Supporting the Transition to Engineering Education Research: growing the community through the AAEE Winter School

Abstract

CONTEXT

Full text

Supporting the Transition to Engineering Education Research:
growing the community through the AAEE Winter School
Keith Willey1; Rosalie Goldsmith1, Tania Machet1, Scott Daniel1, Anne Gardner1, Greet Langie2.
The University of Technology Sydney1 KU Leuven2
keith.willey@uts.edu.au
ABSTRACT
CONTEXT
There is an increasing amount of research into the experiences of engineering academics making
the transition from technical engineering research (TER) to engineering education research
(EER). The literature is almost unanimous in agreeing that formal and informal networks are
critical in enabling this transition. One such network is the AAEE Winter School, which since 2011
has been running intensive one-week workshops to induct academics into engineering education
research methodologies. Over the years it has inducted many people into EER, but the impact of
these experiences has been under-researched.
PURPOSE OR GOAL
This paper investigates what engineering academics are seeking when they enrol in the AAEE
Winter School. It explores engineering academics’ motivation to become involved in EER, and the
key benefits that they identify through participating in the Winter School.
APPROACH OR METHODOLOGY/METHODS
The 2022 AAEE Winter School was held at the University of Technology Sydney. A survey
incorporating a range of Likert scale (four point), pick group & rank, multiple-choice, hybrid and
free response answers was sent to participants. Nine of the 14 participants who attended the
majority of winter school sessions completed all questions in the survey. A spreadsheet was used
to analyse the quantitative data and a thematic analysis was conducted for the free response
answers.
ACTUAL OR ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES
Despite the struggle for EER to be recognised as a legitimate area of research in engineering
(e.g. Dart et al., 2019; Gardner & Willey, 2018), the results of the data analysis reveal that most of
the participants see EER as part of the engineering discipline. However, this view does not
appear to be shared by the majority of the participants’ engineering faculties. Furthermore, many
of the participants reported a significant skills gap in transitioning to EER. Key benefits of
attending the Winter School included meeting like-minded researchers and developing an
understanding of what is involved in educational research.
CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS/SUMMARY
It is important for researchers to have social connectivity through a combination of networking,
collaboration, role models and mentors in order to successfully transition from TER to EER. The
AAEE Winter School provides emerging EER researchers with the foundations for both social
connectivity and an opportunity to learn about EER research methodologies to support their
research journey.
KEYWORDS
Engineering education research; research methodologies; networks; Self Determination Theory.

Proceedings of AAEE 2022 Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia, Copyright © Keith Willey; Rosalie Goldsmith, Tania
Machet, Scott Daniel, Anne Gardner, 2022.
Introduction
The journey into engineering education research for engineering academics has been explored
from several perspectives in recent years. The theories of community of practice (e.g. Mann &
Chang, 2011), Bourdieu’s theory of practice (e.g. Dart, Trad & Blackmore, 2021), identity
development (Gardner and Willey, 2018), and grounded theory approaches (e.g. Rodrigues, Paul
& Seniuk Cicek, 2021) have all been applied to investigate this phenomenon, and a range of
understandings have emerged from these studies. For example, researchers have identified the
need for an epistemological paradigm shift (e.g. Borrego, 2007; Dart, Trad & Blackmore, 2021) to
accommodate qualitative research methodologies and education-based theories of learning.
Other insights, such as the importance of the role of mentors (Dart et al., 2021; Mann & Chang,
2012), the desire to improve learning outcomes for engineering students (e.g. Gardner & Willey,
2018; Rodrigues et al., 2021) and the significance of belonging to a supportive community (e.g.
Allendoerfer, Adams, Bell, Fleming, & Leifer, 2007; Siddiqui, Allendoefer, Adams & Williams,
2021) have been noted by several researchers.
