A Mixed-Method Study Exploring Cyber Ranges and Educator Motivation

A growing number of academic institutions have invested resources to integrate cyber ranges for applying and developing cybersecurity-related knowledge and skills. Cyber range developers and administrators provided much of what is known about cyber range resources and possible educational applications; however, the educator provides valuable understanding of the cyber range resources they use, how they use them, what they value, and what they do not value. This study provides the cyber range user perspective of cyber ranges in cybersecurity education by describing how K-12 educators are motivated using cyber ranges. Using mixed methods, this study explored educator motivation associated with cyber range usage through the lens of Eccles’ Situated Expectancy Value Theory. This research contributes to understanding how educators are motivated using academic cyber ranges for cybersecurity education. Overall, educators were motivated but professional development and preparation resources that do not assume any prior cybersecurity knowledge would contribute positively to their usage. Cybersecurity education stakeholders should continue to support cyber range integration to strengthen cybersecurity education programs and support educators\u27 ability to become better cybersecurity educators

A multiple case study of an interorganizational collaboration: Exploring the first year of an industry partnership focused on middle school engineering education

Background: Calls to improve learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and particularly engineering, present significant challenges for school systems. Partnerships among engineering industry, universities, and school systems to support learning appear promising, but current work is limited in its conclusions because it lacks a strong connection to theoretical work in interorganizational collaboration. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study aims to reflect more critically on the process of how organizations build relationships to address the following research question: In a public–private partnership to integrate engineering into middle school science curriculum, how do stakeholder characterizations of the collaborative process align with existing frameworks of interorganizational collaboration?. Design/Method: This qualitative, embedded multiple case study considered in-depth pre- and post-year interviews with teachers, administrators, industry, and university personnel during the first year of the Partnering with Educators and Engineers in Rural Schools (PEERS) program. Transcripts were analyzed using a framework of interorganizational collaboration operationalized for our context. Results: Results provide insights into stakeholder perceptions of collaborative processes in the first year of the PEERS program across dimensions of collaboration. These dimensions mapped to three central discussion points with relevance for school–university–industry partnerships: school collaboration as an emergent and negotiated process, tension in collaborating across organizations, and fair share in collaborating toward a social goal. Conclusions: Taking a macro-level look at the collaborative processes involved enabled us to develop implications for collaborative stakeholders to be intentional about designing for future success. By systematically applying a framework of collaboration and capitalizing on the rich situational findings possible through a qualitative approach, we shift our understanding of collaborative processes in school–university–industry partnerships for engineering education and contribute to the development of collaboration theory

Sustaining Engineering Education Research: Sharing Qualitative Research Data For Secondary Analysis

The need for secondary data analysis practices emerges from multiple sources. Qualitative researchers often have rich data sets that far exceed the time available for data analysis, and many of us wish that someone could spend more time with the data. We also recognize that local data sets would benefit from further analysis that linked our data with related data collected in different contexts. Many also grapple with increasing data sharing requirements from funding agencies that raise concerns about participant confidentiality and data integrity. This workshop provides a chance to explore potential responses to these concerns through a robust dialogue around secondary data analysis practices and pitfalls

The Rising Engineering Education Faculty Experience (REEFE): Preparing Junior Colleagues

Despite the importance of professional development, for most graduate students as up-and coming faculty members professional development is informal at best. Graduate programs often emphasize gaining technical knowledge, skills, and abilities through courses and research projects, but provide less opportunity for future faculty members to gain experience with teaching, service, communication, assessment, proposal writing, etc. To provide this experience, we developed the Rising Engineering Education Faculty Experience (REEFE). Founded on theoretical and practical models of graduate student development, REEFE is an innovative faculty apprenticeship program for engineering education graduate students that places students in visiting faculty member positions at host schools. This paper describes the foundations of REEFE and the program itself. We also offer lessons learned from the host school, sending school, and participants based on prior REEFE implementations. We hope our learnings prompt discussions regarding how to effectively prepare future engineering education facult

Outcome Expectations and Environmental Factors Associated with Engineering College-Going: A Case Study

Family, school, and community contexts each link to secondary school enrollment, yet these factors have been comparatively examined only in limited ways. A holistic examination of contextual factors will be particularly important for engineering where college enrollment patterns vary by demographics. To begin explaining patterns of engineering college-going at different high schools across the Commonwealth of Virginia, we answered the following research questions: Within a single school system and from a socializer’s perspective, what outcome expectations and environmental factors influence students’ engineering-related postsecondary educational plans? How are these factors the same and different between high schools within a school district? Using a single-case-study approach and in-depth interviews with socializers (teachers, administrators, and counselors), we examined similarities and differences in outcome expectations and environmental factors at three high schools within a single school district. By integrating the results regarding outcome expectations and environmental factors, three important findings emerged: (1) relationships between outcome expectations and environmental factors vary across schools within the same system, (2) proximity to a postsecondary institution is not just about physical distance, and (3) messaging regarding career pathways matters. Each of these has practical implications but can also set the foundation for future research

Building Community Capacity for Integrating Engineering in Rural Middle School Science Classrooms

