San Jose State University MOOCs in STEM Conference June 6, 2014

1. Jeremi London Ph.D. Candidate, School of Engineering Education, Purdue University Intern, Division of Undergraduate Education, National Science Foundation Toward a Research Agenda Around MOOCs in Engineering Education: Feedback from Two NSF-funded Workshops (Work in Progress) Cynthia Young, Ph.D. Associate Dean & Professor of Mathematics, College of Science, University of Central Florida San Jose State University MOOCs in STEM Conference June 6, 2014

2. MOTIVATION • Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have infiltrated STEM education quickly, leaving little time for discussion and reflection • According to May 2014 search, NSF has funded 24 awards involving MOOCs • Division of Undergraduate Education: 9 awards • Engineering Among the Disciplinary Focus: 6 awards • National-level interest in improving engineering education (NAE, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2013) • Leveraging latest technologies among the five major shifts in engineering education over the past century (Froyd, Wankat, Smith, 2012) • Growing interest in MOOCs among engineering education researchers (e.g., London, 2013; Tsai, Wong, 2013) The integration of MOOCs in engineering education should be strategic, not simply reactive. Large group discussions and a research agenda would facilitate a more strategic integration.

3. GOALS OF THIS STUDY • To organize a workshop series that brings together experts on MOOCs, learning science, engineering education, and content specialists within engineering disciplines • To build a community of engineering educators interested in using MOOCs to improve student learning in engineering. • To identify a set of research questions around MOOCs and student learning in engineering education

4. APPROACH FOUR-PART STRATEGY

5. APPROACH FOUR-PART STRATEGY • ASME International Mechanical Engineering Education Leadership Summit (MEED 2014) (March 2014, San Juan, PR) • Electrical and Computer Engineering Department Heads Association (ECEDHA) Annual Conference (March 2014, Napa, CA) • American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference (June 2014, Indianapolis, IN) • Biomedical Engineering Society (BMES) Annual Conference (Oct 2014, San Antonio, TX)

6. APPROACH FOUR-PART STRATEGY Workshop Composition: Panelist Presentation & Moderated, Interactive Discussions Panelists’ Presentations Response to Two Questions: • What potential does MOOCs have for improving student learning in engineering education • What research questions do we need on MOOCs to improve student learning in engineering education? Scribes Document Workshop Insights

7. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS ASME & ECEDHA WORKSHOP HIGHLIGHTS MEED 2014 Panelists & Moderator Attendees: ~100 Mechanical Engineering Department Heads & Practitioners Dr. Aldo Ferri, Assoc. Prof. & Assoc. Chair for Undergraduate Studies, Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Kathryn Jablokow, Assoc. Prof., Mechanical Engineering & Engineering Design, Pennsylvania State University-Great Valley Dr. Dorothy Jones-Davis, AAAS Science & Technology Policy Fellow, Engineering Directorate, National Science Foundation (NSF) Dr. AndreinaParisi-Amon, Partnership Manager, Coursera Dr. Don Millard, Program Director, Division of Undergraduate Education, NSF (Moderator) ECEDHA 2014 Panelists & Moderator Attendees: ~25 Electrical & Computer Engineering Department Heads & Practitioners Dr. YacobAstatke, Assoc. Chair, Dept. of ECE, Morgan State University Dr. Ping Hsu, Prof. of EE; Assoc. Dean of Research, San Jose State University Dr. AndreinaParisi-Amon, Partnership Manager, Coursera Dr. Larry Lagerstrom, Dir. Of Online Learning, School of Engineering, Stanford Dr. Don Millard, Program Director, Division of Undergraduate Education, NSF (Moderator)

8. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS THEMES ACROSS ASME & ECEDHA WORKSHOPS • What potential does MOOCs have for improving student learning in engineering education? • Numerous examples of MOOCs’ potential to influence the role of the institution, classroom, homework, instructor, students, and peers • Fewer examples of MOOCs’ potential to influence engineering education content, assessment, and pedagogy • MOOCs provide opportunities to conduct research at the nexus of brain science, cognitive science, and education research. • Tipping points: (1) Resolve issues surrounding credentialing & accreditation; (2) Identify viable business models • What research questions do we need on MOOCs to improve student learning in engineering education? • Questions on alignment of MOOCs with existing university mission, department goals • Questions on best practices for MOOCs course design, development, and delivery • Questions on how MOOCs facilitate new insights on how people learn

9. IMPLICATIONS OF THIS STUDY • Research Agenda Around MOOCs in Engineering Education Could Potentially: • Lead to a more strategic integration of MOOCs in Engineering Education • Influence the Quality of Undergraduate Engineering Education • Inform NSF Program Officer’s Funding Decisions & Lead to Better Allocation of Taxpayers’ Resources • Provide a basis for studying the role of MOOCs in other science,technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines

10. INVITATION TO JOIN THE DISCUSSION TODAY & TOMORROW • Ways to join TODAY: • Complete a notecard with responses to the following questions: • What potential does MOOCs have for improving student learning in STEM education? • What research questions do we need on MOOCs to improve student learning in STEM education? • Ways to join TOMORROW: • Visit www.MOOCsInEngineering.WordPress.Com

11. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS & CONTACT INFO Acknowledgements: This study is supported by National Science Foundation Grant #1341340. Contact Information: Jeremi London JLondon@nsf.gov Dr. Cynthia Young Cynthia.young@ucf.edu

12. Jeremi London Ph.D. Candidate, School of Engineering Education, Purdue University Intern, Division of Undergraduate Education, National Science Foundation Toward a Research Agenda Around MOOCs in Engineering Education: Feedback from Two NSF-funded Workshops (Work in Progress) Cynthia Young, Ph.D. Associate Dean & Professor of Mathematics, College of Science, University of Central Florida San Jose State University MOOCs in STEM Conference June 6, 2014

13. REFERENCES Froyd, J. E., Wankat, P. C., & Smith, K. A. (2012). Five Major Shifts in 100 Years of Engineering Education. Proceedings of the IEEE, 100 (Special Centennial Issue). London, J. (2013). Key Aspects of Cyberlearning Resources with Compelling Results. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference. Atlanta, Georgia. National Academy of Engineering. (2002). Raising Awareness of Engineering.Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. National Academy of Engineering. (2004). The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. National Academy of Engineering. (2005). Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. National Academy of Engineering. (2008). Changing the Conversation: Messages for Improving Public Understanding of Engineering. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. National Academy of Engineering. (2010). Rising Above the Gathering Storm Revisited: Rapidly Approaching Category 5. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. National Academy of Engineering. (2013). Messaging for Engineering: From Research to Action. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. Tsai, F.S., Wong, K.H. (2013). The State of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in Engineering Education: Where do we go from here?. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference. Atlanta, Georgia.