Taking Stock: An Analysis of the Publishing Record as Represented by the Journal of Engineering Education

Journal of Engineering Education, Jan 2004 by Whitin, Katherine, Sheppard, Sheri

The other major categories, Faculty and Assessment and Evaluation, are at 23 percent and 20 percent, respectively. Within the Faculty category, teaching methods were the most commonly coded topic. Teaching methods for a specific course or series of courses and general teaching strategies were included in this category. The topics ranged from accounts of holistic grading practices, as reported by Pappas and Hendricks [25] to the discussion by Chinowsky on the use of case studies in an interdisciplinary course [4]. Other topics included employing educational theories to evaluate activities and practices, such as supplemental instruction and group and cooperative learning activities. Pimmel, in 2001, reported on the application of cooperative learning techniques in a capstone design course [28]. He also reported positive findings that these techniques enhanced students' understanding of the topics as well as encouraged students to use the associated skills in other projects. The use of technology, as a learning tool and as part of distance learning, was another topic encountered in this category. Gillet published a paper on the use of technology to create a "hands-on" lab for distance education [10].

The other common Faculty topic dealt with the cultural and institutional attitude towards engineering education scholarly activities. In 1997, Lee, Castella, et al. reported that an extensive survey identified a discrepancy between the current academic reward system and faculty's preference for a flexible system rewarding research, teaching and service activities [16]. Other papers reported on tenure, balancing research and teaching activities, the effect of industrial experience on teaching, and the availability of professional development resources. Several papers over the years addressed the lack of teaching preparation for professors, discussing what should and is currently being done to remedy the deficiency. Wankat discussed the possibility of including teaching instruction during the Ph.D. process [41]. Conley, et al. approached the subject from the perspective of helping those who are already teaching engineering students [5].

Assessment and Evaluation papers covered a wide range of issues within three basic areas of assessment: (1) processes and strategies, (2) findings, and (3) future actions. Generally, papers focused only on one or two of these areas. In each of these areas, some papers dealt with the evaluation of student learning and development using educational theories (Kolb's Learning Style Index and Perry's model were the most commonly sited). For example, in 2000, Marra, et al. presented the results of a longitudinal study of student intellectual development due to experience in a first-year design course [19] basing their results upon the Perry model of development. In contrast, Petr's 2001 paper reported on a methodology for helping students to think like an analyst, including extensive assessment of the data and possible implications for teaching strategies [27].