工程学中的聪明之道:信念、价值观和工程学入门经验

A. Kramer, R. Kajfez, E. Dringenberg
{"title":"工程学中的聪明之道:信念、价值观和工程学入门经验","authors":"A. Kramer, R. Kajfez, E. Dringenberg","doi":"10.3991/ijep.v14i1.41633","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Common discourse conveys that to be an engineer, one must be “smart.” Our individual and collective beliefs about what constitutes smart behavior are shaped by our participation in the complex cultural practice of smartness. From the literature, we know that the criteria for being considered “smart” in our educational systems are biased. The emphasis on selecting and retaining only those who are deemed “smart enough” to be engineers perpetuates inequity in undergraduate engineering education. Less is known about what undergraduate students explicitly believe are the different ways of being smart in engineering or how those different ways of being a smart engineer are valued in introductory engineering classrooms. In this study, we explored the common beliefs of undergraduate engineering students regarding what it means to be smart in engineering. We also explored how the students personally valued those ways of being smart versus what they perceived as being valued in introductory engineering classrooms. Through our multi-phase, multi-method approach, we initially qualitatively characterized their beliefs into 11 different ways to be smart in engineering, based on a sample of 36 engineering students enrolled in first-year engineering courses. We then employed quantitative methods to uncover significant differences, with a 95% confidence interval, in six of the 11 ways of being smart between the values personally held by engineering students and what they perceived to be valued in their classrooms. Additionally, we qualitatively found that 1) students described grades as central to their classroom experience, 2) students described the classroom as a context where effortless achievement is associated with being smart, and 3) students described a lack of reward in the classroom for showing initiative and for considerations of social impact or helping others. As engineering educators strive to be more inclusive, it is essential to have a clear understanding and reflect on how students value different ways of being smart in engineering as well as consider how these values are embedded into teaching praxis.","PeriodicalId":170699,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Eng. Pedagog.","volume":"29 13","pages":"129-148"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ways of Being Smart in Engineering: Beliefs, Values, and Introductory Engineering Experiences\",\"authors\":\"A. Kramer, R. Kajfez, E. Dringenberg\",\"doi\":\"10.3991/ijep.v14i1.41633\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Common discourse conveys that to be an engineer, one must be “smart.” Our individual and collective beliefs about what constitutes smart behavior are shaped by our participation in the complex cultural practice of smartness. From the literature, we know that the criteria for being considered “smart” in our educational systems are biased. The emphasis on selecting and retaining only those who are deemed “smart enough” to be engineers perpetuates inequity in undergraduate engineering education. Less is known about what undergraduate students explicitly believe are the different ways of being smart in engineering or how those different ways of being a smart engineer are valued in introductory engineering classrooms. In this study, we explored the common beliefs of undergraduate engineering students regarding what it means to be smart in engineering. We also explored how the students personally valued those ways of being smart versus what they perceived as being valued in introductory engineering classrooms. Through our multi-phase, multi-method approach, we initially qualitatively characterized their beliefs into 11 different ways to be smart in engineering, based on a sample of 36 engineering students enrolled in first-year engineering courses. We then employed quantitative methods to uncover significant differences, with a 95% confidence interval, in six of the 11 ways of being smart between the values personally held by engineering students and what they perceived to be valued in their classrooms. Additionally, we qualitatively found that 1) students described grades as central to their classroom experience, 2) students described the classroom as a context where effortless achievement is associated with being smart, and 3) students described a lack of reward in the classroom for showing initiative and for considerations of social impact or helping others. As engineering educators strive to be more inclusive, it is essential to have a clear understanding and reflect on how students value different ways of being smart in engineering as well as consider how these values are embedded into teaching praxis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":170699,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Int. J. Eng. Pedagog.\",\"volume\":\"29 13\",\"pages\":\"129-148\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Int. J. Eng. Pedagog.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v14i1.41633\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Int. J. Eng. Pedagog.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v14i1.41633","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

通常的说法是,要成为一名工程师,就必须 "聪明"。我们对什么是聪明行为的个人和集体信念,是通过参与复杂的 "聪明 "文化实践形成的。从文献中我们知道,在我们的教育体系中,被认为是 "聪明 "的标准是有偏见的。强调只选拔和留住那些被认为 "足够聪明 "的工程师,使得本科工程教育中的不公平现象长期存在。对于本科生明确认为在工程学中聪明的不同方式是什么,以及在工程学入门课堂上如何评价聪明工程师的不同方式,我们知之甚少。在这项研究中,我们探讨了工科本科生对于 "在工程学中成为聪明人 "的共同信念。我们还探讨了学生个人如何评价这些聪明的方式,以及他们认为在工程学入门课堂上受到重视的方式。通过多阶段、多方法的研究方法,我们首先以 36 名工程专业一年级学生为样本,将他们的信念定性为 11 种不同的 "工程学中的聪明 "方式。然后,我们采用定量方法发现,在这 11 种 "聪明 "方式中,有 6 种在工科学生的个人价值观和他们认为的课堂价值观之间存在显著差异(置信区间为 95%)。此外,我们还在定性分析中发现:1)学生认为成绩是他们课堂体验的核心;2)学生认为课堂是一个不费吹灰之力就能取得成就的环境,而聪明则与此相关;3)学生认为课堂上缺乏对表现主动性、考虑社会影响或帮助他人的奖励。在工程教育工作者努力提高包容性的过程中,有必要清楚地了解和反思学生是如 何看待工程学中不同的聪明方式的,并考虑如何将这些价值观融入教学实践中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ways of Being Smart in Engineering: Beliefs, Values, and Introductory Engineering Experiences
Common discourse conveys that to be an engineer, one must be “smart.” Our individual and collective beliefs about what constitutes smart behavior are shaped by our participation in the complex cultural practice of smartness. From the literature, we know that the criteria for being considered “smart” in our educational systems are biased. The emphasis on selecting and retaining only those who are deemed “smart enough” to be engineers perpetuates inequity in undergraduate engineering education. Less is known about what undergraduate students explicitly believe are the different ways of being smart in engineering or how those different ways of being a smart engineer are valued in introductory engineering classrooms. In this study, we explored the common beliefs of undergraduate engineering students regarding what it means to be smart in engineering. We also explored how the students personally valued those ways of being smart versus what they perceived as being valued in introductory engineering classrooms. Through our multi-phase, multi-method approach, we initially qualitatively characterized their beliefs into 11 different ways to be smart in engineering, based on a sample of 36 engineering students enrolled in first-year engineering courses. We then employed quantitative methods to uncover significant differences, with a 95% confidence interval, in six of the 11 ways of being smart between the values personally held by engineering students and what they perceived to be valued in their classrooms. Additionally, we qualitatively found that 1) students described grades as central to their classroom experience, 2) students described the classroom as a context where effortless achievement is associated with being smart, and 3) students described a lack of reward in the classroom for showing initiative and for considerations of social impact or helping others. As engineering educators strive to be more inclusive, it is essential to have a clear understanding and reflect on how students value different ways of being smart in engineering as well as consider how these values are embedded into teaching praxis.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信