Rethinking Engineering Education

A special issue of Education Sciences (ISSN 2227-7102). This special issue belongs to the section "STEM Education".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (1 January 2026) | Viewed by 19953

Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
College of Engineering, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221, USA
Interests: teaching; pedagogy and education; teacher training; curriculum development; teaching and learning; teaching materials; student development

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Engineering Technology and Computer & Information Technology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA
Interests: STEM education; immersive environments; scientific visualization

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Engineering education is at a critical juncture, demanding fundamental transformation to address the complex challenges of our rapidly evolving technological landscape. Traditional educational models are increasingly inadequate and constrained by systemic barriers that limit diversity, creativity, and innovation. Current education models, conceived in the 1950s, predominantly serve a narrow demographic and fail to capture the full potential of talent from different backgrounds. The profession suffers from persistent racial and gender disparities, with underrepresented groups systematically excluded from technological innovation pathways.

The pace of technological change far outstrips our current educational approaches and we are attempting incremental improvements in a world that requires radical, systemic transformation. Engineers today must be equipped with technical skills and a profound understanding of the ethical, social, and sustainability implications of technological solutions.

This effort represents more than educational reform—it strategically reimagines how we develop human capacity to solve global challenges. By creating a more responsive, inclusive, and dynamic educational framework, we can truly prepare engineers for the complexities of the 21st century. The transformation of engineering education is not just an opportunity—it is an imperative for technological progress, social equity, and global problem-solving.

The future demands a new breed of engineers who are:

- Technically proficient;

- Ethically aware;

- Adaptable to rapid technological changes;

- Committed to inclusive innovation;

- Capable of addressing complex global challenges.

Key Reasons for Transformation:

  1. Global Problem-Solving Capacity

By reimagining engineering education, we directly enhance our collective ability to tackle critical global issues like climate change, sustainable development, and technological equity. This is not just about individual skill development, but about expanding humanity's capacity to solve complex challenges.

  1. Social Justice and Equity

Transforming engineering education is a powerful mechanism for social mobility. By dismantling historical barriers, we open pathways for diverse talent to contribute to technological innovation. This approach enriches the entire profession by incorporating varied perspectives and problem-solving approaches.

  1. Adaptive Learning

The exponential pace of technological change demands an educational model that is itself dynamic and adaptive, in stark contrast to our current system that is mired in tradition and inflexible. A reimagined approach prepares engineers with the flexibility, ethical understanding, and systemic thinking required to navigate complex, evolving technological environments.

  1. Holistic Professional Development

This transformation goes beyond technical competence. By truly integrating ethical considerations, sustainability thinking, and social impact awareness, we are cultivating a new generation of socially responsible innovators. Our current system often treats these factors as “add-ons.”

  1. Addressing Systemic Limitations

The current system perpetuates significant limitations—from demographic exclusions to pedagogical rigidity. Intentional redesign creates a more inclusive, responsive approach to developing technological talent.

Research Priorities:

- Educational and learning theory;

- Sociological and demographic analysis;

- Technology and innovation studies;

- Systems thinking and organizational change;

- Diversity and inclusion research;

- Interdisciplinary engineering education.

Prof. Dr. Sheryl Sorby
Prof. Dr. Gary Bertoline
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 250 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for assessment.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-anonymized peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Education Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2000 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • active learning
  • growth mindset
  • engineering education
  • diversity in engineering
  • ethical engineering
  • adaptive learning
  • systems thinking
  • pedagogy innovation
  • learning theories
  • curriculum design

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (14 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review, Other

