2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Engineering education as in interdisciplinary field of research that borrows from a variety of areas to build its toolset. From theories to research methods the field is in constant evolution in its adaptation of established practices in other fields to the context of engineering education. One of the challenges faced by novice researchers is the need to decide if one should engage with one literature review method versus another, and to devise the transferability of methods learned. In the early stages of training of engineering education researchers, we get acquainted with different strategies available to conduct literature reviews. Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) and Scoping Reviews (SR) have gained popularity as approaches to engage more in depth with existing research in a chosen research topic. One question that we face is: When to decide to conduct one versus the other?

In this paper, we illustrate the learning process generated through such questioning while generating a literature review about the marginalized lived experiences of Asian-American students in engineering. We discuss the different approaches for SRs and SLRs, how they transfer to the context of engineering education, and which adjustments were considered necessary in order to make approaches more useful for the field. The Five-Stage, PICO, and SPIDER frameworks are discussed to depth when considering their transferability and adjustments needed to make their optimal utilization in the engineering education context. The exercise is illustrated by the results of the intended literature review.

The goal of this paper is to make transparent the decision-making process through which novice researchers go through when selecting a type of literature review to engage with for their study. It is intended to demystify the process that is inherent to research endeavor and provide heuristics through which such decision-making can be executed. Initial thoughts about implications for this in the preparation of new engineering education researchers are discussed.