About

Catherine Berdanier is a Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Penn State University, where she also serves as the Director of Online Programs. Her research focuses on engineering education, including writing attitudes, social media forums related to graduate engineering student attrition, visualization of engineering writing and argumentation patterns, and the development of methods to study real-time engineering writing processes. She has contributed to understanding disciplinary discourse in engineering, graduate student perceptions, and the socialization of future faculty through her scholarly work. Berdanier holds a BS in Chemistry, Spanish from the University of South Dakota, an MS in Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering from Purdue University, and a PhD in Engineering Education from Purdue University. Her work has been published extensively in journals and conference proceedings, exploring topics such as engineering writing, leadership behaviors of early-career engineers, ethics and sustainability in global contexts, and engineering identity development. She has received notable awards including the NSF CAREER Award, the Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE), and the Sloan Fellowship Program Mentor of the Year. Her research aims to impact engineering education practices and support the development of engineering professionals.

Research topics

• Pedagogy
• Engineering
• Psychology
• Engineering management
• Mathematics education
• Medicine
• Virology
• Engineering ethics
• Social psychology
• Physics
• Chemistry

Selected publications

• Comparing Prioritization Strategies in Multi-Objective Design for an Enclosed Atrium

  2025-04-07

  articleSenior author

  When structural designers attempt to achieve multiple performance goals at once, multi-objective optimization (MOO) tools may be of assistance. Yet in conceptual structural design, the application of MOO may be less structured than methods described in engineering textbooks. This paper analyzes the behaviors of participants in a recent design study to observe the range of prioritization strategies when designers are pursuing multiple performance objectives. The study asked participants to consider structural efficiency, solar radiation, and daylighting goals while designing an enclosed atrium using the elements of an optimization problem: design variables and objectives. The sessions were recorded and analyzed for actions that demonstrated pursuit of one or more performance objectives, alongside interviews that allowed participants to describe their approach in more detail. The study participants were nearly evenly split between sequential and simultaneous optimization strategies for objectives, with most sequences beginning with a focus on structure. Tool selection seemed to be largely based on familiarity, with evolutionary algorithms being the most common. Observations of these behaviors from a live design task can supplement existing knowledge on the use of optimization in design practice.

  PublisherDOI

• Measuring practical energy literacy: Exploring current scales’ applicability to understand engineering students’ energy knowledge

  2025-08-21

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Stifling Dissent: Engineering PhD Students’ Response whenConsidering Departing

  2025-08-21

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Characterizing Engineering Graduate Students' Longitudinal Stress Landscapes and Stressor Cascades

  2025-11-02

  articleSenior author

  The purpose of this full research paper is to characterize the distinct stressors that engineering graduate students face during their time as students. While recent studies have pointed to broad categories of concern, such as student isolation, departmental practices, time, and advising, most studies are qualitative, limiting insights into the impact of stressors on the engineering graduate student population as a whole. Furthermore, these broad-scope issues make it challenging for university leaders to identify potential points of intervention. Recently, increased attention has been drawn to how structural influences from institutions may generate additional stressors or hinder a graduate student's ability to effectively navigate common issues. Therefore, the goals of this study are to categorize and quantify the prevalence of stressors faced by engineering graduate students. To meet these aims, we collected longitudinal data from 143 engineering graduate students over 17 weeks and coded then analyzed stressors using descriptive statistics to quantify the prevalence of discrete stressors in the population. Results indicate that the most common critical events are stressors related to Graduate student issues, Coursework, Advisor Issues, Lab Equipment and Experiments, Publications, Prelim/Quals, and health and wellbeing. Furthermore, we found that graduate students are likely to experience chronic stress with critical stressor events occurring between 17.65% and 47.06% of the. Since graduate students have limited resources to aid in navigating stressors, it is common for stressors to cascade from one another. This work highlights the existence of systemic issues and the necessity of preventative rather than reactive measures to support student success and well-being.