19 pages, 274 KB  
Article
Sociotechnical Judgment in Engineering Education: Cases at the Intersection of Energy and Society
by Desen S. Özkan, Avneet Hira and Mikayla Friday
Educ. Sci. 2026, 16(3), 458; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci16030458 - 17 Mar 2026
Viewed by 1043
Abstract
Engineering education often emphasizes technical competencies while underemphasizing and devaluing the social, ethical, and political contexts of engineering systems. This gap is particularly pronounced in middle-year courses, where students develop technical fluency but rarely confront the sociotechnical complexity of real-world problems. We propose [...] Read more.
Engineering education often emphasizes technical competencies while underemphasizing and devaluing the social, ethical, and political contexts of engineering systems. This gap is particularly pronounced in middle-year courses, where students develop technical fluency but rarely confront the sociotechnical complexity of real-world problems. We propose sociotechnical judgment as a framework to help students see the intimately intertwining nature of technical knowledge and social, ethical, and contextual reasoning, using energy systems—particularly offshore wind—as an illustrative domain. We designed three course-integrated case studies in thermodynamics, circuits, and statics/dynamics to embed sociotechnical judgment in middle-year engineering courses. These cases include pedagogical strategies, such as project-based learning, problem-based learning, and role-play exercises connecting technical analysis with social, environmental, and policy considerations. The design of these case studies is rooted in real-world problems surrounding U.S. offshore wind, engineering science learning outcomes, and ABET student outcomes. In these pedagogies, we have created opportunities for students to analyze technical systems while engaging with social, ecological, and political factors. Offshore wind projects, including turbine siting, transmission system design, and efficiency trade-offs, provide opportunities to operationalize sociotechnical reasoning in authentic, regionally relevant contexts. Sociotechnical judgment provides a practical framework for bridging technical competency and contextual reasoning in engineering education. Integrating sociotechnical cases into core courses will prepare students to navigate complex, real-world systems through engagement with ethical, social, and environmental considerations inherent in engineering practice. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
22 pages, 725 KB  
Article
A Comparative NLP-BASED Sentiment Analysis of Basic Psychological Needs and Engagement Among Students with and Without Disability Accommodations in a Design Thinking Course with HyFlex Settings
by Elnara Mammadova, Nathan Mentzer, Federico R. Waitoller and Anne Traynor
Educ. Sci. 2026, 16(3), 457; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci16030457 - 17 Mar 2026
Viewed by 1328
Abstract
Although HyFlex teaching has been studied for decades and has become part of the teaching norm since the 2020 pandemic, studies have generally not investigated the learning experiences of students with disabilities in HyFlex classrooms. This study compared the basic psychological needs (BPN) [...] Read more.
Although HyFlex teaching has been studied for decades and has become part of the teaching norm since the 2020 pandemic, studies have generally not investigated the learning experiences of students with disabilities in HyFlex classrooms. This study compared the basic psychological needs (BPN) and engagement of undergraduate students who did (SwA) and did not (SwoA) request academic disability accommodations in an introductory, active learning, human-centered design thinking course, a core component of engineering technology education. Data were collected from 3748 primarily first-year undergraduate engineering technology students between fall 2021 and spring 2024, 126 of whom requested disability accommodation through the disability office. The data sources consisted of an end-of-course survey, in which students reported their basic psychological satisfaction level on a Likert scale and described their BPN experiences and engagement in response to open-ended survey questions. As a novel contribution, this study integrates the descriptive analysis of Likert-scale measures with textual- and word-level sentiment analysis, advancing conceptual understanding of reported BPN satisfaction and engagement and revealing divergent patterns across analytic approaches. While the SwA group reported lower scores across all BPN constructs compared to their counterparts, the highest number of them provided positive feedback statements across all BPN domains. Conversely, the SwoA group reported higher BPN scores across all constructs, yet the highest number of them used negative sentiments in their responses across all BPN constructs. The majority of SwA provided positive feedback on autonomy satisfaction, while the majority of SwoA’s positive feedback was on relatedness to the instructor. Future directions for advancing engineering technology education and disability data collection in higher education are provided. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
Show Figures

