Challenging the De-Valuing of Education Sciences: An Analysis of U.S. Engineering Education Ph.D. Programs

This research paper reports findings of a study analysing engineering education research (EER) Ph.D. programs. The last twenty years have seen a growth in U.S.- based EER Ph.D. programs. Programs vary by curriculum, admissions criteria, and outcomes. EER Ph.D. programs don't just educate the next generation of researchers, these Ph.D. programs are embodiments of what it means to be stewards of the growing field of EER. The research was conducted by collecting curricula, advertising material and Ph.D. handbooks from 18 EER Ph.D. programs in the US. In addition, the same material was collected from two different Ph.D. programs in the each of the 18 universities: one in another DBER area (science, biology, chemistry education) and one in a traditional non-education-oriented Ph.D. program in engineering (Mechanical, Electrical). Results indicate that Ph.D. programs in EER seem to have conflicting notions of stewardship whereas other engineering disciplines have clearer defined models. The amount of core classes and disciplinary depth rooted in the depth/breadth of educational sciences seem significantly smaller than in science education, and significantly and disproportionally smaller to the amount and depth a student would gain in competencies in a Ph.D. in other engineering disciplines.