Why are there so many studies? What is it that occasions such interest? There are several
reasons for this interest, and many of them relate to the observations that have surfaced in the
engineering education research literature. One major reason is the substantial and significant
differences between technical engineering research (TER) and engineering education research
(EER), as has been remarked on by researchers for at least two decades (Borrego, 2007; Dart et
al., 2021; Gardner & Willey, 2018; Wankat, Felder, Smith & Oreovicz, 2002). The widely different
approaches between these two fields of research are evident not only in the types of research but
in what are seen to be valid forms of research and what are regarded as valid or invalid types of
research questions - in other words, significant differences in epistemologies and in
methodologies. As already noted, those who choose to enter the field of EER from a technical
research background often need to recalibrate their world view (their ontology) to match with the
qualitatively (no pun intended) different approaches that underpin educational research.
Borrego’s seminal paper (2007) on the emerging field of engineering education research
highlights the 'conceptual difficulties’ that can arise because of the differences in the theoretical
frameworks and methodologies of TER and EER respectively. Engineering educators in
Borrego’s study were likely to be unfamiliar with education theories, and several had the
perception that qualitative research methods associated with education research were less
rigorous than those of engineering research. To alleviate unfamiliarity with education theories,
Borrego proposed that engineering educators collaborate with researchers outside the field of
engineering, such as colleagues from the field of education or psychology. However, Wankat and
colleagues highlight the difficulties faced when EER involves “…collaborations… between
engineers and social scientists, who frequently have different vocabularies, priorities, and
conceptions of research” (Wankat et al., 2002, p.234).
Moreover, Borrego highlights the perceived importance of rigour for engineering educators
through her repeated use of the term: ‘rigorous engineering education research(ers)’, and by the
definition she includes:
one who is successful at attracting research-focused external funding and publishing in
archived research journals such as Journal of Engineering Education, since both of these
employ peer review to enforce rigorous standards (2007, p.91).
Given these and other differences between the two domains of research, it is clear that the path
to EER for engineers with a background in TER is often neither smooth nor easy. This is
frequently acknowledged in the literature, and several studies refer both to the difficulties of
crossing boundaries and the need for a supportive community to enable or facilitate boundary
crossing (e.g. Gardner & Willey, 2018; Mann & Chang, 2012). Rodrigues and colleagues
conclude that: “finding a new domain with a supporting community – a home – was crucial for
their [scholars’] continuation and success in EER (2021, p.14).

Proceedings of AAEE 2022 Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia, Copyright © Keith Willey; Rosalie Goldsmith, Tania
Machet, Scott Daniel, Anne Gardner, 2022.
This leads us to explore what resources are available to enable such recalibrations, and to ask
the question: what do novice EE researchers need? Again, the literature provides a range of
responses to this question, but there is agreement on the following forms of support: formal
networks, informal networks, and formal instruction in qualitative research methods.
Formal networks: several authors have identified formal networks as being important for people to
pursue EER (e.g. Borrego & Bernhard, 2011; Dart et al., 2021). Formal networks provide a
means of making connections with other researchers, expanding their knowledge of the field, and
as a way of accumulating capital (in the Bourdieusian sense), as explored by Dart and
colleagues.
Informal networks: these networks play diverse roles in supporting novice researchers in EER.
They can range from invitations to attend conferences, co-author papers, or meet with likeminded
colleagues, to corridor conversations which facilitate and maintain interest in the field (e.g. Mann
& Chang, 2011). These encounters are termed “intentional serendipity” (Allendoefer et al., 2007)
or “happenstance” (Rodrigues et al., 2021), and illustrate the importance of relationality in EER:
that people engaged in this field of research seek connections and collaborations with others.