Figure 1

24 pages, 957 KB  
Article
An In-Depth Exploration of the BELONG Conceptual Model of Engineering Persistence
by Gail Baura, Leanne Kallemeyn, Erika Esmeralda de la Riva, Andrea Hercules and Matthew J. Miller
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(12), 1604; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15121604 - 27 Nov 2025
Viewed by 781
Abstract
At Loyola University Chicago, the B.S. Engineering program graduates about 53% women annually, which is much higher than the United States’ average of 25%. In this paper, Loyola University Chicago’s BELONG (Becoming Engineers Leading Our Next Generation) Conceptual Model of Engineering Persistence is [...] Read more.
At Loyola University Chicago, the B.S. Engineering program graduates about 53% women annually, which is much higher than the United States’ average of 25%. In this paper, Loyola University Chicago’s BELONG (Becoming Engineers Leading Our Next Generation) Conceptual Model of Engineering Persistence is described. Grounded in social cognitive career theory, the BELONG model inputs collaborative program structures and uses sense of belonging to explain engineering persistence. Program structures that minimize the chilly climate of engineering for women, particularly those administered during the first undergraduate semester, are described. To explore the model, qualitative semi-structured interviews with self-identified women of color were conducted to gain an in-depth understanding of their program experiences during their first semester. After applying emergent, focused, and thematic coding, results revealed student experiences and understandings of engineering self-efficacy, outcome expectations, interest, sense of belonging, and experiences of program structures. Results support the BELONG model, an approach that addresses the exclusion of women in engineering through program structures and rethinks and repositions engineering education as a more inclusive environment. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
Show Figures

