My Marie Curie fellowship ended the last day of 2019 and I had 60 days to complete my final report. For Marie Curie Research Fellows, it can be difficult to figure out what will be required for reporting, based on discussion threads I read online.
Fellows don’t have much indication of what the report will entail until the European Commission’s “Participant Portal” invites them to submit the final report. Even then, it’s not clear how long the descriptions will need to be or where the report template is located. Only after you enter the text for the public statements, will the system inform you how long the text must be. Surprises I encountered in the official reporting process: The text you post for the public is limited to just 7480 characters! There’s specific button you’ve got to locate that contains the blank PDF template for the full report.
This blog post contains the public synopsis of my 2018-2019 project as well as a link to a PDF of the full report, which uses the required template and thus may be of help to other fellows:
I’ve posted this blog for (a) people interested in the research I’ve done and also (b) other MSCA fellows who have questions about the reporting process. This particular post shares my short, public synopsis (below). It’s likely I’ll post more detailed info in coming blogs, along with photos of the MSCA grant period that I’ve never posted before.
Getting the photos loaded onto WordPress has provided me a pleasant trip down memory lane. I plan to share more of these in coming posts.
Public Synopsis
1 – Summary of the context and overall objectives of the project (For the final period, include the conclusions of the action)
This section should include information on:
- What is the problem/issue being addressed?
- Why is it important for society?
- What are the overall objectives?
The Action “Designing Engineers: Harnessing the Power of Design Projects to Spur Cognitive and Epistemological Development of STEM Students” looks at how engineering and architecture students learn, and how design projects and teamwork affect students’ thinking and overall development. The research questions how students learn to design and how their thinking changes over time with regard to what knowledge is, where it comes from, and how it gets validated; their views on this constitute their epistemologies. Such topics are important because society needs more engineers and more STEM graduates. Not only is there widespread lack of engagement, but problems also have been identified in graduate engineers’ ability to think holistically—today’s graduates do not seem prepared to identify and address global challenges in the comprehensive way society needs. Although engineering is often perceived as a dry, technical subject there is great room for creativity.
Architecture programs around the world are filled with highly engaged students. In engineering, there has been a move to teach in more active, hands-on, project-based ways that incorporate design, as done in architecture. Engineering can learn from architecture’s historic success in engaging and teaching students to design, but engineering has placed more focus than architecture has on understanding how students learn. The fields of engineering and architecture education have much to learn from each other.
Objectives of this Marie Skłodowska Curie Action (MSCA) have been to (a) develop and promote better ways to teach and support STEM students; (b) help transform engineering into a more diverse and creative field; and (c) investigate questions surrounding the theme, To what extents do design projects influence the cognitive and epistemological development of undergraduates in engineering and architecture? A parallel goal of the MSCA Individual Fellowship is to foster the development of the individual researcher (that’s me!).
2 – Work performed from the beginning of the project to the end of the period covered by the report and main results achieved so far (For the final period please include an overview of the results and their exploitation and dissemination)
Work was conducted via 6 work packages (WPs). WP1 comprised 3 qualitative research studies that yielded 4 conference publications and 1 journal publication to date, with an additional 3 conference publications and 2 journal manuscripts underway. WP2 sought to build skill with multiple research methodologies. In it, the Fellow delivered 5 conference presentations, 3 published journal articles, and 1 encyclopedia entry, with 2 conference manuscripts underway. WP3 involved developing a special-focus journal issue. The Fellow exceeded goals by spearheading development of 2 different special focus journal issues (published 2018 & 2019). The Fellow is leading the development of a third special focus issue (for 2020). In WP4, the Fellow delivered 20 public engagement activities to popularize STEM and communicate findings. In WP5, for researcher training and transfer-of-knowledge, the Fellow attended 70 intensive training workshops and multi-day conferences. She provided leadership in publishing and research at university, national, and international levels. To transfer of knowledge, she conducted 18 workshops for researchers and educators; she provided supervision and mentoring for early career researchers. She was appointed Associate Editor of IEEE Transactions on Education, Editorial Board member of the European Journal of Engineering Education, and serves as Chair of the global Research in Engineering Education Network (REEN). During the grant, she earned a teaching qualification in the UK (SFHEA) and secured €56,000 (as co-PI) for education projects in Spain, a £11,200 donation to UCL’s Centre for Engineering Education from the UK’s Royal Academy of Engineers via EWBUK, and €237,727 in contract work from UCL Consulting. The project was managed under WP6.
