Journal of Engineering Education最新文献

{"title":"The Undergraduate Engineering Mental Health Help-Seeking Instrument (UE-MH-HSI): Development and validity evidence","authors":"Joseph H. Hammer,&nbsp;Courtney J. Wright,&nbsp;Melanie E. Miller,&nbsp;Sarah A. Wilson","doi":"10.1002/jee.20615","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20615","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Undergraduate engineering students experiencing distress are less likely than peers to ask for professional help. A population-specific instrument to facilitate the identification of factors that influence mental healthcare utilization could guide development and testing of interventions to increase help seeking.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>We used mixed methods guided by the Integrated Behavioral Model (IBM) to develop and evaluate the Undergraduate Engineering Mental Health Help-Seeking Instrument (UE-MH-HSI).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>First, we adapted existing measures of mental health help-seeking intention and mechanisms (i.e., attitudes, perceived norm: injunctive, perceived norm: descriptive, personal agency: autonomy, personal agency: capacity). Second, we coded qualitative interviews (<i>N</i> = 33) to create population-specific mental health help-seeking belief measures (i.e., outcome beliefs, experiential beliefs, beliefs about others' expectations, beliefs about others' behavior, beliefs about barriers and facilitators). Third, we tested the psychometric properties using data from 596 undergraduate engineering students at a historically White, research-focused institution in southern United States.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Psychometric analyses indicated that (1) help-seeking mechanism and intention measures demonstrated unidimensionality, internal consistency, construct replicability, and sufficient variability; (2) mechanism measures demonstrated criterion evidence of validity; and (3) most items within the belief measures demonstrated sufficient variability and convergent evidence of validity.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The UE-MH-HSI is an evidence-based tool for investigating mental health help-seeking factors and their relationship to help-seeking behavior, well-being, academic success, and engineering identity formation. Guidelines for use are provided.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jee.20615","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142540908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How can I help move my manuscript smoothly through the review process?","authors":"Joyce B. Main,&nbsp;David B. Knight","doi":"10.1002/jee.20618","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20618","url":null,"abstract":"<p>We hope that these questions to consider will be helpful as you prepare your next manuscript for submission to JEE. Perhaps another avenue to maximize the success of the papers you author that is often overlooked is to serve as a reviewer. Indeed, reviewing is an important aspect of being a part of a research community. In our March 2024 editorial, we highlighted some tips for reviewers (Knight &amp; Main, <span>2024</span>). Through reviewing and authoring scholarly works, we engage with our engineering education and larger communities in the exchange of ideas and dissemination of high-quality research that has potential for change and transformation.</p>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jee.20618","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142540820","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reasons and root causes: Conventional characterizations of doctoral engineering attrition obscure underlying structural issues","authors":"Gabriella M. Sallai,&nbsp;Catherine G. P. Berdanier","doi":"10.1002/jee.20619","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20619","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Although most engineering graduate students are funded and usually complete their degrees faster than other disciplines, attrition remains a problem in engineering. Existing research has explored the psychological and sociological factors contributing to attrition but not the structural factors impacting attrition.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose/Hypothesis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Using systems theory, this study seeks to understand nuance in how underlying structural causes affect engineering graduate students' attrition experiences in ways that may differ from their official reasons for departure.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Design/Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with seven departing or already departed engineering doctoral students from R1 graduate programs across the United States. Using thematic analysis, root cause analyses were conducted to understand participants' attrition experiences to explore how structures influence causes of departure.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The ways participants discuss root causes of their departure indicate differences in formal reasons for departure and underlying causes of departure. We highlight the role of informal and formal policy as root causes of a different attrition rationale often passed off as interpersonal issues. When interpreted as evidence of structural issues, the causes of departure show ways in which action–inaction, policy–“null” policy serve as structural features governing student attrition decision processes. We also highlight a form of benign neglect toward struggling graduate students.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study reveals important nuances underlying face-value reasons of attrition indicating foundational structural issues contributing to engineering graduate student attrition. Coaching faculty in team management and encouraging close revision of departmental policies could help mitigate students' negative graduate experiences and decrease unnecessary attrition.