Matching Items (2)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Mixed Methods
- Creators: Berry, Megan Cheyenne
Description
There has been a growing emphasis on the education of future generations of engineers who will have to tackle complex, global issues that are sociotechnical in nature. The National Science Foundation invests millions of dollars in interdisciplinary engineering education research (EER) to create an innovative and inclusive culture aimed at radical change in the engineering education system. This exploratory research sought to better understand ways of thinking to address complex educational challenges, specifically, in the context of engineering-social sciences collaborations. The mixed methods inquiry drew on the ways of thinking perspectives from sustainability education to adapt futures, values, systems, and strategic thinking to the context of EER. Using the adapted framework, nine engineer-social scientist dyads were interviewed to empirically understand conceptualizations and applications of futures, values, systems, and strategic thinking. The qualitative results informed an original survey instrument, which was distributed to a sample of 310 researchers nationwide. Valid responses (n = 111) were analyzed to uncover the number and nature of factors underlying the scales of futures, values, systems, and strategic thinking. Findings illustrate the correlated, multidimensional nature of ways of thinking. Results from the qualitative and quantitative phases were also analyzed together to make recommendations for policy, teaching, research, and future collaborations. The current research suggested that ways of thinking, while perceived as a concept in theory, can and should be used in practice. Futures, values, systems, and strategic thinking, when used in conjunction could be an important tool for researchers to frame decisions regarding engineering education problem/solution constellations.
ContributorsDalal, Medha (Author) / Archambault, Leanna M (Thesis advisor) / Carberry, Adam (Committee member) / Savenye, Wilhelmina (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
By providing vignettes with manipulated scientific evidence, this research examined if including more or less scientific detail affected decision-making in regards to the death penalty. Participants were randomly assigned one of the two manipulations (less science and more science) after reading a short scenario introducing the mock capital trial and their role as jury members. Survey respondents were told that a jury had previously found the defendant guilty and they would now deliberate the appropriate punishment. Before being exposed to the manipulation, respondents answered questions pertaining to their prior belief in the death penalty, as well as their level of support of procedural justice and science. These questions provided a baseline to compare to their sentencing decision. Participants were then asked what sentence they would impose \u2014 life in prison or death \u2014 and how the fMRI evidence presented by an expert witness for the defense affected their decision. Both quantitative and qualitative measures were used to identify how the level of scientific detail affected their decision. Our intended predictor variable (level of scientific detail) did not affect juror decision-making. In fact, the qualitative results revealed a variety of interpretations of the scientific evidence used both in favor of death and in favor of life. When looking at what did predict juror decision-making, gender, prior belief in the death penalty, and political ideology all were significant predictors. As in previous literature, the fMRI evidence in our study had mixed results with regards to implementation of the death penalty. This held true in both of our manipulations, showing that despite the level of detail in evidence intended for mitigation, jurors with preconceived notions may still disregard the evidence, and some jurors may even view it is aggravating and thus increase the likelihood of a death sentence for a defendant with such brain abnormalities.
ContributorsBerry, Megan Cheyenne (Author) / Fradella, Hank (Thesis director) / Pardini, Dustin (Committee member) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / School of Life Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2016-12