Results of this MSCA are reported in: (1) forthcoming papers on how architecture and civil engineering students conceptualize design creation and knowledge generation; (2) forthcoming papers on ethics, sustainability/SDGs and early-career engineers from a study on UK civil engineers’ practices and perceptions of global responsibility; (3) papers about women’s experiences studying engineering including a longitudinal study (that uses data collected over four years in Ireland regarding Middle Eastern women’s experiences studying engineering abroad) and analysis using the framework known as A Hero’s Journey (of a single mother’s challenges and successes studying and working in engineering); (4) a systematic review of grit in engineering education; a multi-method study of engineering teachers’ experiences implementing problem based learning (PBL). The data sets collected during this MSCA will inform and enhance dozens of publications in the coming years, in addition to the ones produced and published during the fellowship itself.
3 – Progress beyond the state of the art, expected results until the end of the project and potential impacts (including the socio-economic impact and the wider societal implications of the project so far)
This MSCA has pushed the frontiers of engineering education research (EER) forward in a numerous ways. The 2 special focus issues the Fellow spearheaded have shed new light onto socio-cultural diversity and engineering students’ identity formation and epistemic development. The educational blogs, STEM activity books for kids, and fun, creative events conducted by the Fellow are helping popularize engineering—the first STEM book was nominated for an award of excellence in the UK. The engineering education journals, and the workshops and community up-skilling events led by the Fellow are helping cultivate broader human capacity to produce quality research in the field of EER (e.g., Chairing the Research in Engineering Education Network to help raise the quality, credibility, and usefulness of EER globally and delivering Master Classes to help engineering teachers and researchers upskill).
This MSCA allowed the Fellow to develop agility with many different research methodologies and promote best practices to the larger EER community (e.g., co-authoring a study on “grit” in engineering education and identifying how to report it for maximum impact). The Fellow’s project on UK civil engineers exposed shortfalls in ethics and sustainability education and identified how engineers learn about these crucial topics, in that research participants said they did not learn enough about them in university. The Fellow’s PhD student is generating important new knowledge about processes and organizational systems that support creativity in engineering production; working together they are generating new models that describe shortfalls in engineering for UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and illustrate what can be done to address them. Through the Fellow’s research on architecture and civil engineering students, valuable new understandings are emerging related to how students conceptualize both design creation and knowledge generation.
Impacts anticipated from the MSCA are increased and improved: focus by engineering educators on developmental patterns shared among engineering students; student retention as a result of improved support; diversity as techniques to support minority students are increasingly employed; overall teaching in engineering education as a result increasingly credible and useful research; focus on ethics and sustainability in engineering education; and production of tools and models to help engineering educators foster creativity and engineering firms contribute to realizing the UN’s SDGs. A final overarching impact is enhanced public perception of engineering as a fun and creative field.
The commission also requested:
4 – Address (URL) of the project’s public website
5- Images attached to the Summary for publication
Lovely write-up. I am a travel blogger from India. Please have a look at my blog too.
LikeLike
[…] Final Report of my MSCA Individual Fellowship […]
LikeLike
[…] Final Report of my MSCA Individual Fellowship […]
LikeLike
[…] Final Report of my MSCA Individual Fellowship […]
LikeLike
[…] This example wasn’t funded in 2015, but was the following year when it was amended in response to reviewer comments. The full suite of posts I’m sharing on this proposal includes:• Abstract and Eval• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2 (here)• Implementation Section• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] The full suite of posts I’m sharing on this proposal includes:• Abstract and Eval• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1 (here), 2.2 • Implementation Section• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] The full suite of my posts on this topics includes:• Abstract and Eval• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2 • Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 (here)• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] • Abstract and Eval• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2• Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 • Ethics Section (here)• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2• Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] The full suite of posts on this topic includes:• Abstract and Eval• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2• Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] The full suite of posts on this topic includes:• Abstract and Eval• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2• Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] The full suite of posts on this topic includes:• Abstract and Eval• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2• Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] The full suite of posts on this topic includes:• Abstract and Eval• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2• Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] Over the course of the week starting August 3, I will be posting blogs on each of the following topics: • Abstract and Eval (here)• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2• Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] I’ve also posted an example grant proposal for Marie Curie (individual fellowships):• Abstract and Eval• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2• Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
[…] • Abstract and Eval• Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2• Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike
I’m starting to write my MSCA IF report now and your entry helped me a LOT. I finally found the well-hidden report template, haha.
Thank you so much for this post!!!
LikeLike
I’m delighted that the post was useful. Thank you so much for letting me know, and best wishes for your final report and onward journey!
LikeLike
[…] Today, this website shares stories of being a “researcher on the move”, but a huge majority of visitors come to learn about the process of applying for a Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions (MSCA) individual fellowship. I’ve posted lots of advice. YOu can find out more using the following links:• Abstract and Eval • Excellence Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4• Notes on using tables• Impact Section 2.1, 2.2• Implementation Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4• Ethics Section• Final Report from 2016 submission […]
LikeLike