The Aula Fellowship

Category: Topic: Engineering Education

Research Topic: Engineering Education

  • Canary in the Mine: An LLM Augmented Survey of Disciplinary Complaints to the Ordre des ingénieurs du Québec (OIQ) (Peer Reviewed)

    Canary in the Mine: An LLM Augmented Survey of Disciplinary Complaints to the Ordre des ingénieurs du Québec (OIQ) (Peer Reviewed)

    This study investigates disciplinary incidents involving engineers in Quebec, shedding light on critical gaps in engineering education. Through a comprehensive review of the disciplinary register of the Ordre des ingénieurs du Québec (OIQ)’s disciplinary register for 2010 to 2024, researchers from engineering education and human resources management in technological development laboratories conducted a thematic analysis of reported incidents to identify patterns, trends, and areas for improvement. The analysis aims to uncover the most common types of disciplinary incidents, underlying causes, and implications for the field in how engineering education addresses (or fails to address) these issues. Our findings identify recurring themes, analyze root causes, and offer recommendations for engineering educators and students to mitigate similar incidents. This research has implications for informing curriculum development, professional development, and performance evaluation, ultimately fostering a culture of professionalism and ethical responsibility in engineering. By providing empirical evidence of disciplinary incidents and their causes, this study contributes to evidence-based practices for engineering education and professional development, enhancing the engineering education community’s understanding of professionalism and ethics.

    More Information

  • Whole-Person Education for AI Engineers: Presented to CEEA (Peer Reviewed)

    Whole-Person Education for AI Engineers: Presented to CEEA (Peer Reviewed)

    This autoethnographic study explores the need for interdisciplinary education spanning both technical an philosophical skills – as such, this study leverages whole-person education as a theoretical approach needed in AI engineering education to address the limitations of current paradigms that prioritize technical expertise over ethical and societal considerations. Drawing on a collaborative autoethnography approach of fourteen diverse stakeholders, the study identifies key motivations driving the call for change, including the need for global perspectives, bridging the gap between academia and industry, integrating ethics and societal impact, and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration. The findings challenge the myths of technological neutrality and technosaviourism, advocating for a future where AI engineers are equipped not only with technical skills but also with the ethical awareness, social responsibility, and interdisciplinary understanding necessary to navigate the complex challenges of AI development. The study provides valuable insights and recommendations for transforming AI engineering education to ensure the responsible development of AI technologies.

    More Information

  • WIP: Gen AI in Engineering Education and the Da Vinci Cube (Peer Reviewed)

    WIP: Gen AI in Engineering Education and the Da Vinci Cube (Peer Reviewed)

    As generative AI (GenAI) tools rapidly transform the engineering landscape, a critical question emerges: Are current educational innovations adequately preparing engineers for the socio-technical challenges of the future? This work-in-progress paper presents two key contributions. First, we build on prior work presenting a systematic review of over 160 scholarly articles on GenAI implementations in engineering education, revealing a predominant focus on enhancing technical proficiency while often neglecting essential socio-technical competencies. Second, we apply an emerging framework—the da Vinci Cube (dVC)—to support engineering educators in critically evaluating GenAI-driven innovations. The dVC framework extends traditional models of innovation by incorporating three dimensions: the pursuit of knowledge, consideration of use, and contemplation of sentiment. Our analysis suggests that while GenAI tools can improve problem-solving and technical efficiency, engineering education must also address ethical, human-centered, and societal impacts. The dVC framework provides a structured lens for assessing how GenAI tools are integrated into curricula and research, encouraging a more holistic, reflective approach. Ultimately, this paper aims to provoke dialogue on the future of engineering education and to challenge the prevailing assumption that technical skill development alone is sufficient in an AI-mediated world.

    More Information

  • Les leviers du pouvoir dans l’IA

    Les leviers du pouvoir dans l’IA

    La camaraderie Aula est fièr de commanditer la conférence annuel la faculté du campus Saint Jean de l’Université de l’Alberta. Notre directrice, Tammy Mackenzie, y présente les leviers du pouvoir dans l’IA dans la société albertaine et de la francopĥonie. Le tout dans le but de remmettre le pouvoir décisionnel dans les mains des gens qui sont impliqués: nous tous.

