Reflections on Implementing a Students-as-Partners Approach to Curriculum Development in Engineering

Abstract

The implementation of Students-as-Partners (SaP) with instructors in the co-development of curriculum is becoming an increasingly popular pedagogical model. Enhanced learning outcomes, student satisfaction, and skill development have been demonstrated as a result of SaP work. Engineering educators stand to benefit from this approach, however further investigation is needed to better understand the implications of SaP work on curriculum development processes. Thus, the primary goal of this paper is to provide an analysis of the complexities of the Students-as-Partners approach from an experiential lens of curriculum design in first-year engineering. This study uses a collaborative auto-ethnographic approach to draw from instructor and student written reflections on the process and experiences of working within the SaP model on a first-year engineering curriculum development project. Common themes were identified and synthesized from individual reflections. Important considerations of a partnership include creating a positive climate, pre-existing perceptions of power, framing the project with intention, and taking advantage of niche areas of expertise. Various forms of motivation were also found to influence the partnership dynamics and outcomes. Restraints of partnerships in general were identified in the unequal student representation and the difficult balance of providing guidance and instilling ownership. These findings provide key considerations to engineering educators who may find the SaP approach a viable option in curriculum development processes.

A biomedical engineering curriculum development: A qualitative study engaging four stakeholders

“…Some studies focus on qualitative approaches involving interviews (Thune, 2011), autoethnography (Pearlston et al, 2020), surveys (Bell-Huff et al, 2019), questionnaires (McCusker et al, 2022 or mixed methods (Fowler et al, 2014;Patrick et al, 2022;Wolf, 2007). Within the engineering field, while some studies involve only external stakeholders (Thune, 2011), faculty members (Fowler et al, 2010;Fowler et al, 2014), and students as partners (Bell-Huff et al, 2019;Bovill et al, 2011;Pearlston et al, 2020), others advocate for the involvement of multiple stakeholders (McCusker et al, 2022;Patrick et al, 2022;Walkington, 2002), including students, program curriculum committees, faculty members, and external advisory boards. Engaging diverse stakeholders brings unique perspectives, expertise, and interests, essential for developing interdisciplinary engineering curricula that meet industry demands and academic standards (Walkington, 2002).…”

“…Considerable research studies have employed a range of research methodologies to explore different modes and the extent of stakeholders' collaboration (Franco et al, 2019;Thune, 2011). Some studies focus on qualitative approaches involving interviews (Thune, 2011), autoethnography (Pearlston et al, 2020), surveys (Bell-Huff et al, 2019), questionnaires (McCusker et al, 2022 or mixed methods (Fowler et al, 2014;Patrick et al, 2022;Wolf, 2007). Within the engineering field, while some studies involve only external stakeholders (Thune, 2011), faculty members (Fowler et al, 2010;Fowler et al, 2014), and students as partners (Bell-Huff et al, 2019;Bovill et al, 2011;Pearlston et al, 2020), others advocate for the involvement of multiple stakeholders (McCusker et al, 2022;Patrick et al, 2022;Walkington, 2002), including students, program curriculum committees, faculty members, and external advisory boards.…”

Considerations for Development of Critical Reflection Skills in First-Year Engineering Informed Through Student Perspectives

“…An initial meeting involved identifying constraints and key information required to inform the curriculum development process, as well as the respective strengths and expectations of all team members. The intricacies of the student-faculty dynamic on this project, in specific, are analyzed from a reflective lens in a separate study [16].…”