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jee.20619","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142540895","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Special issue on systematic reviews and meta-analyses in engineering education: Highlights and future research directions","authors":"Olusola O. Adesope","doi":"10.1002/jee.20613","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20613","url":null,"abstract":"<p>It gives me great pleasure to explore and synthesize the unique and synergistic contributions of 14 articles for this important special issue, as well as to set future directions for the field of engineering education. Given that evidence-based syntheses help shape key research advances in the medical, psychological, and educational fields, we sought papers that used state-of-the-art methods for systematic reviews and meta-analyses to explore fundamental topics in engineering education. We received many excellent manuscripts, and eventually accepted 14 for this special issue. They cover a range of topics, including reading and writing in engineering, the use of concept maps for assessment in engineering, and other key topics. Most papers used systematic review methods, while three used scoping reviews and bibliometric methods. However, none used meta-analysis. Although this is surprising, it presents an opportunity to call for more rigorous experimental and quantitative research on key topics in engineering education. Experimental studies can uncover cause and effect relationships and enable researchers to draw inferences more easily. While I advocate for all traditions of rigorous research, the collection of reviews in this special issue points to a pressing need for more experimental studies in the field of engineering education.</p>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jee.20613","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142540927","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Reflections on a mentored group peer review process","authors":"Harpreet Auby,&nbsp;Lorena S. Grundy,&nbsp;Sandra Huffman,&nbsp;Kaylla Cantilina,&nbsp;Samuel B. Gavitte,&nbsp;Sarah E. Kaczynski,&nbsp;Melissa Penyai,&nbsp;Milo D. Koretsky","doi":"10.1002/jee.20616","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20616","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;Peer review, an established part of research practice, is intended to ensure quality and engender trust among researchers. Reviewers with appropriate expertise evaluate a manuscript to ensure scholarly practices and engage in productive dialogue with the authors. However, significant concerns with peer review (Ware, &lt;span&gt;2008&lt;/span&gt;) have sparked proposals to improve the process. Biases can manifest through prestige, nationality, gender, and content (Lee et al., &lt;span&gt;2013&lt;/span&gt;). Because the peer review process is primarily maintained by unpaid labor, it burdens overworked scholars, leading to fewer and fewer willing peer reviewers and, at times, rushed reviews (Dance, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;; Flaherty, &lt;span&gt;2022&lt;/span&gt;). Delays in peer review are an issue for junior faculty seeking promotion and graduate students entering the job market (Dance, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;). Rushed peer reviews have been shown to miss errors, leading to erroneous publications that erode trust in the scientific community (Campbell, &lt;span&gt;2024&lt;/span&gt;; Lowe, &lt;span&gt;2010&lt;/span&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Previous &lt;i&gt;JEE&lt;/i&gt; editorials have addressed the challenges of establishing a new peer review culture in STEM (Benson, &lt;span&gt;2019&lt;/span&gt;; Knight &amp; Main, &lt;span&gt;2024&lt;/span&gt;) and the positive influences of the &lt;i&gt;JEE&lt;/i&gt; Mentored Review Program on the identity of mentees (Jensen et al., &lt;span&gt;2021&lt;/span&gt;). Other solutions have been proposed to promote more equitable and efficient peer review. Some claim that crowdsourcing peer reviews using discipline-specific online forums has been fast and effective (List, &lt;span&gt;2017&lt;/span&gt;); however, this approach has yet to be widely explored. Artificial intelligence has also been used to aid the review process by potentially improving the quality of reviews and addressing the lack of reviewers; however, this remedy raises substantial concerns about bias, reliability, and appropriate use of data (Hosseini &amp; Horbach, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Here, we provide reflections from a mentored peer review process within a single engineering education research group. We assert that engaging in this process offers a shared learning experience where emerging scholars can learn about an essential research practice. Furthermore, it has the potential to grow the number of qualified reviewers, improve paper quality, and increase reviewers' academic reading and writing confidence—all while providing quality feedback in a specific review.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This mentored review process can be viewed through a community of practice lens (Wenger, &lt;span&gt;1998&lt;/span&gt;) where novices (e.g., graduate students new to manuscript writing and reviewing) engage as legitimate peripheral participants (Lave &amp; Wenger, &lt;span&gt;1991&lt;/span&gt;) in authentic practice to interact with more central participants and learn the sociotechnical practices of the community. The designers of the &lt;i&gt;JEE&lt;/i&gt; Mentored Peer Review Program take this approach, giving junior faculty members experience by matching them w","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jee.20616","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142540940","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Impact of an immersive engineering program on children's understanding of and interest in engineering: Addressing gender stereotypes","authors":"Alexandra Schonning,&nbsp;Susan M. Perez","doi":"10.1002/jee.20617","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20617","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The gender gap in engineering presents a critical barrier to achieving a diverse and innovative engineering workforce. This gap is influenced by gender stereotypes, socialization processes, masculine culture, and insufficient early experiences with engineering. These contribute to diminished STEM self-concept, interest, and participation among women.