Figure 1

24 pages, 298 KB  
Article
Integrating Community Engagement and Service Learning into Environmental Engineering Curricula
by Michelle Henderson, Abby Vidmar, Maya Trotz, Deirdre Cobb-Roberts and E. Christian Wells
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(12), 1599; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15121599 - 26 Nov 2025
Viewed by 1199
Abstract
Engineering education is evolving to train students to work more closely with communities to support holistic sustainability. This has increasingly involved collaborative and participatory research models that address environmental justice challenges within local communities. This research evaluates student learning experiences and changes in [...] Read more.
Engineering education is evolving to train students to work more closely with communities to support holistic sustainability. This has increasingly involved collaborative and participatory research models that address environmental justice challenges within local communities. This research evaluates student learning experiences and changes in perceptions about race, justice, and community in a pair of undergraduate service learning courses in environmental engineering and environmental anthropology that were developed to center environmental justice through service learning. Pre- and post-class attitudinal surveys were administered to 55 students across two courses in environmental engineering and environmental anthropology and then analyzed using content analysis to identify shifts in students’ knowledge and perceptions about community engagement and environmental justice. Before their participation in the classes, many students in the environmental engineering course understood environmental injustice as harm done to the environment. At the conclusion of the semester, their understandings were broadened to include social and infrastructural injustices in communities. For the anthropology course, students had a general working knowledge of environmental justice before participating in the course, but their understanding was expanded to include a more interconnected perspective that included infrastructural systems. In both classes, student learning outcomes enhanced the value of partnering with communities and learning from community members’ lived experiences. By approaching engineering from the perspective of environmental justice, students developed broader and more holistic perspectives about the roles and values of community-based research. Students also gained greater understanding of the complex interplay between race and environment, especially when it comes to infrastructural challenges. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
20 pages, 2272 KB  
Article
A Scalable Learning Factory Concept for Interdisciplinary Engineering Education: Insights from a Case Implementation
by Sandro Doboviček, Elvis Krulčić, Duško Pavletić and Radu Godina
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(12), 1574; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15121574 - 21 Nov 2025
Viewed by 1660
Abstract
This paper presents a concept for a Learning Factory (LF) designed for interdisciplinary engineering education. Learning factories are experiential learning environments that bridge the gap between theory and practice while supporting the demands of digital transformation. The proposed LF concept was developed using [...] Read more.
This paper presents a concept for a Learning Factory (LF) designed for interdisciplinary engineering education. Learning factories are experiential learning environments that bridge the gap between theory and practice while supporting the demands of digital transformation. The proposed LF concept was developed using an integrated approach that assessed stakeholder needs and reviewed institutional infrastructure and capacity. These inputs were triangulated into a concept consisting of five core thematic components: Lean processes as an educational anchor, Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems, Internet of Things (IoT)-based integration, simulation, and physical prototyping. Validation workshops with Small- and Medium-sized Enterprise (SME) managers, academic experts, and students confirmed the perceived relevance of this structure and its potential. The resulting concept focuses on practice-orientated, team-based learning methods that are in line with the principles of Education 4.0. The design sets goals in four key dimensions: educational integration, technological readiness, industrial relevance with SME orientation and flexibility and scalability. These design principles and practical insights can be utilized for future academic implementations of learning factories. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 783 KB  
Article
When Performance Takes Priority: Beliefs That Shape Engineering Students’ Mental Health Help-Seeking
by Matthew D. Whitwer, Joseph H. Hammer, Brenna Gomer, Elahe Vahidi and Sarah A. Wilson
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(11), 1553; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15111553 - 18 Nov 2025
Viewed by 1918
Abstract
Engineering education is at a critical juncture where supporting student mental health is essential for fostering persistence, equity, and the development of a resilient and innovative workforce. Yet, undergraduate engineering students experiencing mental health concerns are often unlikely to seek professional help. To [...] Read more.
Engineering education is at a critical juncture where supporting student mental health is essential for fostering persistence, equity, and the development of a resilient and innovative workforce. Yet, undergraduate engineering students experiencing mental health concerns are often unlikely to seek professional help. To identify factors that account for this gap in treatment, this project administered the Undergraduate Engineering Mental Health Help Seeking Instrument to 1903 engineering undergraduates across five institutions. Correlations and regression were used to examine the links between help-seeking intention and (a) help-seeking mechanisms (e.g., attitude, perceived norm, self-efficacy) and (b) beliefs about seeking help. Students’ personal evaluation of seeking help as a good versus bad thing (attitude) and their perceptions of other’s expectations and behaviors toward seeking help (perceived norm) demonstrated the strongest links with intention to seek help. Agreement with certain beliefs (e.g., seeking help would… make me feel better, improve my academic performance) and disagreement with others (e.g., seeking help would be a… waste of time, sign of weakness) was associated with intention. These results provide targets for future interventions designed to improve help seeking in the engineering student population. By illuminating the cultural and psychological factors that shape engineering students’ help-seeking decisions, this study contributes evidence to guide systemic changes in engineering education that promote student well-being and strengthen the future of the profession. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 284 KB  