Formal instruction in qualitative research methods plays a key role in the induction into EER, as
evidenced in several studies. For example, Benson and colleagues (Benson, Becker, Cooper,
Haden Griffin & Smith, 2010) profile engineering education departments in the US, emphasising
the important role of formal instruction in education research methods. Borrego and colleagues
have conducted several studies that investigate the need for engineering faculty staff to receive
formal instruction in education research methods in order to undertake EER (e.g. Borrego, 2007;
Borrego, Douglas, & Amelink, 2013). Nagabhushan and Sohoni (2020) report on the
effectiveness of providing an online 12-month course on EER for engineering faculty staff in India,
and noted several benefits, including that of better quality EER research and reporting.
The Australasian Association of Engineering Education has been running Winter School intensive
workshops in education research methods since 2011. The format of the Winter School has
changed over time, from week-long off-campus retreats, to week-long campus-based workshops,
to two-week part-time online programs under COVID. Nevertheless, the purpose and focus of the
Winter School have remained generally the same - to:
●
improve practice through workshops with experts identified by the participants and
AAEE,
●
share research methodologies and data analysis techniques,
●
provide an opportunity for peer review of work…build community and a reference
group for students and academics whose interests are often unique in their home
departments (Matemba, Parker & Jolly, 2018, pp.15-16).
However, whether the purpose and focus of the Winter School have been understood by its
participants, and the extent to which the Winter School has been meeting the needs of its
participants, have been under-investigated.
Therefore, we conducted a survey of the participants in the AAEE 2022 Winter School on
research methods, which was held in person at the University of Technology Sydney from 18-24
July, 2022. We sought to investigate, amongst other questions, what motivated the participants’
interest in EER and why they chose to attend the Winter School.
The following paragraphs present the survey design, approach, analysis and preliminary results.
Methodology and Methods
While there were 17 participants who enrolled in the 2022 Winter School, due to illness several
were unable to attend the majority of sessions. The 14 participants who attended the majority of
sessions were invited to complete the survey.
A 21 question survey incorporating a range of Likert scale (four point), pick group & rank, multiple

Proceedings of AAEE 2022 Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia, Copyright © Keith Willey; Rosalie Goldsmith, Tania
Machet, Scott Daniel, Anne Gardner, 2022.
choice, hybrid and free response answers was developed. The survey was tested through a
number of iterations by the Winter School facilitators for validity and the wording was refined to
minimise any ambiguity. Consideration was also given to the type, format and order of the
questions. Similarly themed questions were grouped together to reduce survey fatigue and
promote more reflective answers from respondents.
The questions prompted a mixture of phenomenological (in what way did participants respond to
different activities), evaluative (what worked for whom under what circumstances), causal (why
did that happen) and exploratory (what are the significant factors that occurred) data.
Nine participants completed all questions in the survey, representing a 65% response rate from
the 14 invited participants. A spreadsheet was used to analyse the quantitative data, while a
basic thematic analysis was conducted for the free response answers. A preliminary analysis of
the results is presented here.
Results
While eight of the nine respondents agreed they regarded EER to be part of the engineering
discipline, only three felt that their university’s engineering faculty considers it to be so. Despite
this, six of the nine respondents reported they felt supported to undertake EER at their university.
The most common reasons for feeling supported included encouragement and leadership from
senior staff, and observing the success and recognition of more senior EER colleagues within
their institution, as expressed by the following responses:
Several more senior colleagues undertake research in EER have been successful within the
institution.
Excellent leadership. A critical mass of passionate educators. A growing community of
practice internally.
This suggests that networking, role models, and observing the recognition and success of more
senior EER colleagues contribute to developing new and emerging EER researchers’ identity as
EER researchers. It would be reasonable to expect that continued growth in their network through
conference attendance, EER events and other related activities, will also be of importance for
their transition to identifying as established EER researchers (Gardner and Willey, 2018).
The three respondents who felt unsupported to undertake EER held the perception that within
their institutions the majority of faculty staff, who were technical researchers, did not regard EER
as ‘proper’ research. They also noted that there was no support from their line manager,
supervisor or executive for undertaking EER.
