SOI for SEFI 2018 (Max 250 Words)

“Research papers are based on experimental data i.e. they present the application of a sound research
methodology and analysis of the data collected.

In concept papers the application of a sound research methodology and data analysis may be less apparent.
This means that concept papers may present for example experiences gained in teaching projects.”

2. Review criteria for research full papers rationale

Review Criteria
1. Review criteria for concept full papers
 existing scholarship in the field
 theories and/or conceptual framework used
 appropriate context
 rationale for the work
 scope of the work
 methodological approach
 description of findings with qualitative /
quantitative results, insights, lessons learnt
 appropriate conclusions based on the findings
 findings are put into perspectives
 information or ideas that are of interest to the
SEFI community
Concept Abstract Guidelines (250 words):
• WHY has this work been undertaken? (rationale
for the work)
• WHAT has been done? (scope of the work)
• HOW has the work been done? (methodological
approach)
• WHAT have you found so far? (main findings of
the work)
of the study (background / introduction)
 methods & research design (Are methods
chosen appropriate (data assessment and
analysis)?)
 data analysis and results
 interpretation and discussion of results
 conclusions
 impact on Engineering Education (EE)
 recommended interventions to develop EE
 significance for EE
 is the study an original study and reflects good
practice in Engineering Education Research
(EER)?
Research Abstract Guidelines (250 words):
 WHY has this research been undertaken?
(rationale for the study).
 WHAT has been done in that research? (scope
of the study).
 HOW has the research been done?
(methodological approach with special emphasis
on research question and research design).
 WHAT have you found so far? (data analysis and
results)

SOI
Creativity, Conformity and Constraints: a Grounded Theory Study on Capstone Group Design Projects

(249 words)

Creativity, innovation and interpersonal skills are amongst the most important for employability as
engineering graduates transition into the workplace. For the Chemical Engineering (CE) discipline
particularly, but also with general applicability across engineering, one pedagogical activity that is
expected to promote such skills is the capstone Group Design Project (GDP).

The University of Strathclyde’s CE department was the case study with observations, in-depth semi-
structured interviews and documentation such as design briefs collected and analysed over the
course of three iterations of the semester long GDP. Both students and staff members have been
interviewed.

Grounded Theory (GT), which emerges from qualitative research methodology, was used to study
GDPs from the social-psychological perspective. As well as being a novel approach, GT involves
rigorous techniques such as line-by-line analysis, constant comparison and theoretical sampling. The
aim of this research is to provide an empirically-evidenced theory that explains observations and
seeks to answer the questions: What theory of social processes explains the observations of the
GDP? What are the central concerns of, and drivers of behaviour for, students?

Findings thus far suggest that there exist a range of socio-psychological forces that may inhibit
student creativity in the GDP. Sociological tensions exist between individuals’ creativity and fears of
non-conformity with the collective cohort. Behaviours that attempt to reduce the degree of open-
endedness of a problem have been observed, manifesting in students seeking multiple modes of
verification to justify their decisions. Specific aspects of assessment and assignment design were
observed to substantially influence student creativity.

Keywords
Project-Based Learning, Qualitative Social Research, Grounded Theory, Creativity