Article
Fixing the Potholes on the Road to Academic Success: A Curriculum for Engineering Educators to Create and Sustain Meaningful Change
by Eva Andrijcic, Sriram Mohan, Elizabeth Litzler, Rae Jing Han, Adjo Amekudzi-Kennedy, Donald Webster, Kevin Haas and Craig Woolard
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(11), 1509; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15111509 - 9 Nov 2025
Viewed by 869
Abstract
Engineering education has faced significant and deep-rooted challenges, including outdated curricula and pedagogical practices, limited access for underrepresented groups, and persistent diversity gaps, that collectively undermine its ability to equip future generations of engineers for a rapidly evolving world. The changes that are [...] Read more.
Engineering education has faced significant and deep-rooted challenges, including outdated curricula and pedagogical practices, limited access for underrepresented groups, and persistent diversity gaps, that collectively undermine its ability to equip future generations of engineers for a rapidly evolving world. The changes that are needed to reform engineering education are monumental and highlight not only the need for systemic transformation of educational structures but also a fundamental shift in the mindsets of those leading the change. Faculty, professional staff, and administrators must develop knowledge and skills that go beyond their disciplinary training to drive sustainable reform. This article presents a professional development curriculum that has, for over a decade, equipped academic change agents with the tools to implement lasting change. Drawing on experiences from teams supported by the National Science Foundation’s Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (NSF RED) program, the article highlights proven strategies that academic change agents can master and situates them within the broader literature on change in higher education. Specifically, we focus on how academic change agents can develop capacity for systems thinking, build their ability to communicate effectively with various community members, leverage strategic partnerships to increase impact, and cultivate a supportive community of practice with other change agents. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
20 pages, 814 KB  
Article
Practical Programming Exams with Automated Assessment Improve Student Engagement and Learning Outcomes
by Žiga Rojec, Janez Puhan and Iztok Fajfar
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(11), 1486; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15111486 - 4 Nov 2025
Viewed by 1891
Abstract
This study investigates the impact of introducing a mandatory practical programming exam on student learning outcomes in introductory programming courses. To facilitate structured coding practice and scalable automated feedback, we developed Programmers’ Interactive Virtual Onboarding (PIVO), a novel Automated Programming Assessment System (APAS). [...] Read more.
This study investigates the impact of introducing a mandatory practical programming exam on student learning outcomes in introductory programming courses. To facilitate structured coding practice and scalable automated feedback, we developed Programmers’ Interactive Virtual Onboarding (PIVO), a novel Automated Programming Assessment System (APAS). Traditional programming curricula often prioritize theoretical concepts, limiting practical coding opportunities and immediate feedback, resulting in poor skill retention and proficiency. By integrating mandatory practical assessments together with voluntary, self-driven programming tasks through PIVO, we aimed to enhance student engagement, programming proficiency, and overall academic performance. Results show a substantial reduction in failure rates following the introduction of the practical exam, and statistical analyses revealed moderate correlation between students’ voluntary engagement in non-mandatory coding exercises and their performance in both theoretical and practical examinations. These findings indicate an association among engagement in structured, automated practice assessments, algorithmic thinking, and problem-solving capabilities. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 542 KB  
Article
Compassion in Engineering Education: Validation of the Compassionate Engagement and Action Scales (CEAS) and Conceptual Insights
by Alejandro Baquero-Sierra, Cristian Vargas Ordóñez, Jacqueline Tawney and Michael Robinson
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(10), 1406; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15101406 - 19 Oct 2025
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1408
Abstract
This study validates the Compassionate Engagement and Action Scales for Self and Others (CEAS) for use with undergraduate engineering students in the United States. Compassion, defined as sensitivity to suffering in oneself and others coupled with a commitment to alleviate and prevent it, [...] Read more.
This study validates the Compassionate Engagement and Action Scales for Self and Others (CEAS) for use with undergraduate engineering students in the United States. Compassion, defined as sensitivity to suffering in oneself and others coupled with a commitment to alleviate and prevent it, is increasingly recognized as a vital socio-emotional competency in professional education. Using a cross-sectional survey design, 434 engineering undergraduates completed the CEAS instrument. In addition, students responded to open-ended questions about their definition of compassion and “others” as well as a validated engineering identity scale. Structural equation modeling supported the hypothesized three-flow, two-component structure of compassion, with excellent fit indices (CFI = 0.980, RMSEA = 0.037) and generally strong factor loadings. Reliability was high for most subscales (α = 0.716–0.762), though self-compassion engagement showed lower internal consistency (α = 0.614). Divergent validity was confirmed through weak correlations with engineering identity dimensions. Qualitative salience and thematic analysis revealed that participants most frequently associated compassion with empathy, kindness, caring, and understanding and defined “others” mainly as friends, family, and classmates, with high-compassion scorers being more compassion oriented and including broader social circles. Findings support the CEAS’s structural validity and utility in engineering education while highlighting opportunities to strengthen self-compassion engagement to enhance well-being, ethical reasoning, and socially responsible practice among future engineers. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 688 KB  