Hence those who felt supported had both personal and institutionally visible EER role models
available to support their transition and develop their network. This supports earlier findings that
formal and informal networks are critical in enabling a transition from TER to EER (Borrego &
Bernhard, 2011, Dart et al, 2021, Rodrigues et al, 2021).
Self-determination theory (SDT) provides another lens with which to view the key role played by
social relatedness in the journey to EER. The theory provides further support for the importance
of social relatedness facilitated through networking, collaborations, mentors and role models.
Relatedness, together with competence and autonomy, are postulated by SDT to be “three innate
psychological needs …. which when satisfied yield enhanced self-motivation and mental health
and when thwarted lead to diminished motivation and wellbeing”. (Ryan and Deci, 2000).
Motivation
So if a transition to EER is not an attractive, nor supported option within many institutions, what
motivates academics and researchers to undertake this transition? The respondents were asked
to pick, group and rank a number of statements in regard to how much each statement
contributed to their motivation for becoming involved with EER (the three groupings were highly
motivating, somewhat motivating or little/no motivation).

Proceedings of AAEE 2022 Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia, Copyright © Keith Willey; Rosalie Goldsmith, Tania
Machet, Scott Daniel, Anne Gardner, 2022.
Perhaps not surprisingly, the statements most frequently rated as highly motivating were:
●
Personal interest in teaching and learning, and
●
Desire to positively impact students' educational experience in the engineering profession.
In common with the motivation and anecdotal experience of many in the AAEE community, a
personal interest in teaching and learning and a desire to improve educational outcomes were
highly motivating factors for participants beginning their EER journey. This finding is supported in
the literature; for example, Rodrigues and colleagues identified the desire to “right pedagogical
wrongs” and improve student learning as key motivating factors for people entering EER
(Rodrigues et al. 2021).
The most frequent statement that was grouped as ‘somewhat motivating’ was “An invitation to join
a research project”. This points to the importance of collaboration in providing opportunities for
interested researchers to transition to or begin their research journey in EER and highlights the
value of establishing networks to facilitate these collaborations.
The statements most often grouped as providing ‘little or no motivation’ for their transition to EER
were:
●
Opportunity to access research funding, and
●
A way of generating research without needing a budget.
In the Australasian context this result is not surprising, given that research funding and financial
support for EER is scarce. This motivation may differ in contexts where such financial support is
available to emerging EE researchers.
Most educators who have a passion for teaching and learning and improving the student
experience are not typically motivated by financial gain. This is demonstrated by the regularity of
how often they work well above and beyond the hours for which they are paid and/or initially self-
fund their own teaching and learning initiatives. It is little wonder, then, that the same passionate
educators are motivated to transition to EER to improve their practice and not to access research
funding.
This point is significant in terms of the support that the AAEE Winter School provides. While
Winter School is not able to supply avenues for funding, it does provide the informal networking
and collaboration avenues that motivate new researchers. In addition, it provides formal
instruction that supports research; this can then be directly applied to EE researchers’ passion for
improving engineering education for their own students and those in the wider community (see
Dart et al.2021 for an extended discussion about building capital through involvement in EER).
The instruction and participatory activities at the Winter School also build participants' feelings of
competence, through contributing to building their resilience and a belief that they can succeed in
their transition to EER. As pointed out earlier, competence is postulated by SDT as one of three
innate psychological needs required to enhance self-motivation and well-being (Ryan and Deci,
2000). The third need proposed by SDT is autonomy. In terms of intrinsic motivation, autonomy
relates to a person experiencing their behaviour as being self-determined. Choice,
acknowledgement of feelings and opportunities for self-direction have all been found to promote a
feeling of autonomy (Deci & Ryan, 2000 & 1985). While there are some opportunities for
autonomy in the current Winter School activities, it is less clear how to augment these
opportunities in future offerings. On the other hand, it should not only be the responsibility of the
Winter School to meet the innate psychological needs of researchers in their transition to EER. If
the AAEE community is committed to assisting novice and transitioning EE researchers to be
successful, the community needs to consider how to establish other avenues beyond Winter
School to motivate and support these scholars.
