“We’ve Always Done it that Way,” An Exploration of Electrical and Computer Engineering Faculty Curricular Decisions

Reeping, David; McNair, Lisa D.; Baum, Liesl; Wisnioski, Matthew; Patrick, Annie Y.; Martin, Thomas; Lester, L. F.; Knapp, Benjamin; Harrison, Steve

doi:10.1109/fie.2018.8659333

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Immense effort is expended, at great cost in terms of time and emotional labor, as well as political capital, with little to no impact long term. The many factors behind failures such as ours have been enumerated in recent research investigating both Computer Science and Engineering pedagogies' lack of innovation by Taylor et al (2018) and Reeping et al (2018). However, the weight of dominant pedagogical structures, politics and techniques in Games pedagogy is particularly heavy.…”

Section: Radical Pedagogies In the Games Classroommentioning

confidence: 99%

Troubling games: Materials, histories, and speculative future worlds for games pedagogy

Rouse

Holloway-Attaway

2022

Convergence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Games are trouble. As faculty members in a Game Development program we are aware of the troubles. As inside–outsiders, given our status as queer women in the male-dominated Games field, both with interdisciplinary art-tech-humanities backgrounds as opposed to STEM, we are the ones commonly tasked with ‘fixing’ these troubles. This tasking comes to us in the form of both assumptions and requests about our providing particular types of education to others, both faculty and students, as fixes to Game-troubles: teaching the gender module; sitting on an LGBTQ+ committee; advising a particular student who is also outside the more comfortable purview of Games; and so forth. While our labor is often assumed, it is not fully valued, evidenced by the ways in which it is chronically under-resourced. And, given this lack of sustainability, our labor is not effective in the ways we intend. Often, our fixes only serve to a fix ourselves, further cementing us as outsiders. Our fixes are diluted until they become performative gestures, absolving others of the need to act, but changing little else. Acting ‘in a fix’ is something we no longer wish to do. Instead we untangle and re-tangle in a new way, drawing on the work of Feminist New Materialists (Ahmed, 2008; Alaimo, 2016; Alaimo and Hekman, 2008; Barad, 2011; Bennett, 2010; Braidotti, 2013; Coole and Frost, 2010; Dolphijn and Tuin, 2012; Grosz, 1994; Kirby, 1997) to develop imaginative new models for a more just and joyful future Games pedagogy. We share not only our research on this topic, but also invite you into our own intimate experiences of play-making, foregrounding this as knowledge-making too. We offer these crossings between text and context, history and future Ahmed, 2008, memory and fiction as a speculative fabulation for future Games pedagogies.

show abstract

Section: Radical Pedagogies In the Games Classroommentioning

confidence: 99%

Troubling games: Materials, histories, and speculative future worlds for games pedagogy

Rouse

Holloway-Attaway

2022

Convergence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, inertia, or the notion of "we have been doing this," is also a prominent context that can influence instructor course planning and decisions. Research has shown that resistance to changes among faculty or instructors tend to have this as one of the major reasons, as statements like "we have also done it that way" or "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" exemplifying this concept in higher education (Lane, 2007;National Academy of Engineering, 2005;Reeping et al, 2018). In engineering education, literature on this contact is scarce (Reeping et al, 2018), and there is a need to further explore to better understand inertia's influence on instructors' course decisionmaking.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research has shown that resistance to changes among faculty or instructors tend to have this as one of the major reasons, as statements like "we have also done it that way" or "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" exemplifying this concept in higher education (Lane, 2007;National Academy of Engineering, 2005;Reeping et al, 2018). In engineering education, literature on this contact is scarce (Reeping et al, 2018), and there is a need to further explore to better understand inertia's influence on instructors' course decisionmaking. Overall, the literature review has uncovered several research gaps that the engineering education should begin addressing.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Illuminating Contexts that Influence Test Usage Beliefs and Behaviors among Instructors of Fundamental Engineering Courses

Chew,

Matusovich

2023 ASEE Annual Conference &Amp; Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research paper illuminates the different contexts elicited by seven instructors who taught fundamental engineering courses (FECs) when discussing their test usage beliefs and behaviors, beginning to address a gap in engineering education research on instructors' beliefs and behaviors and test usage in engineering courses. Tests and exams are typically heavily used in FECs like statics, dynamics, thermodynamics, and other courses in various engineering disciplines. Understanding why engineering instructors heavily rely on tests to assess student learning in these courses can be crucial in promoting the use of more diverse types of assessments, such as portfolios, concept inventory, reflection-based practices, project-based practices, and intentionality in terms of designing, administering, and interpreting tests, but research has been scarce on documenting research on this topic.Conversations around why instructors make certain course decisions typically involve the contexts these instructors are situated in, emphasizing how important contexts are in terms of influencing decision-making in these courses. Illuminating some of these contexts can be helpful to further understand instructors' beliefs and behaviors in course decision-making, specifically on heavily using tests in fundamental courses. We answered the research question: What are some of the contexts that seven instructors of fundamental engineering courses raise when discussing their test usage in their courses? The data are collected as part of a larger multi-case study that explores test usage beliefs and behaviors of seven individual engineering instructors (seven cases). Multiple sources of data and evidence triangulate to shape the case profiles for these seven instructors, with contexts emerging as an important element of these profiles.Our findings show several key contexts discussed substantially by some of these seven instructors, though not all instructors discussed the same contexts. These contexts include the influence of inertia to continue using tests, course context that includes large enrollment, and the limited autonomy for some instructors to make changes to assessment in the courses. These contexts show some intertwining characteristics to influence test usage among the participants. In addition, our findings support existing literature on inertia and course context and prominent contexts to influence course decision-making, and this paper focuses on the test usage as a form of course design decision.

show abstract

“…A literature review explored instructor decisions to integrate laboratory components into engineering education, showing that instructor decisions were shaped by factors such as institutional context and policies, the role of society, and stakeholders such as students and accreditation (Coutinho et al, 2017). Another study by Reeping et al (2018) explored instructors in an electrical and computing engineering department on their curricular decisions during a reform of the program. They found four themes (valuing system thinking, valuing adaptability, seeing students struggle between values of concrete and abstract, and noting students' low tolerance of ambiguity) that explain how instructors decide on teaching essential knowledge in the field.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fundamental Engineering Course Test Beliefs and Behaviors: A Case Exploration of One Instructor

Chew,

Matusovich

2022 ASEE Annual Conference &Amp; Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

KJ's research interests primarily intersect assessment and evaluation, equity, and motivation in engineering education, with a pragmatic lens specifically looking into how to translate research findings into practice in engineering learning environments. KJ also strives to further scholarship examining assessments from the equity lens to ensure research does not perpetuate marginalization and oppression experienced by minoritized engineering populations.

show abstract

“We’ve Always Done it that Way,” An Exploration of Electrical and Computer Engineering Faculty Curricular Decisions

Cited by 4 publications

References 11 publications

Troubling games: Materials, histories, and speculative future worlds for games pedagogy

Troubling games: Materials, histories, and speculative future worlds for games pedagogy

Illuminating Contexts that Influence Test Usage Beliefs and Behaviors among Instructors of Fundamental Engineering Courses

Fundamental Engineering Course Test Beliefs and Behaviors: A Case Exploration of One Instructor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About