Article
Educating Socially Responsible Engineers Through Critical Community-Engaged Pedagogy
by Ashton Wesner, Khalid Kadir and Lara Cushing
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(10), 1330; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15101330 - 8 Oct 2025
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1529
Abstract
Service or community engaged learning has gained momentum as a strategy for developing engineering students’ professional skills while facilitating engagement with the real-world complexities of engineering problem-solving. Along with other critical scholars of engineering education, we argue that embedding social justice frameworks into [...] Read more.
Service or community engaged learning has gained momentum as a strategy for developing engineering students’ professional skills while facilitating engagement with the real-world complexities of engineering problem-solving. Along with other critical scholars of engineering education, we argue that embedding social justice frameworks into engineering education, including sensibility around difference, power, and privilege, is required in order for engineering to meet the great sustainability and equity challenges of our time. This paper investigates how social justice course content and community engaged learning experiences can change engineering student attitudes toward civic engagement and social responsibility. We also explore how such content increases interest in engineering among students underrepresented in the field. Using pre-/post-survey data and focus group discussions, we conducted a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of student experience in an advanced undergraduate engineering course at a public research university that integrated social justice content with hands-on community engaged projects. Our analysis of survey results show that (1) students placed greater importance on justice-oriented civic engagement and socially responsible engineering after completing the course; (2) women and underrepresented racial/ethnic groups demonstrated greater interest in community engaged projects, and women indicated a greater interest in engineering at the end of the course than men; and (3) participation in a community engaged project also increased students’ interest in engineering, humanized problems that might have traditionally been construed as technological, and deepened the value students placed on non-technical forms of knowledge and their sense of moral and ethical responsibilities. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 259 KB  
Article
Implementing a Sociotechnical Module on Conflict Minerals in a Large “Introduction to Circuits” Course
by Karen E. Nortz, Lea K. Marlor, Musabbiha Zaheer, Cynthia J. Finelli and Susan M. Lord
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(9), 1243; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091243 - 18 Sep 2025
Viewed by 1139
Abstract
Engineers are often faced with complex problems that require both technical and social expertise. However, typical engineering curricula teach technical skills in isolation, without introducing social issues. To address this gap, we implemented a sociotechnical module that linked the circuits topic of capacitors [...] Read more.
Engineers are often faced with complex problems that require both technical and social expertise. However, typical engineering curricula teach technical skills in isolation, without introducing social issues. To address this gap, we implemented a sociotechnical module that linked the circuits topic of capacitors with the social issue of conflict minerals in a single class session of a large “Introduction to Circuits” course. Using a midterm student feedback survey and student group interviews, we explored students’ responses to the module, their takeaways, and their general attitudes towards sociotechnical content in technical engineering courses. Overall, students found the module to be valuable and relevant, with many noting that it helped them understand real-world engineering practice. While some expressed concern about adding new material to an already content-heavy course, more than half agreed that this type of content is important and that they would like to see more sociotechnical topics in their engineering courses. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
18 pages, 633 KB  
Article
Wellness in Engineering Education: An Investigation into the Impact of Degree Plan Length and Its Association with Student Wellness
by Stephanie Shaw and Jeni Spencer
Educ. Sci. 2025, 15(9), 1145; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15091145 - 2 Sep 2025
Viewed by 1648
Abstract
Undergraduate engineering programs are associated with high stress and heavy workloads that impact the wellness of students. One university offers a unique undergraduate engineering education program structure offering two degree plan lengths, four or five years, with both involving the same number of [...] Read more.
Undergraduate engineering programs are associated with high stress and heavy workloads that impact the wellness of students. One university offers a unique undergraduate engineering education program structure offering two degree plan lengths, four or five years, with both involving the same number of courses. These options offer an opportunity for students to select the degree plan length they prefer. The purpose of this research is to explore the motivations for selecting degree plan length and how plan length may be associated with student wellness. An ethics-approved survey of 189 undergraduate students was conducted. Participants responded to a variety of questions that asked about their motivations for selecting their degree plan length and their state of wellness. Mann–Whitney U tests, thematic analyses, and chi-squared tests were used to analyze quantitative and qualitative responses. Results highlighted that there were statistically significant differences (p ≤ 0.001) between the motivators (4 of 8 factors) and perceived wellness (3 of 5 indicators) of students on the four- vs. five-year plans. Overall, it appears that each degree plan length may serve different student needs. Additionally, results suggest that the five-year plan offers the opportunity to reduce the workload and correlates with a better state of perceived wellness. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Review

