challenges (see, e.g., Australian Council of Engineering Deans, 2008; National Academy of Engineering, 2004; Royal Academy of Engineering, 2007). Some of these organizations have specifically pointed to the need for the changes in engineering education to be based on educational research (Jamieson & Lohmann, 2009, 2012; National Research Council [NRC], 2011). In spite of these calls for change, researchers are finding that the rate of change and the nature of the change are not keeping pace with the calls for change.

Reidsema, Hadgraft, Cameron, and King (2011) ask “why has change (in engineering education in Australia) not proceeded more rapidly nor manifested itself more deeply within the curriculum” (p. 345) in spite of funding from the national government and continuing efforts of engineering professional societies and Australian Council of Engineering Deans? Reidsema et al. report that interviews of sixteen coordinators of engineering science units at four different universities in Australia revealed that traditional lecture combined with tutorials remained the dominant model of instruction. An in-depth study of the state of engineering education in the United States by Sheppard, Macatangay, Colby, and Sullivan (2009) makes the case that “in the midst of worldwide transformation, undergraduate engineering programs in the United States continue to approach problem-solving and knowledge acquisition in an outdated manner” (Schmidt, 2009, p. 1).

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research , pp. 375 - 392
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Australian Council of Engineering Deans. (2008). Engineers for the future: Addressing the supply and quality of Australian engineering graduates for the 21st Century. New South Wales, Australia: Australian Council of Engineering Deans.Google Scholar
Baker, E. L. (2007). Principles for scaling up: Choosing, measuring effects, and promoting widespread use of educational innovation. In Schneider, B. & McDonald, S.-H. (Eds.), Scale-up in education, Vol. I: Ideas in principle (pp. 37–54). Plymouth, U.K.: Rowman & Little-field.Google Scholar
Bero, L. A., Grilli, R., Grimshaw, J. M., Harvey, E., Oxman, A. D., & Thomson, M. A. (1998). Closing the gap between research and practice: An overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. BMJ, 317, 465. Retrieved from .CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodilly, S. J., Glennan, T. K., Kerr, K. A., & Galegher, J. R. (2004). Introduction: Framing the problem. In Glennan, T. K., Bodilly, S. J., Galegher, J. R., & Kerr, K. A. (Eds.), Expanding the reach of education reforms: Perspectives from leaders in the scale-up of educational interventions (pp. 1–39) Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Borrego, M., Froyd, J. E., & Hall, T. S. (2010). Diffusion of engineering education innovations: A survey of awareness and adoption rates in U.S. engineering departments. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(3), 185–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Center for the Advancement of Scholarship in Engineering Education (2011, February). Forum on the impact and diffusion of transformative engineering education innovations. Workshop materials. Retrieved from
Coburn, C. E. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (2007). Educational innovation and the problem of scale. In Schneider, B. & McDonald, S.-H. (Eds.), Scale-up in education, Vol. I: Ideas in principle (pp. 19–36). Plymouth, U.K.: Rowman & Little-field.Google Scholar
Constas, M. A., & Brown, K. L. (2007). Toward a program of research on scale-up: Analytical requirements and theoretical possibilities. In Schneider, B. & McDonald, S.-H. (Eds.), Scale-up in education, Vol. I: Ideas in principle (pp. 247–257). Plymouth, U.K.: Rowman & Little-field.Google Scholar
Dancy, M. H., & Henderson, C. (2004). Beyond the individual instructor: systemic constraints in the implementation of research-informed Practices. In Franklin, S., Marx, J., & Heron, P. (Eds.), AAPT Physics Education Research Conference, Sacramento, CA.Google Scholar
Dearing, J. W. (2009). Applying diffusion of innovation theory to intervention development. Research on Social Work Practice, 19, 503–518.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eckel, P., Hill, B., & Green, M. (1998). En route to transformation. (On Change: An Occasional Paper Series of the ACE Project on Leadership and Institutional Transformation). Washington, DC: American Council on Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED435293)Google Scholar
Elmore, R. F. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard Review, 66(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Entwistle, N. J., & Peterson, E. R. (2004). Conceptions of learning and knowledge in higher education: Relationships with study behavior and influences of learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(6), 407–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairweather, J. (2005). Beyond the rhetoric: Trends in the relative value of teaching and research in faculty salaries. Journal of Higher Education, 76, 401–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairweather, J. (2008). Linking evidence and promising practices in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) undergraduate education. Invited Paper for National Academies National Research Council Workshop, Evidence on Promising Practices in Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Fishman, B. J. (2005). Adapting innovations to particular contexts of use: A collaborative framework. In Dede, C., Honan, J. P., & Peters, L. C. (Eds.), Scaling up success (pp. 48–66). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Fullan, M. (2009). Large-scale reform comes of age. Journal of Educational Change, 10, 101–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Getz, M., Siegfried, J. J., & Anderson, K. H. (1997). Adoptions of innovations in higher education. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 37(3), 605–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glennan, T. K., Bodilly, S. J., Galegher, J. R., & Kerr, K. A. (2004). Summary: Toward a more systematic approach to expanding the reach of educational interventions In Glennan, T. K., Bodilly, S. J., Galegher, J. R., & Kerr, K. A. (Eds.), Expanding the reach of education reforms: Perspectives from leaders in the scale-up of educational interventions (pp. 647–685). Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Goldman, S. (2005). Designing scalable educational improvements. In Dede, C., Honan, J. P., & Peters, L. C. (Eds.), Scaling up success (pp. 67–96). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Graham, R. (2012). Achieving excellence in engineering education: The ingredients of successful change. Royal Academy of Engineering & MIT Press. Retrieved from .
Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2011). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Google Scholar
Hall, G. E., Wallace, R. C., & Dossett, W. F. (1973). A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions. Research and Development Center for Teacher Education. University of Texas at Austin. (ERIC Report ED 095 126).
Henderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2009). Impact of physics education research on the teaching of introductory quantitative physics in the United States. Physical Review Special Topics – Physics Education Research, 5, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2010). Increasing the impact and diffusion of STEM education innovations. Invited paper for the National Academy of Engineering, Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education Forum, Impact and Diffusion of Transformative Engineering Education Innovations. Retrieved from
Horwitz, P. (2007). Successful scale-up in three stages: Insights and challenges for educational research and practice. In Schneider, B. & McDonald, S.-H. (Eds.), Scale-up in education, Vol. I: Ideas in principle (pp. 259–268). Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Jamieson, L. H., & Lohmann, J. R. (2009). Creating a culture for scholarly and systematic innovation in engineering education. Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education. Retrieved from
Jamieson, L. H., & Lohmann, J. R. (2012). Inno-vation with impact: Creating a culture for scholarly and systematic innovation in engineering education. Washington, DC: American Society for Engineering Education. Retrieved from
Kezar, A. J. (2001). Understanding and facilitating organizational change in the 21st century: Recent research and conceptualizations (ASHE – ERIC Higher Education Reports, Vol. 28, No. 4). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Kezar, A. (2012). The path to pedagogical reform in the sciences: Engaging mutual adaptation and social movement models of change. Liberal Education, 98(1). Retrieved from Google Scholar
Kreuter, M. W., & Bernhardt, J. M. (2009). Reframing the dissemination challenge: A marketing and distribution perspective. American Journal of Public Health, 99(12), 2123–2127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lattuca, L. R. (2010). Influences on engineering faculty members’ decisions about educational innovations: A systems view of curricular and instructional change. Invited paper for the National Academy of Engineering, Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education Forum, Impact and Diffusion of Transformative Engineering Education Innovations, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Lattuca, L. R., & Stark, J. S. (2009). Shaping the college curriculum: Academic plans in context. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Martin, E. (1999). Changing academic work: Developing the learning university. Society for Research into Higher Education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning. I – Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(part 1), 4–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, R. S., Cooper, J. L., Davidson, N., & Hawkes, P. (1995). Building bridges between cooperative and collaborative learning. Change, 27(4), 34–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, M. W., & Mitra, D. (2001). Theory-based change and change-based theory: Going deeper, and going broader. Journal of Educational Change, 2, 301–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mourshed, M., Chijioke, C. & Barber, M. (2010). How the world's most improved school systems keep getting better. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from Google Scholar
National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2004). The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
National Research Council (NRC). (2011). Promising practices in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education: Summary of two workshops. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Nelson Laird, T. F., Shoup, R., Kuh, G. D., & Schwarz, M. J. (2008). The effects of discipline on deep approaches to student learning and college outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 49(6), 469–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nutley, S., Walter, I., & Davies, T. O. (2009). Promoting evidence-based practice: Models and mechanisms from cross-sector review. Research on Social Work Practice, 19, 552–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oxford, R. L. (1997). Cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and interaction: Three communicative stands in the language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 443–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raudenbush, S. W. (2007). Designing field trials of educational innovation. In Schneider, B. & McDonald, S.-H. (Eds.), Scale-up in education, Vol. II: Issues in practice (pp. 23–40). Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Reidsema, C., Hadgraft, R., Cameron, I., & King, R. (2011). Change strategies for educational transformation. In Proceedings of the 2011 Australasian Engineering Education Conference, Fremantle, Western Australia. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Renniger, K. A. (2000). Individual interest and its implication for understanding intrinsic motivation. In Harackiewicz, J. M. & Sansone, C. (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 373–404). San Diego: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.Google ScholarPubMed
The Royal Academy of Engineering (RAE). (2007). Educating engineers for the 21st century. London: The Royal Academy of Engineering.Google Scholar
Schmidt, P. (2009, January 15). Carnegie Foundation calls for overhaul of engineering education. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from
Schoenfeld, A. H. (2006). Notes on the educational steeplechase: Hurdles and jumps in the development of research-based mathematics Instruction. In Constas, M. A. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Translating theory and research into educational practice: Developments in content domains, large-scale reforms, and intellectual capacity (pp. 9–30). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Sheppard, S., Macatangay, K., Colby, A., & Sullivan, W. M. (2009). Educating engineers: Designing for the future of the field. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Smith, K. A. (1998, June). Cooperative learning. Paper presented at American Society for Engineering Education Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
Smith, K. A. (2011, October). Cooperative learning: Lessons and insights from thirty years of championing a research-based innovative practice. Paper presented at the 41st Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, Rapid City, SD.
Smith, K. A., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1981). The use of cooperative learning groups in engineering education. Paper presented at the Eleventh Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, Rapid City, SD.
Trowler, P., Saunders, M., & Knight, P. (2003). Change thinking, change practices: A guide to heads of departments, programme leaders and other change agents in higher education. Learning and Teaching Support Network Generic Centre, UK. Retrieved from
Walter, I. C., Nutley, S. M., & Davies, H. T. O. (2003). Developing a taxonomy of interventions used to increase the impact of research. Research Unit for Research Utilisation, Discussion Paper 3. Retrieved from

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×