This paper outlines the results obtained during Year 3 of a Broadening Participation in Engineering project through the National Science Foundation concerning structural barriers that can push diverse subgroups of students out of engineering. We specifically focus on curricular factors using an emerging framework based in network analysis that can quantify the “complexity” of engineering curricula. We have curated a dataset of 497 plans of study representing five engineering disciplines (Mechanical, Civil, Electrical, Chemical, and Industrial) across 13 institutions within the Multiple Institution Database for Investigating Engineering Longitudinal Development (MIDFIELD), which – among other demographic variables – contains course-taking records for all students. By aligning our plan of study dataset with MIDFIELD, we aim to enable the synthesis of the two data sources to parse out the educational trajectories of engineering students in the dataset.
In Year 3, we have focused on three primary activities: (1) mining course-taking trajectories for students in the MIDFIELD dataset to compare the uncovered patterns with the codified plans of studies, (2) distributing the dataset and functionality to analyze the plans of study through a comprehensive R package, and (3) conducting a scoping review to collect other possible metrics for researchers and practitioners to use in conjunction with the dataset or their own data.
Regarding the first activity, we have explored course-taking patterns in the five engineering disciplines under study at the 13 institutions within our dataset using association analysis. Through this process, we extracted common bundles of courses taken by students and overlayed those bundles within the plan of study networks. In this paper, we will provide sample visualizations to highlight how merging the two datasets can provide insights into the varied pathways in which students approach their degree program requirements.
Regarding the second and third activities, our R package is ready for public use and is currently being used by a set of early-adopting institutions. We will provide sample outputs to outline its essential functionality and include a list of metrics we have added to our package based on our scoping review of the literature describing other network-based measurements used to characterize the complexity of engineering programs. Our scoping review draws from a set of 159 papers that cited foundational papers on Curricular Analytics to capture how the framework has evolved since it was originally proposed in 2013.
Through this project, we contend our primary impact is drawing insights from already available data and providing the engineering education community with ready-to-use tools for analyzing their own curricula within a standard statistical programming platform used in the field. Moreover, by deconstructing the varied pathways students take to an engineering degree, we can better understand what curricular bottlenecks exist for students and find appropriate ways to increase the flexibility of our programs to enable a broader population of students to succeed.
The full paper will be available to logged in and registered conference attendees once the conference starts on June 22, 2025, and to all visitors after the conference ends on June 25, 2025