Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine

Paper ID #26004 Exploratory Examination of an Interdisciplinary Engineering Field: Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine Cassandra Sue Ellen Woodcock, University of Michigan Cassandra (Cassie) Woodcock is a pre-candidate doctoral student at the University of Michigan. She is pursuing a PhD in Biomedical Engineering with and Emphasis in Engineering Education. Her research interests involve interdisciplinary engineering programs and the professional, personal, and academic outcomes of students engaged in these programs. She is also involved in student outcomes research focused on graduate student beliefs on learning and teaching. Cassie received a B.A. in Engineering Sciences at Wartburg College (Waverly, IA). Nicole Erin Friend, University of Michigan Nicole Friend is currently a PhD student in the Biomedical Engineering program at the University of Michigan. She received her B.S in Bioengineering: Biosystems from the University of California, San Diego in 2017. Nicole’s research interests are centered around regenerating vasculature in ischemic envi- ronments. Nicole is also interested in more broadly deﬁning the ﬁeld of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine to inform curriculum design and student career trajectories. Dr. Aileen Huang-Saad, University of Michigan Aileen is faculty in Engineering Education and Biomedical Engineering. Previously, Aileen was the Associate Director for Academics in the Center for Entrepreneurship and was responsible for building the Program in Entrepreneurship for UM undergraduates, co-developing the masters level entrepreneurship program, and launching the biomedical engineering graduate design program. Aileen has received a number of awards for her teaching, including the Thomas M. Sawyer, Jr. Teaching Award, the UM ASEE Outstanding Professor Award and the Teaching with Sakai Innovation Award. Prior to joining the University of Michigan faculty, she worked in the private sector gaining experience in biotech, defense, and medical device testing at large companies and start-ups. Aileen’s current research areas include entrepreneurship engineering education, impact and engaged learning. Aileen has a Bachelor’s of Science in Engineering from the University of Pennsylvania, a Doctorate of Philosophy from The Johns Hop- kins University School of Medicine, and a Masters of Business Administration from the University of Michigan Ross School of Business. Aileen is also a member of Phi Kappa Phi and Beta Sigma Gamma. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Exploratory Examination of an Interdisciplinary Engineering Field: Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine Introduction This research paper examines faculty perceptions of a rapidly developing interdisciplinary engineering field to inform adaptive undergraduate curricular reform. Interdisciplinary engineering programs and courses, those that focus on solving problems that require skills and techniques of multiple disciplines [1], have gained traction in engineering education [2], [3]. Such programs have also been shown to promote 21st century skills (critical thinking, complex problem solving, self-efficacy, etc.) [4] and diversity in the engineering pipeline [5]. One field that both embodies the characteristics of interdisciplinary engineering and has motivated the development of undergraduate specific programming is tissue engineering and regenerative medicine (TERM). TERM, a subfield of biomedical engineering (BME), brings together researchers from a variety of traditional disciplines, including engineering and physical sciences, to perform research focused on the micro to macro-level fabrication and regeneration of tissues. While this field has continued to grow since the 1970’s [6], it faces challenges shared by other interdisciplinary fields when trying to develop and implement curriculum for interdisciplinary programs. Rapid growth in interdisciplinary fields and subsequently interdisciplinary academic programs has created programs with ill-defined disciplinary skills for students graduating from those programs [7]. As a result, interdisciplinary engineering program graduates regularly pursue careers outside of traditional engineering jobs [8], often making career trajectories unclear after graduation [9]. In an effort to more effectively scope an interdisciplinary engineering field, many academic journals have created annual reviews to address trends in research. One example of such efforts is the annual Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine International Society (TERMIS) Year in Review [6], [10]–[13]. Each year, TERMIS publishes a review of the ground- breaking advances in the field. Researchers in the field of TERM use these reviews to inform the direction of their research. However, it is unclear how or even if the new advances are integrated into TERM undergraduate curricula. As curriculum is the primary method for students to gain the knowledge necessary to enter into a field of study after graduation, research efforts wishing to improve student experience and success should focus on understanding the important aspects of the field through the lens of those who shape it. The purpose of this study is to close the gap between interdisciplinary engineering practice and undergraduate curricula. In this paper, we develop a framework for studying interdisciplinary engineering programs in the context of the progression of engineering and situated learning theory. We then use this framework to explore TERM literature and characterize TERM professional practice. Findings from this study can be used to inform evidence-based curriculum development in rapidly evolving interdisciplinary engineering programs, particularly in TERM. The research was guided by two research questions: 1. How do faculty working in the field of TERM define or describe engineering generally and tissue engineering specifically? 2. How do those definitions inform their emphasis on specific skills and concepts important in TERM as well as the role of engineers in the field? Research Framework In this study, we first explore how an interdisciplinary engineering field is influenced by historical engineering definitions, drawing from literature using philosophy to inform engineering and technology [14], [15] and literature about the progression of engineering design in curriculum [16], [17]. We then examine the interdisciplinary community of practice through the lens of situated learning theory [18] to explore current interdisciplinary learning experiences. We use this theory of learning to reason that the important skills, concepts, and roles of engineers in a field are largely defined by the ‘community of practice’ [18] and that understanding the conceptions of the community members can better inform curricular and co-curricular efforts to improve the interdisciplinary engineering student experience. Progression of the Engineering Discipline While interdisciplinary engineering fields and programs have developed iteratively by working with several other disciplines to solve complex societal problems [19], a common link between these interdisciplinary engineering fields and programs is the context of what engineering is to the people who practice it. Historically, engineering is a broad discipline and has a history of fluctuating norms, disciplinary definitions, and values systems, and as such, consensus on how to describe the philosophy of engineering has yet to be reached [14], [15]. While not all individuals who have worked to describe engineering agree on the common aspects of engineering, the term has evolved to regularly incorporate concepts like transformation of the natural world, use of scientific principles for some practical end, and the incorporation of design principles [14], [15] across broad groups in engineering. These descriptions indicate that there is not a defined body of knowledge that engineering is based on, but rather, engineering is focused on the use of established knowledge for practical purposes, one common purpose being the design of solutions to problems [14]. Furthermore, the literature exploring philosophy and engineering commonly discusses the ethical implications of these designs and their influence on humankind [15]. While discussions about the relationship between philosophy and engineering is constantly evolving, the focus on application of science for some practical means continues to be prevalent in discussions [20]. Because the focus of engineering is not on a specific knowledge base, but rather a utilization of scientific principles to meet changing societal needs [21], engineering disciplines continue to evolve and therefore must be consistently analyzed to better inform curricular design. The design process is also commonly discussed in engineering literature [14], [15], and has also gained traction in engineering curricula in recent years. Engineering design is now a key part of engineering curricula regardless of disciplinary emphasis [16], [17], [22] and is likely an area of discussion in many interdisciplinary engineering fields and programs. Design processes vary slightly across disciplines and even across universities or industries, but most processes share characteristic activities such as identifying a need, defining and analyzing a problem, making decisions, detailing, and presenting and communicating a product or solution [23]. Situated Learning as a Lens for Interdisciplinary Engineering Field Development In practice, interdisciplinary engineering program development aligns with

Load more