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose/Hypothesis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study assessed an engineering outreach program's impact on children's understanding of and interest in engineering and beliefs about who can be an engineer. It compared whether discussions of gender bias differentially influenced these outcomes for girls and boys.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Design/Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The study was a short-term sequential quasi-experimental design with boys and girls in grades 4–5. Six classroom groups attended a half-day engineering field trip and were randomly assigned to two conditions: Gender Presentation or No Gender Presentation. Pre- and post-program surveys measured changes in understanding of and interest in engineering and beliefs about who can be an engineer.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>All children, regardless of gender or condition, had higher understanding of and interest in engineering after the program, but also demonstrated a bias in selecting men over women as engineers. Participants reported that both girls and boys like and are good at engineering and these ratings increased from the pre-program to the post-program survey.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This research affirms the effectiveness of immersive and inclusive programming in enhancing children's understanding of and interest in engineering. No substantial gender-specific differences emerged regarding the impact of discussions on gender biases. The program underscores the value of early inclusive educational interventions in fostering equitable interest in engineering among young students.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142540939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Exploring fundamental engineering course instructors' test usage beliefs and behaviors: A multicase study","authors":"Kai Jun Chew,&nbsp;Holly M. Matusovich","doi":"10.1002/jee.20614","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20614","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Tests are commonly and heavily used in fundamental engineering courses (FECs) to assess student learning of concepts. With existing literature presenting mixed benefits and disadvantages of testing to students' motivation to learn and documenting widely alternative assessments, the lack of questioning of heavy and common test usage must be addressed to diversify classroom assessment and promote intentionality in test usage.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose/Hypothesis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study begins to address the lack of questioning by exploring and uncovering test usage beliefs and behaviors of seven FEC instructors from two engineering departments in a land-grant, public, Research 1 university</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Design/Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Grounded in the Situated Expectancy–Value Theory (SEVT), we conducted a multicase study. Data include two interviews, course syllabi, and sample tests provided by the participants, and public documents from the institution and departments. We conducted a priori and emergent coding and thematic analysis to identify the beliefs and behaviors before developing individual case summaries for cross-case analysis to identify groupings.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Three test usage groups emerged: enthusiastic, default, and questioning. All test usage groups featured tests heavily in their FECs, resulting in varying alignment between these participants' test usage beliefs and behaviors.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Our findings reveal the various factors that can shape FEC instructors' test usage beliefs and behaviors, and the complexity in terms of alignment. This work lays important implications, including laying the foundations for future scholarship on testing in engineering education research and leveraging findings to begin efforts in diversifying assessment approaches and promoting intentional test usage in FECs.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jee.20614","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142541058","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Arrebatos and institutionalized barriers encountered by low-income Latino/a/x engineering students at Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) and emerging HSIs","authors":"Cristhian Fallas Escobar,&nbsp;Joel Alejandro Mejia,&nbsp;Tess Perez","doi":"10.1002/jee.20612","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20612","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Latinos/as/xs continue to face many barriers as they pursue engineering degrees, including remedial placement, lack of access to well-funded schools, and high poverty rates. We use the concept of <i>arrebatos</i> to describe the internal reckoning that Latino/a/x engineering students experience through their journeys, particularly focusing on the impact of socioeconomic inequalities.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To bring counternarratives in engineering education research focusing on the experiences and lived realities of low-income Latino/a/x engineering students. These counternarratives are an important step in interrogating systemic biases and exclusionary cultures, practices, and policies at HSIs and emerging HSIs and within engineering programs.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p><i>Pláticas</i> were conducted with 22 Latino/a/x engineering undergraduates from four different universities in the US Southwest. These <i>pláticas</i> were coded and analyzed drawing from Anzaldúa's theoretical concept of <i>el arrebato</i>. Special attention was given to participants' <i>arrebatos</i> triggered by their college experiences as low-income individuals.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Analysis indicates that Latino/a/x engineering students' a<i>rrebatos</i> arise from events that shake up the foundation of their own identity, including an institutional lack of sociopolitical consciousness. This lack of consciousness becomes evident not only in individuals' attitudes toward these students but also in institutional policies that put them at a further disadvantage.