EAGER Collaborative Proposal: Building a Community of Mentors in Engineering Education Research Through Peer Review Training

这个探索性研究（EAGER）项目的早期概念补助金探索了研究人员在审查工程教育研究（EER）奖学金方面的指导，从而促进了期刊手稿和赠款提案同行评审培训的发展。作为一个领域，EER受益于旨在改善工程教育和挑战现有工程师专业形成模式的不同观点，但有必要正式确定学者如何通过审查磨练自己的研究和沟通技能。我们提出了EER同行评审培训（EER PERT）计划，利用工程教育杂志（JEE）指导评审员计划中开发的知识和组织结构，其中三位导师和导师（经验丰富的评审员）合作撰写及时，建设性的JEE手稿评论。EER PERT参与者包括学员、导师和导师教练。不同的参与者将通过竞争性的申请程序和通过个人和专业网络，包括HBCU和MSI网络招聘。教练将通过定期调查和会议监测指导者/学员三元组中的指导关系的质量，并将向项目团队提供反馈。在开发和实施这项培训的同时，我们将研究评审员如何开发EER的心理模型。正在进行的研究同行评审过程中发现的问题，包括缺乏审查培训，不一致和有偏见的审查，以及缺乏合格的审查。质量差的同行评议可能导致学术质量差;过于苛刻的负面评论可能会排除社区中的不同声音，扼杀创新。我们将利用通过JEE指导评审员计划开发的培训框架，参与者描述了扩展专业知识的积极成果，对研究质量的更好理解，以及将关于同行评审的主导（负面）话语转变为对知识生产和出版的更积极看法。以社会文化的角度，认识到社会互动的作用，在共同建设的知识和元认知，我们提出了这些研究问题：学者如何发展的图式质量工程教育研究，通过合作建设同行评议？手稿和资助计划评审的图式发展有什么相同和不同之处？EER PERT计划将提高EER手稿和提案的质量，并最终增加EER奖学金的影响。通过在EER社区内开发奖学金评审技能而创建的积极反馈循环将最大限度地提高NSF在EER项目中的投资。该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并被认为值得通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响评审标准进行评估来支持。

This Early-concept Grant for Exploratory Research (EAGER) project explores mentorship of researchers in reviewing engineering education research (EER) scholarship, leading to the development of training in peer review of journal manuscripts and grant proposals. As a field, EER benefits from diverse perspectives aimed at improving engineering education and challenging existing models of professional formation of engineers, but there is a need to formalize how scholars hone their own research and communication skills through reviewing. We propose the EER Peer Review Training (EER PERT) program, leveraging the knowledge and organizational structure developed in the Journal of Engineering Education (JEE) Mentored Reviewer Program in which triads of mentees and mentors (experienced reviewers) collaboratively write timely, constructive reviews of JEE manuscripts. EER PERT participants include mentees, mentors, and mentor coaches. Diverse participants will be selected through a competitive application process and recruitment through personal and professional networks, including HBCU and MSI networks. Coaches will monitor the quality of the mentoring relationships within mentor/mentee triads through periodic surveys and meetings, and will provide feedback to the project team. In parallel with developing and implementing this training, we will study how reviewers develop mental models of EER. Ongoing studies about the peer review process have identified problems including lack of reviewer training, inconsistent and biased reviews, and dearth of qualified reviewers. Poor quality peer reviews can lead to poor quality scholarship; overly harsh, negative reviews can exclude diverse voices in the community and stifle innovation. We will leverage a training framework developed through the JEE Mentored Reviewer Program, in which participants have described positive outcomes of expanded expertise, a greater understanding of research quality, and shifting the dominant (negative) discourses about peer review to a more positive view of knowledge production and publishing. Taking a sociocultural perspective that recognizes the role of social interaction in co-construction of knowledge and metacognition, we pose these research questions: How do scholars develop schema for quality engineering education research through collaboratively constructing peer reviews? What are the similarities and differences between schema development for manuscript and grant proposal review?The EER PERT program will enhance the quality of EER manuscripts and proposals, and ultimately increase the impact of scholarship in EER. The positive feedback loop created through developing scholarship review skills within the EER community will maximize NSF investments in EER projects.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.