SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Andrews, R. (2005). The place of systematic reviews in education research. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(4), 399416.
  • Barnett-Page, E., & Thomas, J. (2009). Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: A critical review. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9(59), 110. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-9-59
  • Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of General Psychology, 1(3), 311320.
  • Becker, K., & Park, K. (2011). Effects of integrative approaches among science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects on students' learning: A preliminary meta-analysis. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 12(5), 2337.
  • Beddoes, K., & Borrego, M. (2011). Feminist theory in three engineering education journals: 1995–2008. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 281303.
  • Beddoes, K., Jesiek, B. K., & Borrego, M. (2010). Identifying opportunities for collaborations in international engineering education research on problem- and project-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 4(2), 734.
  • Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58(3), 978988.
  • Berlin, J. A. (1997). Does blinding of readers affect the results of meta-analyses? Lancet, 350(9072), 185186.
  • Borrego, M. (2007a). Conceptual difficulties experienced by engineering faculty becoming engineering education researchers. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(2), 91102.
  • Borrego, M. (2007b). Development of engineering education as a rigorous discipline: A study of the publication patterns of four coalitions. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(1), 518.
  • Borrego, M., Douglas, E. P., & Amelink, C. T. (2009). Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed research methods in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(1), 5366.
  • Borrego, M., Froyd, J. E., & Hall, T. S. (2010). Diffusion of engineering education innovations: A survey of awareness and adoption rates in U.S. engineering departments. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(3), 185207.
  • Borrego, M., & Newswander, L. K. (2008). Characteristics of successful cross-disciplinary engineering education collaborations. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(2), 123134.
  • Borrego, M., Streveler, R. A., Miller, R. L., & Smith, K. A. (2008). A new paradigm for a new field: Communicating representations of engineering education research. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(2), 147162.
  • Campbell Collaboration. (n.d.). About Us [Web page]. Retrieved from http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/about_us/index.php
  • Cook, D. A., & West, C. P. (2012). Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: A stepwise approach. Medical Education, 46, 943952.
  • Cook, D. J., Mulrow, C. D., & Haynes, R. B. (1997). Systematic reviews: Synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Annals of Internal Medicine, 126(5), 376380.
  • Crismond, D. P., & Adams, R. S. (2012). The informed design teaching and learning matrix. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 738797.
  • Downe-Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: Methods, applications and issues. Health Care for Women International, 13, 313321.
  • Durand, M.-A., Stiel, M., Boivin, J., & Elwyn, G. (2008). Where is the theory? Evaluating the theoretical frameworks described in decision support technologies. Patient Education and Counseling, 71(1), 125135. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.12.004
  • Eva, K. M. (2008). On the limits of systematicity. Medical Education, 42(9), 852853. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03140.x
  • Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre). (2010). EPPI-Centre methods for conducting systematic reviews. London: University of London.
  • Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287322.
  • Fensham, P. J. (2004). Defining an identity: The evolution of science education as a field of research. New York, NY: Springer.
  • Froyd, J. E., & Ohland, M. W. (2005). Integrated engineering curricula. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 147164.
  • Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
  • Gough, D. (2004). Systematic research synthesis. In G. Thomas & R. Pring (Eds.), Evidence-based practice in education (pp. 4462). Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
  • Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2012). An introduction to systematic reviews. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
  • Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24, 105112.
  • Haghighi, K. (2005). Quiet no longer: Birth of a new discipline. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(4), 351353.
  • Henderson, C., Finkelstein, N. D., & Beach, A. (2010). Beyond dissemination in college science teaching: An introduction to four core change strategies. Journal of College Science Teaching, 39(5), 1825.
  • Heywood, J. (2005). Engineering education: Research and development in curriculum and instruction. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-IEEE Press.
  • Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (2009). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (Cochrane Collaboration Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 12771288.
  • Institute of Education Sciences. (2012). What Works Clearinghouse. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/aboutus.aspx
  • Jadad, A. R., Moore, R. A., Carroll, D., Jenkinson, C., Reynolds, D. J., Gavaghan, D. J., & McQuay, H. J. (1996). Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? Controlled Clinical Trials, 17(1), 112.
  • Jesiek, B. K., Borrego, M., Beddoes, K., Hurtado, M., Rajendran, P., & Sangam, D. (2011). Mapping global trends in engineering education research, 2005–2008. International Journal of Engineering Education 27(1), 7790.
  • Jesiek, B. K., Newswander, L. K., & Borrego, M. (2009). Engineering education research: Discipline, community, or field? Journal of Engineering Education, 98(1), 3952.
  • Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom (3rd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
  • Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to college: What evidence is there that it works? Change, 30(4), 2635.
  • Johri, A., & Olds, B. (2011). Situated engineering learning: Bridging engineering education research and the learning sciences. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 151185.
  • Johri, A., & Olds, B. (Eds.). (in press). Cambridge handbook of engineering education research.
  • Kiefer, M., & Pulvermüller, F. (2012). Conceptual representations in mind and brain: Theoretical developments, current evidence and future directions. Cortex, 48(7), 805825. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.04.006
  • Kondracki, N. L., Wellman, N. S., & Amundson, D. R. (2002). Content analysis: Review of methods and their applications in nutrition education. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behaviour, 34(4), 224230.
  • Koro-Ljungberg, M., & Douglas, E. P. (2008). State of qualitative research in engineering education: Meta-analysis of JEE articles, 2005–2006. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(2), 163176.
  • Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
  • Li, Q., & Ma, X. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students' mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 215243.
  • Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., . . . Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: Explanation and elaboration. BMJ (Clinical Research Education), 339, b2700. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2700
  • Light, R. J., & Pillemer, D. B. (1984). Summing up: The science of reviewing research. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Litzinger, T., Lattuca, L. R., Hadgraft, R., & Newstetter, W. (2011). Engineering education and the development of expertise. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 123150.
  • Lohmann, J. R., & Froyd, J. E. (2010). Chronological and ontological development of engineering education as a field of scientific inquiry. Paper presented at the Second Meeting of the Committee on the Status, Contributions, and Future Directions of Discipline-Based Education Research, Washington DC.
  • Lou, Y. (2004). Understanding process and affective factors in small group versus individual learning with technology. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(4), 337369.
  • Lucena, J., Downey, G., Jesiek, B. K., & Elber, S. (2008). Competencies beyond countries: The re-organization of engineering education in the United States, Europe, and Latin America. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(4), 433447.
  • McGowan, J., & Sampson, M. (2005). Systematic reviews need systematic searchers. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 93(1), 7480.
  • Meese, N., & McMahon, C. (2012). Knowledge sharing for sustainable development in civil engineering: A systematic review. AI & Society, 27(4), 437449.
  • Mehalik, M., & Schunn, C. (2007). What constitutes good design? A review of empirical studies of design processes. International Journal of Engineering Education, 22(3), 519.
  • Monasor, M. J., Vizcaíno, A., Piattini, M., & Caballero, I. (2010). Preparing students and engineers for global software development: A systematic review. Paper presented at the 5th IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering, Princeton, NJ.
  • Montfort, D., Brown, S., & Pegg, J. (2012). The adoption of a capstone assessment instrument. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 657678.
  • Mullen, B., Driskell, J. E., & Salas, E. (1998). Meta-analysis and the study of group dynamics. Group Dynamics, 2(4), 213229.
  • Mullen, P. D., & Ramirez, G. (2006). The promise and pitfalls of systematic reviews. Annual Review of Public Health, 27, 81102. doi: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.27. 021405.102239
  • National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). (2009). Methods for the development of NICE public health guidance (2nd ed.). London: Author.
  • National Research Council. (2011) Promising practices in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education: Summary of two workshops. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  • Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. London: Sage.
  • Osorio, N., & Osorio, M. (2002). Engineering education in Europe and the USA: An analysis of two journals. Science and Technology Libraries, 23(1), 4970.
  • Papaioannou, D., Sutton, A., Carroll, C., Booth, A., & Wong, R. (2010). Literature searching for social science systematic reviews: Consideration of a range of search techniques. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 27(2), 114122. doi: 2048/10.1111/j.1471–1842.2009.00863.x
  • Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2002). Evidence, hierarchies, and typologies: Horses for courses. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 57, 527529.
  • Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  • Prince, M. J. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223231. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
  • Prince, M. J., & Felder, R. M. (2006). Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 123128. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00884.x
  • Salleh, N., Mendes, E., & Grundy, J. (2011). Empirical studies of pair programming for CS/SE teaching in higher education: A systematic literature review. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 37(4), 509525.
  • Schmid, R. F., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R., Abrami, P. C., Wade, C. A., . . . Lowerison, G. (2009). Technology's effect on achievement in higher education: A Stage I meta-analysis of classroom applications. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21(2), 95109.
  • Serial Solutions. (n.d.). Ulrichsweb [Web page]. Retreived from http://www.serialssolutions.com/en/services/ulrichs/ulrichsweb
  • Shavelson, R., & Towne, L. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
  • Slavin, R. E. (1984). Meta-analysis in education: How has it been used? Educational Researcher, 13(8), 615.
  • Springer, L., Stanne, M., & Donovan, S. (1999). Effects of small group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 2152.
  • Streveler, R. A., Borrego, M., & Smith, K. A. (2007). Moving from the scholarship of teaching and learning to educational research: An example from engineering. In D. R. Robertson & L. B. Nilson (Eds.), To Improve the Academy (Vol. 25, pp. 139149). Boston: Anker.
  • Streveler, R. A., Litzinger, T. A., Miller, R. L., & Steif, P. S. (2008). Learning conceptual knowledge in the engineering sciences: Overview and future research directions. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 279294.
  • Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(45), 110. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
  • Thompson, L. A. (2001). Grey literature in engineering. Science & Technology Libraries, 19(3–4), 5773. doi: 10.1300/J122v19n03_05
  • Tondeur, J., Van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59(1), 134144.
  • Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207222. doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.00375
  • Tricco, A. C., Tetzlaff, J., & Moher, D. (2011). The art and science of knowledge synthesis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(1), 1120.
  • U.S. Department of Education. (2007). Report of the Academic Competitiveness Council. Washington, DC: Author.
  • Wankat, P. C. (1999). An analysis of the articles in the Journal of Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 88(1), 3742.
  • Wankat, P. C. (2004). Analysis of the first ten years of the Journal of Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(1), 1321.
  • Wankat, P. C., Felder, R. M., Smith, K. A., & Oreovicz, F. S. (2002). The scholarship of teaching and learning in engineering. In M. T. Huber & S. P. Morreale (Eds.), Disciplinary styles in the scholarship of teaching and learning: Exploring common ground (pp. 217237). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
  • What Works Clearinghouse. (2011). Procedures and standards handbook. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
  • Whitin, K., & Sheppard, S. (2004). Taking stock: An analysis of the publishing record as represented by the Journal of Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(1), 512.