: Broadening participation in engineering is an important national priority and has led to increasing demands for engineering content to be integrated into traditional K-12 curriculum. However, expecting teachers to incorporate engineering into their classrooms without additional training or resources is unreasonable. Partnering teachers with industry partners is one promising way to prioritize integrated science and engineering content while also introducing youth to possible career paths. In this programmatic article, we introduce the Partnering with Educators and Engineers in Rural Schools (PEERS) project that focuses on the collaborative design, implementation, and study of recurrent hands-on engineering activities with middle school youth in three rural communities in or near Appalachia. We discuss the curricular priorities of the program as well as preliminary findings on both student-focused and capacity-building metrics across the partnerships. Key discussion points include (1) a need to distill goals for engineering outreach by wrestling with what success might really look like for middle-school youth engagement with engineering and (2) cultivating community capacity to better support education systems and the simultaneous potential for and challenges of collaborating to build such infrastructure

Student Outcomes from the Collective Design and Delivery of Culturally Relevant Engineering Outreach Curricula in Rural and Appalachian Middle Schools

Middle school is a pivotal time for career choice, and research is rich with studies on how students perceive engineering, as well as corresponding intervention strategies to introduce younger students to engineering and inform their conceptions of engineering. Unfortunately, such interventions are typically not designed in culturally relevant ways. Consequently, there continues to be a lack of students entering engineering and a low level of diverse candidates for this profession. The purpose of this study was to explore how students in rural and Appalachian Virginia conceive of engineering before and after engagement with culturally relevant hands-on activities in the classroom. We used student responses to the Draw an Engineer Test (DAET), consisting of a drawing and several open-ended prompts administered before and after the set of engagements, to answer our research questions related to changes in students’ conceptions of engineering. We used this study to develop recommendations for teachers for the use of such engineering engagement practices and how to best assess their outcomes, including looking at the practicality of the DAET. Overall, we found evidence that our classroom engagements positively influenced students’ conceptions of engineering in these settings

Engineering PhD Returners and Direct‐Pathway Students: Comparing Expectancy, Value, and Cost

BackgroundProfessionals who pursue a doctorate after significant post‐baccalaureate work experience, a group we refer to as returners, represent an important but understudied group of engineering doctoral students. Returners are well situated to leverage their applied work experiences in their advanced engineering training.Purpose/HypothesisWe drew on results from the Graduate Student Experiences and Motivations Survey to explore the dimensionality of our scales measuring value and cost constructs. We used these scales, as well as measures of student expectancy of success, to compare returners with direct‐pathway students.Design/MethodWe surveyed 179 returners and 297 direct‐pathway domestic engineering doctoral students. We first conducted Exploratory Factor Analysis on our cost and value measures. We then used both Ordinary Least Squares and Ordinal Regression Model analyses to assess the relationships of various student characteristics and experiences (including returner status) with student expectancy of success and the emergent cost and values factors associated with doctoral study in engineering.ResultsFactor analysis revealed three categories of values (interest, attainment, and career utility) that were largely consistent with those in Eccles’ expectancy‐value framework. A similar analysis identified three categories of costs (balance, financial, and academic) associated with pursuing a PhD. Returners felt significantly less confident in their ability to complete their degrees prior to enrolling and perceived higher levels of all cost types than direct‐pathway students.ConclusionsGiven the differences between returning and direct‐pathway students, it is important to consider how universities might best recruit and retain returners. Tracking returner status could be critical in better supporting these students.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/140046/1/jee20182.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/140046/2/jee20182_am.pd

Choosing engineering: Can I succeed and do I want to? A qualitative analysis framed in expectancy-value theory

Recently published reports call for an increase in the number of engineering graduates and suggest appropriate characteristics that these graduates should embody. Accomplishing either objective requires first understanding why students choose to pursue engineering degrees. This research started addressing this knowledge gap using Eccles\u27 expectancy-value model to qualitatively and longitudinally examine undergraduate student\u27s choices to enroll and persist in engineering majors. Specifically, this study focused on identity within Eccles\u27 model to answer the question: How do students\u27 beliefs about being engineers in the future shape their choices to pursue engineering? ^ Framed in Eccles\u27 model, students\u27 choices to pursue engineering majors are based on beliefs about their engineering-related competence and how much they value succeeding in an engineering major. Eccles posits that identity shapes both competence and value beliefs. This study defined identity as students\u27 self-perceptions as future engineers then examined the roles these self-perceptions in shaping their choices to pursue engineering degrees. Gee\u27s conception of four-interrelated aspects of identity (nature identity, institutional identity, affinity identity, and discourse identity) provided a lens to examine students\u27 self-perceptions as future engineers. ^ Multiple case study methods guided this research with each of ten students (five men and five women) representing a case. Results derive from the inductive analysis of longitudinal interviews triangulated with survey results—all data spanned the students\u27 first through fourth undergraduate years. This study is part of a larger body of work, the Academic Pathways Study (APS), conducted by the Center for Advancement of Engineering Education (CAEE). ^ Results demonstrated that students\u27 self-perceptions as future engineers are connected to both competence and value beliefs and to the choice to persist in engineering. Specifically, the results showed: (1) even in their fourth undergraduate year, three out of ten participants were uncertain about themselves as future engineers; (2) students choosing to pursue an engineering degree because they identify with the types of activities in which engineers engage experience the persistence choice process differently than students who choose engineering for other reasons; and (3) all students ultimately had positive competence beliefs, although two women participants continually renegotiated definitions of competence in engineering.