  PublisherDOI

• Benchmarking Usage of Quality Indicators in Qualitative Human Subjects Design Theory and Methods Research

  2025-08-17

  article1st authorCorresponding

  Abstract The purpose of this paper is to benchmark current practices in how qualitative research in Design Theory and Methods fields is presented. Given that qualitative research methods are often viewed as “subjective,” and that most traditionally-trained engineering researchers have not been educated in intensive qualitative research methodologies, it is important to assess whether and how the extant literature seeks to establish credibility. Using a variety of qualitative quality indicators from other long-established traditions that regularly enforce high standards in qualitative research, we performed a content analysis of a systematically-curated corpus of publications published in ASME Journal of Mechanical Design between the years 2010-2025 in order to identify opportunities for the field to better employ and defend the use of qualitative methods. Findings from this work show that more recent papers show a higher attendance to quality concerns and employment of qualitative standards for quality, perhaps due to cross-disciplinary influence from developing peripheral fields like engineering education, and emergent researchers who have interdisciplinary training in these domains. This work also highlights the opportunity for researchers seeking to employ qualitative data in their research work by providing a more credible and legitimized way to establish quality in their methods. In addition, we hope that this work will guide reviewers of qualitative human subjects work to better assess quality of qualitative research designs and the communication of valuable qualitative research findings.

  PublisherDOI

• A Call for the expansion of intercultural competency to graduate engineering education

  2025-08-21

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Exploring the Role of Data Proficiency in Shaping Engineering Identity

  2025-08-21

  article
  PublisherDOI

• Advancing Engineering Design Research Through the Use of Qualitative and Participatory Methodologies

  2025-08-17

  articleSenior author

  Abstract Engineering design is social—both in the sense that the process of design requires social interactions and in the sense that the outcomes are embedded into society resulting in direct and indirect social effects. Qualitative and participatory methods equip researchers with approaches to not only expand existing theories but also deepen their scope and understanding of the social considerations in design. As the application of qualitative and participatory methods increase in the Design Theory and Methodology (DTM) community, there is an opportunity to reflect on their use, strengthen their quality, and consider their potential for addressing key design research questions. This paper presents themes from a special session at 2024 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences (IDETC) that included presentations and discussions on the use of qualitative and participatory research methods. Namely, effectively applying methods from other disciplines and increasing the credibility of such methods within DTM were discussed. Panelists and audience members also sparked ideas that led to our paper’s “call to action,” including being more responsible in participant sampling and engagement, increasing industry partnerships, and conducting more intentional training and mentoring across the research community. Ultimately, we encourage a strengthening of DTM research, with a particular focus on the broader social impacts of engineering design.

  PublisherDOI

• Creating Public Resources to Diversifying Content in Mechanical Engineering: Fostering Awareness and Ethical Considerations

  2025-08-21

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• Characterizing Interactions Between Master's Engineering Students and Their Environment During the Advisor-Matching Process with the Person-Environment Interaction Model

  2025-08-21

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

Recent grants

• Research: Characterizing Postdoctoral Education, Mentorship, Gender, and Race in the Formation of Academic Engineers and Computer Scientists

  NSF · $394k · 2020–2024

• Investigating the Formation of Engineers and the Future Professoriate: Linking Writing Approaches and Attitudes to Doctoral Socialization, Persistence, and Attrition

  NSF · $350k · 2017–2021

• CAREER: Characterizing Master's-Level Departure from the Engineering Doctorate through Multiple Stakeholders' Perspectives

  NSF · $671k · 2018–2026

Frequent coauthors

• Marie Paretti

  George Washington University

  82 shared

• Kelly Scarff

  Virginia Tech

  81 shared

• Elena Kalodner-Martin

  81 shared

• Ann Hill Duin

  University of Minnesota

  81 shared

• Morgan C. Banville

  81 shared

• Drake Gossi

  The University of Texas at Austin

  81 shared

• Ellen Zerbe

  Pennsylvania State University

  51 shared

• Jessica Menold

  Park University

  41 shared

Labs

• PSMES BoardPI

  The PSMES board of directors is made up of elected officers, six to nine at large members, the ME department head, and a mechanical engineering faculty member.

Awards & honors

• Sloan Fellowship Program Mentor of the Year, Sloan Foundatio…
• Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers…
• Shuman Family Early Career Professorship, Clyde W. Shuman Jr…
• NSF CAREER Award, National Science Foundation, December 2018