Jesiek, B. K., & Woo, S. E., & Zhu, Q., & Ramane, K. D., & Choudhary, N. (2015, June), Defining and Assessing Global Engineering Competency: Methodological Reflections  Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington. 10.18260/p.23781

\bibitem{asee_peer_23781}
  Jesiek, B. K., \& Woo, S. E., \& Zhu, Q., \& Ramane, K. D., \& Choudhary, N. (2015, June), \emph{Defining and Assessing Global Engineering Competency: Methodological Reflections}
  Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Seattle, Washington.
  10.18260/p.23781

Brent K Jesiek, Sang Eun Woo, Qin Zhu, Kavitha D Ramane, and Neha Choudhary.  "Defining and Assessing Global Engineering Competency: Methodological Reflections".  2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington, 2015, June.  ASEE Conferences, 2015.  https://peer.asee.org/23781 Internet.  13 Oct, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_23781}
  Brent K Jesiek, Sang Eun Woo, Qin Zhu, Kavitha D Ramane, and Neha Choudhary.
  "Defining and Assessing Global Engineering Competency: Methodological Reflections".
  \emph{2015 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Seattle, Washington, 2015, June}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2015.
  https://peer.asee.org/23781 Internet.  13 Oct, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_23781
author = "Brent K Jesiek, Sang Eun Woo, Qin Zhu, Kavitha D Ramane, and Neha Choudhary"
title = "Defining and Assessing Global Engineering Competency: Methodological Reflections"
booktitle = "2015 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2015"
month = "June"
address = "Seattle, Washington"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/23781}
number = {10.18260/p.23781}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -              Defining and Assessing Global Engineering Competency:                           Methodological ReflectionsResearchers are facing manifold challenges as engineering education continues to emerge, grow,and evolve as a distinct field of scholarly activity. For instance, discussions about criteria forevaluating engineering education research have intensified, including through publishedcommentaries focused on concepts like “research quality,” “rigor,” and “systematic research,” aswell as accompanying shifts in the various criteria used to evaluate funding proposals and peerreviewed papers. The field’s topical foci are also something of a moving target given a long andepisodic history of efforts to reinvent the form and content of engineering curricula. As themethods and desired outcomes of engineering instruction change, so does the engineeringeducation research agenda. Further worth noting are rising pressures to relate research to practice,as reflected in mandates to identify the “broader impacts” associated with our scholarly work.This paper speaks to these challenges through the lens of our team’s recent experiences workingon an NSF-supported research project, one primary objective of which is to develop and validatea global competency assessment tool. This paper is organized in three major parts, each focusedon a different phase of the project and a variety of associated questions and challenges. The firstsection is focused on efforts to clarify our main domain of interest, including by developing aworking definition of “global engineering competency” that is grounded in both the extantliterature and our own qualitative data set. This part of the paper is particularly concerned withhow we meaningfully delineate, define, and study specific domains or facets of engineeringeducation and practice, including by working toward more nuanced interpretations of keyattributes and capabilities important for current and future engineers. The second section of thepaper describes our efforts to develop a large pool of assessment questions using a situationaljudgment test (SJT) format. Here we interrogate our rationale for picking this type of assessmenttool, procedures for developing the scenario-based test questions, and efforts to bolster validitythrough use of an underlying theoretical framework and systematic item development procedures.Third and finally, we discuss our ongoing efforts to validate our large pool of SJT questions,with an emphasis on data collection bottlenecks and questions about what counts as validation indifferent academic fields. In this paper we also explore how we are working to maximize theimpacts of our assessment questions by building an online survey and assessment system.The major goal of this paper is to make visible and critically reflect on key methodological issuesand decisions that are often absent or simplified in more conventional research papers. Ourcommentary will likely be of interest for engineering education researchers who wish to explorecontemporary methodological concerns that cut across both qualitative and quantitative researchtraditions. This paper may also be of interest to scholars involved with ongoing efforts to define,develop, and/or assess complex, multi-faceted learning outcomes such as global competency,innovation, teamwork, leadership, inter/trans/multi-disciplinarity, engineering design, etc.
AU  - Brent K Jesiek
AU  - Sang Eun Woo
AU  - Qin Zhu
AU  - Kavitha D Ramane
AU  - Neha Choudhary
CY  - Seattle, Washington
DA  - 2015/06/14
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Defining and Assessing Global Engineering Competency: Methodological Reflections
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/23781
DO  - 10.18260/p.23781
ER  -