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Findings have implications for engineering programs, particularly at HSIs and emerging HSIs regarding the creation of policies and practices that aim to secure the retention of low-income Latino/a/x engineering students and alleviate the systemic barrier they face by affirming the practice of servingness.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2024-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142540909","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Celebrating outstanding publications and reviewers from the 2023 volume","authors":"David B. Knight,&nbsp;Joyce B. Main","doi":"10.1002/jee.20610","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20610","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The <i>Journal of Engineering Education</i> (JEE) publishes outstanding contributions that span a wide variety of topics and methods (Katz et al., <span>2023</span>). As we laid out in the journal's strategic plan (Main &amp; Knight, <span>2023</span>), JEE is more than a place to publish papers—it is a vital partner in the global community of stakeholders dedicated to advancing research in engineering education from pre-college contexts to post-graduate professional contexts. We appreciate that authors from around the globe choose to share their work in JEE and keep it a top destination for high-quality engineering education research.</p><p><b><i>William Elgin Wickenden Award (2023)</i></b></p><p>All articles in a volume are automatically considered for the award.</p><p>Congratulations to Brooke Coley and Katreena Thomas for their article “‘The lab isn't life’: Black engineering graduate students reprioritize values at the intersection of two pandemics,” which was published in the April 2023 issue (https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20518) (Coley &amp; Thomas, <span>2023</span>). The article has been selected to receive the 2023 William Elgin Wickenden Award!</p><p>Many thanks to Senior Associate Editor Bill Williams and Deputy Editor Adam Carberry for co-chairing the selection process and the Wickenden Award committee members Jiabin Zhu, Stephen Secules, Alex Mejia, Brian McSkimming, and Madeline Polmear. We also appreciate the entire JEE editorial board for participating in this challenging task of identifying one paper to recognize out of an entire volume of excellent research contributions.</p><p><b><i>JEE Star Reviewers (2023)</i></b></p><p>Our annual recognition of a few members of the JEE community is always an important activity to highlight some of our outstanding contributions from the past year. We would be remiss, however, not to acknowledge everyone in the community for helping continue to make JEE a top destination globally for sharing engineering education research. All of our authors, reviewers, editorial board members, and readers play critical roles, and we appreciate you.</p><p><b>Farewell from the JEE Editorial Board</b></p><p>We are saying a fond farewell to Assistant Editor Matilde Sánchez-Peña. Matilde has been on the JEE Editorial Board since 2021 and has been a wonderful member of our team. We wish her well in her continued role as a faculty member. It has been a pleasure to work with you, Matilde!</p>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jee.20610","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141730087","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"(Mis)alignments between postdoctoral and supervisors' perceptions of mentorship competencies in engineering and computer science","authors":"Matthew Bahnson,&nbsp;Monique Ross,&nbsp;Catherine G. P. Berdanier","doi":"10.1002/jee.20611","DOIUrl":"10.1002/jee.20611","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Postdoctoral training holds an increasingly important place in preparation for leading academic and research positions. While little empirical research has described postdoctoral training beyond the sciences, across all fields, “misaligned expectations” are often touted as a key source of postdoctoral strife.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Purpose/Hypothesis</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This article describes mentorship competency beliefs within engineering and computer science fields, which increasingly engage in postdoctoral training.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Design/Method</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>An embedded mixed-methods design was used to quantitatively identify mentorship profiles from survey data using latent profile analysis (LPA) from a sample of <i>n</i> = 118 postdoctoral scholars and <i>n</i> = 165 postdoctoral supervisors. Qualitative thematic analysis of interviews with <i>n</i> = 29 postdoctoral scholars and <i>n</i> = 20 postdoctoral supervisors was used to identify meaning in the differences between quantitative profiles. The combination of LPA with thematic analysis enabled the triangulation of distinct postdoctoral mentorship profile definitions.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>LPA identified six postdoctoral fellow profiles and four supervisor profiles, which became clearly definable through thematic analysis. Postdoc profiles included Technical Manager, Autonomy Focused Advisor, Stretched Mentor, Well-Rounded Mentor, Exemplar Mentor, and Leader-Mentor, while supervisor profiles included Autonomous Mentor, Reflective Mentor, Research Lab Mentor, and Confident Leader-Mentor. Some of these are aligned, but several are not, giving insight into the phenomenon of “misaligned expectations” in postdoctoral literature.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The mentorship profiles illustrate the misalignment in expectations, which leads to negative mentorship experiences for many postdoctoral scholars.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2024-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jee.20611","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141643036","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}