    Pour en savoir plus, voir: https://www.ualberta.ca/en/campus-saint-jean/congress/index.html

  • Path to Personalization: A Systematic Review of GenAI in Engineering Education

    Path to Personalization: A Systematic Review of GenAI in Engineering Education

    This systematic review paper provides a comprehensive synthesis across 162 articles on Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) in engineering education (EE), making two specific contributions to advance research in the space. First, we develop a taxonomy that categorizes the current research landscape, identifying key areas such as Coding or Writing Assistance, Design Methodology, and Personalization. Second, we highlight significant gaps and opportunities, such as lack of customer-centricity and need for increased transparency in future research, paving the way for increased personalization in GenAI-augmented engineering education. There are indications of widening lines of enquiry, for example into human-AI collaborations and multidisciplinary learning. We conclude that there are opportunities to enrich engineering epistemology and
    competencies with the use of GenAI tools for educators and students, as well as a need for further research into best and novel practices. Our discussion serves as a roadmap for researchers and educators, guiding the development of GenAI applications that will continue to transform the engineering education landscape, in classrooms and the workforce.

    More Information

  • Dataset: Engineering Education Research on LLMs (Full Systematic Review)

    Dataset: Engineering Education Research on LLMs (Full Systematic Review)

    This dataset is available for collaborations. Please contact our research Director, Dr. Branislav Radeljic, Ph.D., for more information.

    Used in: Path to Personalization: A Systematic Review of GenAI in Engineering Education

    More Information

  • Exploring and Expanding Support for International Students in Engineering: Faculty Reflections Beyond Academic Boundaries

    Exploring and Expanding Support for International Students in Engineering: Faculty Reflections Beyond Academic Boundaries

    This is a student paper:

    Expanding upon our previous work in the blinded for review paper, this research seeks to delve into the realm of self-reflection among engineering faculty members who regularly interact with international students. The primary objective is to investigate how these faculty members address the unique needs of the international student community. The Challenge and Support model by Nevitt Sanford serves as our guiding framework for this research, and we employ narrative analysis due to its potential in analyzing differences in cases and describing the dynamics of individual narratives within their distinct contexts (Floersch et al., 2010; Simons et al., 2008).

    This paper aims to answer the following research question: How do engineering faculty members address the multifaceted and distinct needs of international students? It is important to understand these perspectives when considering how to support international engineering students given that each student has unique and intricate experiences in both academic and non-academic aspects.

    More Information

  • Investigating Transition Phases: An Autoethnographic Study of International Women of Color Engineering Educators in the US

    Investigating Transition Phases: An Autoethnographic Study of International Women of Color Engineering Educators in the US

    The study aims to explore the transitions experienced by international Women of Color (IWoC) engineers in the US as they navigate their academic and professional lives. Motivated by the lack of research on IWoC’s experiences, specifically around transition points of their lives, four international Women of Color participated in this qualitative auto-ethnographic deep-dive. All four researchers have attended college in the United States for their high educational degrees focused on education/engineering education and are currently involved in engineering education scholarship work.

    More Information

  • Making Space for Critical Action: Re-visioning Computational Thinking

    Making Space for Critical Action: Re-visioning Computational Thinking

    While school makerspaces promise to inspire and excite, the challenge of meaningfully integrating them into schools remains. Guided by a philosophy of praxis that stresses the need for education to interweave theory, action, and reflection to advance positive social change in our communities (Freire, 1970), this paper reports on the co-design of a school space called the Critical Action Learning Lab (CALL) for inclusive making to support computational thinking and critical action through curriculum-informed learning

    More Information

  • Outsiders: Pathways and Perspectives from Engineering Education PhDs Outside Academia

    Outsiders: Pathways and Perspectives from Engineering Education PhDs Outside Academia