Jump to: Research, Other

33 pages, 4483 KB  
Review
Educating the Next Generation of Engineers: Spatial Thinking Is Key to Their Success
by Sheryl Sorby, Gavin Duffy, Jack Parkinson, Gibin Raju, John Lynch and Muhammad Asghar
Educ. Sci. 2026, 16(6), 847; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci16060847 - 28 May 2026
Viewed by 824
Abstract
This paper attempts to answer questions regarding the link between engineering success and spatial skills through three themes. The previous research of the authors in examining the questions surrounding each theme is the focus of this paper; we acknowledge that others around the [...] Read more.
This paper attempts to answer questions regarding the link between engineering success and spatial skills through three themes. The previous research of the authors in examining the questions surrounding each theme is the focus of this paper; we acknowledge that others around the world may have conducted similar research, but the specific findings of the authors are the main focus of this paper. In the first theme, we examine data from several author-led studies where positive correlations have been found between spatial skill levels and proficiency in tasks that are a part of what it means to be an engineer. Studies in Theme 1 explore the positive contribution of spatial skills in solving mathematical problems, solving engineering problems, coding, designing, and even technical writing. Theme 2 examines how spatial skills naturally develop just by being enrolled in an engineering program. Taking part in the spatially demanding activities inherent to engineering studies appears to improve the spatial skills of students in our programs. In Theme 3, we examine the result of implementing explicit spatial skills training for students with initially weak skills. In this theme, the impact of spatial skills training on spatial skills, grades in technical courses, and retention in engineering is explored. We begin with a review of the literature that informed the author-led studies in each theme. Finally, we conclude with a call for reform, advocating for an engineering education that acknowledges the importance of spatial skills development for student success and committing to ensuring that all who want to can become the future innovators in the profession. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research, Review

12 pages, 229 KB  
Commentary
Mathematics as a Gateway, Not a Barrier: Reimagining Engineering Preparation for the 21st Century
by Jenna Carpenter, Nathan Klingbeil, Sheryl Sorby and Gary Bertoline
Educ. Sci. 2026, 16(5), 785; https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci16050785 - 15 May 2026
Viewed by 413
Abstract
For more than seventy years, mathematics—particularly the calculus sequence—has defined both the rigor and the exclusivity of engineering education in the United States. While this structure was historically instrumental in professionalizing engineering, it has also produced unintended consequences: restricted access, misalignment with contemporary [...] Read more.
For more than seventy years, mathematics—particularly the calculus sequence—has defined both the rigor and the exclusivity of engineering education in the United States. While this structure was historically instrumental in professionalizing engineering, it has also produced unintended consequences: restricted access, misalignment with contemporary engineering practice, and persistent inequities in participation and degree attainment. This commentary argues that mathematics must be reimagined not as a barrier or filter, but as a gateway that enables engineering learning, persistence, and innovation. Building on The Engineering Mindset Report and decades of research in engineering education, learning sciences, and curricular reform, we examine how mathematics became a gatekeeping mechanism, assess its current impacts, and propose a framework for redesigning engineering mathematics around context, modularity, technology, and equity. We advocate for accessible, flexible, and technology-enabled pathways that emphasize modeling, data analysis, and conceptual understanding over procedural endurance. Such an approach has the potential to broaden participation, improve student success, and better align engineering education with the realities of 21st-century professional practice. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Rethinking Engineering Education)
Back to TopTop