Participants who transition from TER to EER
Respondents were asked to describe their main reasons for choosing to attend the AAEE Winter
School, with the most frequent responses relating to beginning to build their EER research

Proceedings of AAEE 2022 Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia, Copyright © Keith Willey; Rosalie Goldsmith, Tania
Machet, Scott Daniel, Anne Gardner, 2022.
capacity and expanding their network as reflected in the following comments:
I need to be spending 20% of my time researching. The AAEE Winter School was my
introduction to research
Personal and professional goals to develop skills in EER and expand my network
To help with my transition into EER (learning how research is conducted in EER, and the
associated terminology, theories, and methodologies).
Winter School attracts participants at different stages in their EER careers (historically some
participants have even returned to further develop their skills) and the formal instruction
component endeavours to accommodate this range. The Winter School curriculum has evolved in
response to the experiences from previous years. It focuses specifically on assisting participants
to address the acknowledged gap in skills for engineering educators transitioning from TER to
EER. However, the limitations of a one-week program to address an extensive field of literature
and skills means that facilitators must select a subset of topics and skills.
In our survey, five respondents had conducted technical research before transitioning to EER
(four had conducted technical research for at least four years while the fifth respondent had
conducted technical research for three years prior to their transition). Of these five respondents,
two reported they experienced a large skills gap in transitioning to EER, two reported a moderate
skills gap and one reported only a minor skills gap.
Four of the five respondents who had conducted technical research before transitioning to EER
reported that the skills they were in greatest need of developing to facilitate their transition were:
●
Awareness of relevant theories, and
●
Awareness of relevant methodologies
Other skills that were highly ranked as needing development included:
●
Familiarity with educational literature, and
●
Learning terminology and language associated with educational research
Not surprisingly, respondents reported the skills that needed the least or no development to
facilitate participants’ transition to EER were:
●
Quantitative research approaches, and
●
Statistics
Of all nine respondents (that is, including both those that had previously undertaken technical
research and those who began their research careers in EER) the most common methods they
had used to collect data in their EER so far were surveys, interviews and observations.
The skills and attributes identified as needing the most development are already included in the
current Winter School curriculum. The methods used by the participants in their research are also
discussed in participative sessions where the skills are developed further.
Those skills identified as needing the least development, were not addressed in detail at the 2022
Winter School but were touched on and contextualised to EER. For example, while quantitative
research approaches are discussed, far more sessions focus on qualitative research. Similarly,
statistics were only discussed in the context of exploring different data analysis methods and how
they can be used, and are often misused in EER, in the context of analysing survey data.
Winter School Participation Outcome
When asked to describe the best parts of their AAEE Winter School experience, the most
frequent responses related to forming “collaborative networks” and “meeting like-minded
researchers” with the next most frequent responses being related to improving their capacity to
undertake EER.

Proceedings of AAEE 2022 Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia, Copyright © Keith Willey; Rosalie Goldsmith, Tania
Machet, Scott Daniel, Anne Gardner, 2022.
The survey results indicate that the Winter School is meeting the needs of our target audience in
terms of their expectations for delivery of formal instruction. However, the informal networks
formed during the Winter School were valued more by the respondents than the EER instruction
and associated discussions, or the individual guidance and support provided by facilitators to
develop their research.
In previous Winter Schools, collaborations between participants have resulted in publications and
continued working relationships (Matemba, Parker & Jolly 2018, Dart, Blackmore, Willey,
Gardner, Jose, Sharma, Sloan, Jolly, 2019, Dart, Trad & Blackmore, 2021). A number of the
facilitators of the 2022 Winter School are previous participants. This is evidence of the networking
and collaboration which can emerge from participating in the Winter School. The results of this
survey indicate that the 2022 Winter School was seen as valuable for these reasons. The
connections made in the 2022 Winter School, which arise from the collaborative activities and
open sharing of experiences, enable participants to identify “like-minded researchers”. In an
environment where some researchers feel their EER is not supported by their institutions, this
informal networking and exposure to role models is of crucial value in supporting their continued
participation in EER.
