Background The field of engineering education research is adopting an increasingly diverse range of qualitative methods. These developments necessitate a coherent language and conceptual framework to critically engage with questions of qualitative research quality.Purpose/Hypothesis This article advances discussions of qualitative research quality through sharing and analyzing a methodologically diverse, practice-based exploration of research quality in the context of five engineering education research studies.Design/Method As a group of seven engineering education researchers, we drew on the collaborative inquiry method to systematically examine questions of qualitative research quality in our everyday research practice. We used a process-based, theoretical framework for research quality as the anchor for these explorations. ResultsWe constructed five practice explorations spanning grounded theory, interpretative phenomenological analysis, and various forms of narrative inquiry. Examining the individual contributions as a whole yielded four key insights: quality challenges require examination from multiple theoretical lenses; questions of research quality are implicitly infused in research practice; research quality extends beyond the objects, procedures, and products of research to concern the human context and local research setting; and research quality lies at the heart of introducing novices to interpretive research.Conclusions This study demonstrates the potential and further need for the engineering education community to advance methodological theory through purposeful and reflective engagement in research practice across the diverse methodological approaches currently being adopted.

Many qualitative research studies in engineering education use semi-structured interviews as an approach to inquiry. However, traditional semi-structured interviews do not always enable participants to answer questions in deep and meaningful ways. Recent research in engineering education has successfully drawn upon the inquiry method of photo elicitation, which uses photographs as interview prompts to elicit "thick description" from participants. Some studies have extended the methodology of photo elicitation to artifact elicitation, in which research participants are asked questions about artifacts (physical, virtual, etc.) that they have previously created and bring to the interview. Artifacts are similar to photos in that they embody the knowledge, skills, and attitudes held by the artifact creators. In this paper, we will provide examples of two current studies in engineering education that use artifact elicitation. Through these examples we demonstrate how artifact elicitation can elicit new meanings not possible through traditional interview techniques.

This synthesis paper examines the concepts of critical thinking, reflective practice, and adaptive expertise as represented throughout academic literature. The academic community generally considers each of these skillsets to be desirable attributes of engineering graduates and practitioners. Despite the trend of engineering programs across the country to embrace critical thinking, reflective practices, and adaptive expertise through mission and vision statements, the development of these qualities through education may be falling short. Lack of explicit exposure to and discussion of each concept may be contributing to the common inability of engineering students and educators to effectively communicate their understanding of each. In an attempt to contribute to the improvement of the situation, this paper aims to provide an individual evaluation of each topic as represented in the literature, a review of current operationalization techniques, and the current state of each topic within the field of engineering. Additional discussion builds connections by exploring relationships among the three topics, considers issues related to the topics within engineering, and offers possible areas of future exploration.

This paper examines the meaning and enactment of critical thinking for engineering and humanities undergraduate students. We address the following research question: What are the similarities and differences between humanities and engineering students in their perceptions and enactment of critical thinking? Semi-structured interviews were conducted with four to five

The Educate Utilizing CubeSat Experience (EdUCE) program was developed to cultivate practical hands-on K-20 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) experiences via space systems engineering. Recently, the inclusion of the Arts (resulting in STEAM) has become a complementary effort to engage students in STEM activities and to motivate innovation in Systems Engineering curriculum and broaden the participation of K-20 students and educators worldwide. This paper discusses how the EdUCE program utilizes systematic approaches to implement its hands-on experiences to K-20 participants. These learning experiences were derived from a CubeSat project at the University of Florida. Original efforts to educate CubeSat concepts were through outreach activities such as designing and building a representative CubeSat class satellite with specific mission applications at engineering fairs and communication activities through the use of amateur radio equipment similar to tracking and commanding of satellites. In addition, this paper presents how the systems engineering processes are applied in the educational domain. Furthermore, the EdUCE experiences and derived content are delivered through a state-of-the-art digital platform.