Student and faculty perceptions of engagement in engineering

Journal of Engineering Education

Volumn 99, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 253-261

  Heller, Rachelle S ^a   Beil, Cheryl ^a   Dam, Kim ^a   Haerum, Belinda ^a  

^a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Engagement; Freshmen programs; Undergraduate engineering education

Indexed keywords

CURRICULA; EDUCATION; ENGINEERING EDUCATION; TEACHING; TECHNICAL PRESENTATIONS;

ENGAGEMENT; ENGINEERING EDUCATORS; ENGINEERING UNDERGRADUATES; FRESHMEN PROGRAMS; STANDARD DEFINITIONS; UNDERGRADUATE ENGINEERING EDUCATIONS; UNDERGRADUATE ENGINEERING STUDENTS; UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS;

STUDENTS;

EID: 77954641346     PISSN: 10694730     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01060.x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Akera, A. 2005. Education simulation and pedagogies of engagement. www.rpi.edu/~akeraa/prometheans/education/ihss1975/4spresentation.ppt (Last accessed, August 2009).
2. Allen, D., and K. Tanner. 2005. Infusing active learning into the largeenrollment biology class: Seven strategies, from the simple to complex. Cell Biology Education 4 (4): 262-268
3. Belcheir, M. 2004. The national survey of student engagement: Results from Boise State freshmen and seniors. Boise State University Research Report 2000-2004
4. Bjorkland, S., and N. Fortenberry. 2005a. Measuring student and faculty engagement in engineering education, CASEE Report 5902001-2005-0705. Washington, DC: National Academy of Engineering.
5. Bjorkland, S., and N. Fortenberry. 2005b. Work in progress-developing national survey instruments to assess engagement in best instructional practices and attainment of targeted student outcomes. In Proceedings of the 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Indianapolis, IN.
6. Bonous-Hammarth, M. 2000. Pathways to success: Affirming opportunities for science, mathematics, and engineering majors. Journal of Negro Education 69 (1/2): 92-111.
7. Brainard, S., and L. Carlin. 1997. A six-year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering and science. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of Frontiers in Education: Teaching and Learning in an Era of Change. Pittsburgh, PA.
8. Capie, W., and K.G. Tobin. 1981. Pupil engagement in learning tasks: A fertile area for research in science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 18 (5): 409-417
9. Carini, R.M., J.C. Hayek, G.D. Kuh, J.M. Kennedy, and J.A. Ouimet. 2003. College student responses to web and paper surveys: Does mode matter? Research in Higher Education 44 (1): 1-19.
10. Columbia University Engineering Websites: http://www.studentaffairs. columbia.edu/fysaac/majordec/seas/ (last accessed, March 2009). http://www.engineering.columbia.edu/pages/academics/undergraduate-studies/index. htm (last accessed, March 2009).
11. Frehill, L.M., N.M. DiFabio, and S.T. Hill. 2008. Confronting the 'new' American dilemma, underrepresented minorities in engineering: A data-based look at diversity. National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, Inc.(NACME): White Plains, NY. http://www.cpst.org/NACME-Rep.pdf (last accessed, March 2010).
12. Gonyeau, M., and M. Dascoli. 2006 Assessing classroom engagement utilizing student perceptions of faculty attributes and teaching techniques. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy. San Diego, CA. http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p-mla-apa-research- citation/1/1/8/2/0/p118208-index.html (last accessed, October 2009).
13. Hake, R. 1998. Interactive-engagement vs. traditional methods: A sixthousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics 66 (1): 64-74
14. Harris, A.H., and M.F. Cox. 2003. Developing an observation system to capture instructional differences in engineering classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education 92 (4): 329-336
15. Hickey, D.T., and J.B. Granade. 2004. The influence of socio-cultural theory on our theories of engagement and motivation. In Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning, eds. D. McInerney and S. Van Etten. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
16. Kuh, G.D., J.H. Schuh, and E.J. Whitt. 1991. Involving colleges: Successful approaches to fostering student learning and development outside the classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
17. Kuh, G.D., T.F.N. Laird, and P.D. Umback. 2004. Aligning faculty activities and student behavior. Liberal Education 90 (4): 24-31.
18. Kubanek, A.M.W., and M. Walker. 1995. Women's confidence in science: Problematic notions around young women's career and life choices. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 2 (4): 243-253
19. Mestre, J. 2005. Fact and myths about pedagogies of engagement in science learning. Peer Review 7 (2): 24-27.
20. Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering and the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. 2006. Beyond bias and barriers: Fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
21. National Survey of Student Engagement. 2003. Converting data into action: The college student report-2003 annual report.
22. Bloomington, IN: Center for Postsecondary Research, Indiana University. National Survey of Student Engagement. 2007. Experiences that matter: Enhancing student learning and success-2007 annual report. Bloomington, IN: Center for Postsecondary Research, Indiana University.
23. Pascarella, E.T., and P.T. Terenzini. 2005. How college affects students: A third decade of research. San Francicso, CA: Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education.
24. Prince, M. 2004. Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education 93 (3): 223-231
25. Smith, K.A., S.D. Sheppard, D.W. Johnson, and R.T. Johnson. 2005. Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom-based practices. Journal of Engineering Education 94 (1): 1-15.
26. Swaner, L. 2007. Linking engaged learning, student mental health and well-being, and civic development: A review of the literature. Liberal Education 93 (1): 16-25.
27. University of California, Berkeley. 2005. Osr2.berkeley.edu/ UCUES-WEB/AdministrativePresentations/UG-deans-1.28.2005.ppt (last accessed, January 2008).