Contributing to the Community of Practice (community responsibility)
If the social connectivity and research development provided by events such as AAEE Winter
School and the annual AAEE conference play such an important role in building and enhancing
our community, why is there not more enthusiasm to host these events? Is this because they are
a time-consuming and sometimes thankless task for those involved?
Historically, conferences were often profitable and sometimes in part, chaired as a way of raising
money for the facilitators to fund their research (Covid travel restrictions and a reduction in
participants' available funding sources has changed this for the present). However, AAEE has
never sought to make a profit from Winter School.
Over the 11 years in which the Winter School has been held, there have been a number of repeat
facilitators who have contributed for a block of several years, with Dr Leslie Jolly being the
champion. Hosting and/or facilitating the Winter School means giving up a week of semester
break, preparing in the weeks beforehand, and recovering the week after while catching up on
normal duties. The Winter School is currently undergoing renewal, with new facilitators
volunteering this year to work with the more experienced team, learning the ropes to take it
forward. This year we also tried a different approach with invited speakers, interleaved with
sessions run by the facilitators. This provided a variety of presenters and topics and made it less
fatiguing for the primary facilitators, but it also meant that the flexibility to change sessions on the
fly to tailor them for the interests of the participants was not available. However, this approach
seems to be a sustainable way forward.
It has always been the intention to move the Winter School location each year. However, despite
holding a Summer School in Hamilton, New Zealand (Waikato and Wintec) in 2020 and a Winter
School in Melbourne, Victoria (Swinburne) in 2018, in the absence of other institutions offering to
host, the Winter School has been hosted at University of Technology Sydney since 2016.
Pleasingly, in recent years it has become increasingly competitive to be elected to the AAEE
Executive and AAEE Journal editorial board (sadly we can’t say the same for reviewing). While
still requiring a significant contribution to the community, these positions, we speculate, are more
attractive than facilitating Winter School as they have career capital and prestige.
As a community, we need to generate the same enthusiasm for contributing to and/or hosting the
Winter School and annual conference, in order to continue EER’s move from an emerging field to
being an established research discipline. It is also important that EER be recognised in the wider
research community.
In addition, we suggest that the AAEE community may find it informative to use SDT as a
framework to assess whether its activities are providing the opportunity and support to motivate

Proceedings of AAEE 2022 Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia, Copyright © Keith Willey; Rosalie Goldsmith, Tania
Machet, Scott Daniel, Anne Gardner, 2022.
and enable novice and emerging researchers on their journey to achieving the required
outcomes, to become recognised as being established in EER.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Helping novice and emerging Engineering Education researchers to develop their relevant
professional networks is arguably the most important objective in supporting their transition to
EER. Building their network and developing their research skills were the most frequent reasons
respondents gave for enrolling in the AAEE winter school. A personal interest in teaching and
Learning, and a desire to positively impact their students’ educational experience were the most
highly motivating factors reported by respondents for them to become involved in EER.
Respondents reported that a lack of local institutional support and members in their EER network
were factors that inhibited their transition to EER. Attendance at Winter School facilitated the
establishment of networks of supportive academics, and was seen by most participants as the
best aspect of their attendance. This is especially important for participants who would otherwise
lack this support.
These preliminary results reveal the importance of networking in events such as Winter School,
which suggests that future programs aimed at supporting the transition to EER should consider
expanding this aim. This could involve follow-up networking opportunities, or formalised
processes for supporting collaborations that emerge. In addition, to assessing social relatedness,
activities should also assess if they are providing opportunities to build and promote feelings of
competence and autonomy as described by SDT, to enhance the motivation required for a
successful transition to EER.