    This article presents a critical exploration and recommendation based on the lived experiences of PhD graduates in Engineering Education who have ventured into non-academic career paths. The work is rooted in an auto-ethnographic research approach, and the report aims to mimic a live virtual panel. It seeks to elucidate the experiences and challenges faced by PhD graduates who diverged from traditional academic roles to pursue careers in industry, entrepreneurship, consulting, and pre-college leadership. These narratives reveal a complex landscape of motivations, perceived hierarchical barriers, and under-recognition within academic and non-academic sectors, highlighting a divide between industry and academia. The paper delves into the unique challenges faced by non-academic engineering educators, such as confronting a culture that often questions their value outside traditional faculty roles and the overarching perception that non-research roles are less significant. Despite these challenges, the authors argue for the vital role these professionals play in bridging the gap between research, instruction, and practical application in engineering education. They emphasize the importance of ASEE or similar professional societies in recognizing and leveraging the diverse contributions of non-academic engineering educators to foster a more inclusive and supportive community. Key takeaways and recommendations include the necessity for ASEE and similar bodies to shift normative expectations, create inclusive and equitable environments, and actively value diverse career trajectories. The paper calls for actionable strategies to build more inclusive professional communities, create safe spaces for discussing career diversity, and establish stronger connections between current students and diverse alums. The overarching goal is to cultivate an environment where all forms of contribution to engineering education are valued, encouraging a broader spectrum of career considerations among graduates and professionals. The authors seek not only to share insights but also to galvanize a nascent community of like-minded engineering educators aspiring or working outside the traditional academic sphere.

    More Information

  • Teaching Future-Makers: Outcomes of an International Design Workshop for Critical Action Educators

    Teaching Future-Makers: Outcomes of an International Design Workshop for Critical Action Educators

    This paper reports on recent developments of the Critical Action Learning Exchange (Carvalho et al., 2021), an international community of educators who seek to respond to social and environmental issues that affect their students. We report on an international design workshop that engaged a cohort of teachers in designing Critical Action Learning activities for their students in the Summer of 2023. Participants (n=39) completed 16 curriculum designs for grade levels from kindergarten to university, addressing a broad range of socio-environmental issues and adopting diverse approaches, such as Arts-Based Critical Action, Community Engagement, Critical Making, Games for Critical Action, and Storytelling. This paper examines our Professional Development model, together with an analysis of teacher participants’ ideas and their design products. We investigate what forms of scaffolding can facilitate the changes of practice needed for teachers to become critical action educators and support their Critical Action Learning designs.

    More Information

  • (Multi-disciplinary) Teamwork makes the (real) dream work: Pragmatic recommendations from industry for engineering classrooms

    (Multi-disciplinary) Teamwork makes the (real) dream work: Pragmatic recommendations from industry for engineering classrooms

    Many students choose to major in engineering to join the community of professional engineers and gain exposure to the field through their college experience. However, research suggests that engineering graduates may not be adequately prepared for the workplace due to the complexities of engineering work. Engineering work involves complexity, ambiguity, and contradictions, and developing innovation skills requires analyzing real-world problems that are often ill-defined and multifaceted. Therefore, it is essential for engineering students to have opportunities to work in multi-disciplinary teams to develop their skills in problem-solving and innovation. This emphasis on the need for exposure to multi-disciplinary problem solving holds true not only for undergraduate engineers in training, but also for graduate students focused on engineering education.

    This paper draws from experiences of a multi-disciplinary team (including engineers, scientists, UX researchers, Industrial-Organization (I-O) psychologists, economists, and program and product managers) studying talent management in the tech industry, to present lessons learned from leading with science to understand, inform, and improve employee experiences at a large private technology company. Our paper exemplifies how projects in industry leverage multi-disciplinary expertise and presents recommendations for new graduates and engineering professionals. Ultimately, this paper affords an opportunity for educators to expand on examples of how multiple disciplines come together to study engineers in the workforce.

    More Information