Developing a Taxonomy to Compare Engineering Leadership Curricula Across Canadian Universities

Klassen, Mike; Donald, John

doi:10.1007/s42330-019-00072-8

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our proposal starts from conceptual references typical of Mathematics Education to establish the categories that organize the key terms. This approach has been used in other academic disciplines to develop their own taxonomies from existing references and resources (Aadland & Aaboen, 2020;Klassen & Donald, 2020). Bibliographic review in databases (strategy used in our proposal) has served as a basis in other studies to identify and structure disciplinary knowledge in specific categories (Fellnhofer, 2019;Pertegal-Vega et al, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We used the same type of information sources that have been used in the production of taxonomies for other fields (Aadland & Aaboen, 2020;Fellnhofer, 2019;Klassen & Donald, 2020;Pertegal-Vega, Oliva-Delgado, & Rodríguez-Meirinhos, 2019). We used four sources of information for the production of the new taxonomy:  The first is the terms proposed in the encyclopedias published specifically in Mathematics Education (Grinstein & Lipsey, 2001;Lerman, 2014).…”

Section: Sources Of Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Taxonomy of Key Terms for Mathematics Education

Castro

Gómez

2021

IJEMST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present the process of developing a taxonomy of key terms for Mathematics Education. We build on the existing taxonomy of key terms that has been used in an open access document repository. Additionally, we took into account terms that have been established in encyclopedias of the discipline and the frequency of use of keywords in specialized journals that were indexed in Scopus and Web of Science. We made a review of synonymy between these terms and the terms of the existing taxonomy. We included in our proposal the terms that are relevant given their frequency of use in the journals. We removed from the existing taxonomy the terms that are little used in practice. The new taxonomy is organized in six main categories: approach, educational level, foundations of Mathematics Education, research in Mathematics Education, pedagogical notions and mathematical content. This proposal was validated in three phases by researchers, innovators in Mathematics Education, and editors of specialized journals and experts who lead associations and events in the discipline.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sources Of Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taxonomy of Key Terms for Mathematics Education

Castro

Gómez

2021

IJEMST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the breadth of leadership, it should come as no surprise that opportunities for engineering students to develop leadership skills occur in a huge variety of modes, employing different pedagogical models, purposes, and methods. In this Special Theme, Klassen and Donald (2020) perform an initial survey of leadership offerings in a subset of Canadian institutions, exploring the variety of pedagogies alongside the internal and external factors that shape them. Instruction in personal, interpersonal, and organizational leadership was evident across the six institutions.…”

Section: Transdisciplinary Competenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultivating Disciplinary Expectations for Engineering Education Research in Canada

Burke

Chong

Evans

et al. 2020

Can. J. Sci. Math. Techn. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Engineering education research in Canada is, in many ways, still establishing itself as a discipline, yet much is already being asked of it. The diversity of career pathways for engineering graduates, along with the increased complexity of global engineering challenges and the ramifications of technological opportunities, is raising important questions about current engineering education foci and practices. This paper brings together issues surfaced through the process of compiling a Special Theme on engineering education research in Canada, positioning the collection of papers in terms of the challenges and opportunities faced by this maturing Canadian research community. We seek to reconcile how this research can incorporate the theoretical and methodological depth valued in the social sciences while honoring the focus on effective instructional practices that has become an important strand of inquiry in engineering education. Challenges to the growth of engineering education research, such as funding and graduate student inclusion, are also discussed. In addition, we explore the emergence of teaching stream engineering faculty and problematize the role of research and scholarship in their career trajectories. Finally, we call for more strategic thinking to guide the evolution of engineering education research in Canada. We hope that, collectively, this editorial and the other four papers in this Special Theme will help to stimulate discussion about how we define and recognize excellence in the domain of engineering education research in Canada. plus, nous explorons l'émergence de corps professoraux en ingénierie dont la principale -voire la seulefonction est l'enseignement, et nous problématisons le rôle de la recherche et des programmes de bourses dans leur trajectoire professionnelle. Enfin, nous demandons une réflexion plus stratégique pour guider l'évolution de la recherche en didactique de l'ingénierie au Canada. Nous espérons que, collectivement, cet éditorial et les quatre autres articles de ce thème spécial contribueront à stimuler la discussion sur la façon de définir et de reconnaître l'excellence dans le domaine de la recherche en formation des ingénieurs au Canada.

show abstract

“…[9], [10], [11]), and of how engineering leadership is taught (e.g. [12]) are prevalent in the literature. However, these papers either look at the attributes in isolation, or explore how leadership is taught in a way that does not have a direct connection to the attributes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching Teamwork, Ethics and Equity, and Impact on Society and the Environment to Undergraduate Engineering Students: A Review of the Literature

Grushcow

Sheridan

2021

PCEEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the way in which three graduate attributes have been instructed on, together, in the undergraduate engineering curriculum. In particular, this paper explores how teamwork, ethics & equity, and the impact of engineering on society and the environment are taught together. These three attributes are used as a framing for engineering leadership education to explore how it has been embedded in the curriculum from a graduate attributes perspective. Following systematic literature review principles, this work explores the prevalence and motivations forincorporating these attributes in undergraduate engineering education in Washington Accord signatory countries. Findings indicate that these attributes are not frequently documented as being taught together, and are motivated equally as a design topic as a leadership/entrepreneurship topic.

show abstract

Developing a Taxonomy to Compare Engineering Leadership Curricula Across Canadian Universities

Cited by 4 publications

References 24 publications

Taxonomy of Key Terms for Mathematics Education

Taxonomy of Key Terms for Mathematics Education

Cultivating Disciplinary Expectations for Engineering Education Research in Canada

Teaching Teamwork, Ethics and Equity, and Impact on Society and the Environment to Undergraduate Engineering Students: A Review of the Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About