Future work will include examining other similar international programs for EER support to learn
from and inform practice. It is expected that regional differences (such as variations in funding
opportunities) may change why and how participants engage in these programs.
References
Allendoerfer, C., Adams, R., Bell, P., Fleming, L., & Leifer, L. (2007, March). Becoming an engineering
education researcher: Finding pathways toward interdisciplinarity. In Annual American Educational
Research Association (AERA) Conference (17).
Borrego, M. (2007). Conceptual difficulties experienced by engineering faculty becoming engineering
education researchers. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(2), 91–102.
Borrego, & Bernhard, J. (2011). The Emergence of Engineering Education Research as an Internationally
Connected Field of Inquiry. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 14–47.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00003.x
Dart S., Blackmore K., Willey K., Gardner A., Jose S., Sharma R., Sloan T., & Jolly L., (2019) Moving from
crime and punishment to success and reward: Transitioning from technical to educational research.
Proceedings of the 8th Research in Engineering Education Symposium, REES 2019: Volume 1 p329-338
Dart, S., Trad, S., & Blackmore, K. (2021). Navigating the path from technical engineering to engineering
education research: a conceptual model of the transition process. European Journal of Engineering
Education, 46(6), 1076-1091.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior. New York:
Plenum.
Gardner, A., & Willey, K. (2018). Academic identity reconstruction: the transition of engineering academics to
engineering education researchers. Studies in Higher Education, 43(2), 234-250.
Mann, L., & Chang, R.L. (2012). Helping engineering academics to undertake education research: A Model
for practice. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 18(1), 89-104.
Mann, L., Brodie, L., Chang, R., & Howard, P. (2011). Engineering education research groups in Australia:
Implications for Australasian engineering educators. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of
the Australasian Association for Engineering Education (AaeE 2011) (pp. 235-240). Engineers Australia.

Proceedings of AAEE 2022 Western Sydney University, Sydney, Australia, Copyright © Keith Willey; Rosalie Goldsmith, Tania
Machet, Scott Daniel, Anne Gardner, 2022.
Matemba E., Parker L. & Jolly L (2018) Diversifying methods in educational research: what we learned at
Winter School. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 23:1, 15-24, DOI:
10.1080/22054952.2018.1503779
Nagabhushan, P., & Sohoni, S. (2020, October). An Introductory Course on Research in Engineering
Education-An experiment in training faculty in India. In 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
(FIE) (pp. 1-7). IEEE.
Rodrigues, R. A., Paul, J. W., & Seniuk Cicek, J. (2021). Entering the discipline of engineering education
research: A thematic analysis. Proceedings of the 2021 ASEE Annual Conference, Virtual Meeting, July
26-29, 2021.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social
development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0003066X.55.1.68
Siddiqui, J. A., Allendoerfer, C., Adams, R. S., & Williams, B. (2016). Integration of scholarship:
Interconnections among three studies on becoming an engineering education researcher. International
Journal of Engineering Education, 32(6), 2352-2377.
Wankat, P. C., Felder, R. M., Smith, K. A., & Oreovicz, F. S. (2002). The scholarship of teaching and learning
in engineering. Huber, M.T. & S.P. Morreale, (Eds). Disciplinary Styles in the Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning: Exploring Common Ground, 217-237.
Williams, B., & Figueiredo, J. (2012). International scholars' pathways to engineering education research. In
International Conference on Innovation, Practice and Research in Engineering Education, UK.
Copyright statement
Copyright © 2022 Keith Willey; Rosalie Goldsmith, Tania Machet, Scott Daniel, Anne Gardner: The authors assign to the Australasian
Association for Engineering Education (AAEE) and educational non-profit institutions a non-exclusive licence to use this document for
personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The authors
also grant a non-exclusive licence to AAEE to publish this document in full on the World Wide Web (prime sites and mirrors), on Memory
Sticks, and in printed form within the AAEE 2022 proceedings. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the
authors.