Search

The authors present a scientometric procedure comparing engineering education (EE) publication output in different countries. Selected European countries were compared using a snapshot of authors published in EE journals during a two-year period – 895 in all. The entire publication careers of these authors – 39,322 publications – were analysed to determine the breakdown of educational and non-educational publications. Spain and the UK produced the most publications, and we propose explanations based on relevant national policies. France, Germany, and Italy had notably fewer EE publications relative to their general engineering and science research outputs, whereas Portugal, Ireland, and three Nordic countries were the opposite. Countries varied widely in the ratio of educational to non-educational publications. Non-educational publications typically had a greater impact on authors' h-index values. We believe this procedure can longitudinally map and compare EE publication output in and across Europe, providing a valuable resource for policy-makers and researchers in the region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Benefits of industry engagement in engineering education for various stakeholders are well known, but there can be significant obstacles to initiating engagement. Using social capital theory, this study investigated how stakeholders initiate industry engagement in engineering education, and the main barriers from the stakeholders' perspectives. Semi-structured interviews were held with 21 professionals involved in the engineering industry (including academics and industry personnel). Inductive analysis showed industry engagement was initiated by all stakeholders, although reasons differed. Relationships between individual academics and their industry contacts were often key. Relying on these relationships was problematic when individuals changed roles or organisations. Relationships were also maintained through ongoing agreements or facilitated through third-party organisations. Key barriers included lack of invitations to industry stakeholders from universities, and unclear benefits to industry stakeholders of long-term engagement. The success of third parties in facilitating engagement may provide a framework for facilitating successful ongoing engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Access to interactive, simulated work environments through virtual reality (VR) has potential in teaching safety in design (SiD) to engineering students with reduced risk, cost and inconvenience. However, there is limited understanding of what students learn from immersive VR interventions, or the outcomes from specific learning activities. This study investigated engineering students' SiD learning in engineering design units at an Australian university. Informed by blended cognitivist-constructivist and situative perspectives, the units embedded static visualisation, dynamic visualisation through VR simulation, and group discussion, within an authentic hazard identification and analysis process. Observational data and student performances were analysed. Students' hazard comprehension differed by type of hazard and by learning activity. Students demonstrated understanding of SiD processes, terminology, and relevance of these to engineering design. We conclude that VR simulation is an effective learning tool, however the combination of learning elements was important to achieve learning outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]