This research article presents the importance of psychological safety in engineering education. Anchoring the importance of teamwork and team-based learning, we synthesize the common issues of dysfunctional team dynamics and coping strategies based on relevant literature. Particularly, it is critical to better manage student teams and monitor student team dynamics, particularly psychological safety based on archived literature in industrial-organizational psychology and management and recent empirical studies in engineering education. Psychological safety, defined as a shared belief that a team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking, is shown to enhance team trust, communication, and collaboration. This paper presents the critical role of psychological safety in teamwork, enabling equitable participation and fostering inclusive learning environments, especially for disadvantaged students in teaming. The manuscript concludes with recommendations for approaches to enhance psychological safety by raising awareness, supporting disadvantaged students in teaming, and fostering inclusive learning environments. By fostering inclusivity and empowering all students to contribute to the teams meaningfully and effectively, psychological safety not only addresses the immediate challenges of team-based learning but also remediates students' intention to leave engineering major, ultimately leading to broader participation in engineering.

1. Murzi H. Team-based learning theory applied to engineering education: a systematic review of literature. 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings; 2014.

2. Najdanovic-Visak V. Team-based learning for first year engineering students. Educ Chem Eng. 2017;18:26-34.

3. Parappilly M, Woodman RJ, Randhawa S. Feasibility and effectiveness of different models of team-based learning approaches in STEMM-based disciplines. Res Sci Educ. 2021;51(1):391-405.

4. Passow HJ. Which ABET competencies do engineering graduates find most important in their work? J Engineering Edu. 2012;101(1):95-118.

5. ABET. Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, 2024 - 2025. Accessed May 10, 2024. https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering-programs-2024-2025/#GC3

6. Picard C, Hardebolle C, Tormey R, Schiffmann J. Which professional skills do students learn in engineering team-based projects? Eur J Eng Educ. 2022;47(2):314-32.

7. Loughry ML, Ohland MW, Woehr DJ. Assessing teamwork skills for assurance of learning using CATME team tools. J Mark Educ. 2014;36(1):5-19.

8. China Engineering Education Accreditation Association, “Engineering Education accreditation criteria (2024 Version),” 2024. https://www.ceeaa.org.cn/gcjyzyrzxh/xwdt/tzgg56/677023/2024120114575853318.pdf

9. Carroll LJ, Reeping D, Finelli CJ, et al. Barriers instructors experience in adopting active learning: Instrument development. J Engineering Edu. 2023;112(4):1079-108.

10. Rodriguez-Sanchez C, Orellana R, Fernandez Barbosa PR, Borromeo S, Vaquero J. Insights 4.0: Transformative learning in industrial engineering through problem-based learning and project-based learning. Comp Applic Engineering. 2024;32(4):e22736.

11. Vaghela MK, Kaushal DU. A systematic review of research on pedagogical practices for communication skills in engineering education. J Eng Educ Transform. 2023;37(3):99-120.

12. Falade F. Change in the training mode of excellent engineers. Engin Edu Rev. 2023;1(1):8-15.

13. Kolmos A, Graaff de E. Problem-based and project-based learning in engineering education. In: Johri A, and Olds BM, eds. Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research. Cambridge University Press; 2014: 141-160.

14. Ke W, Wei Y, Hu C,et al. Study on engineering capability cultivation of postgraduate with university-enterprise joint projects. Engin Edu Rev. 2024;2:92-100.

15. Adya M, Temple BK, Hepburn DM. Distant yet near: promoting interdisciplinary learning in significantly diverse teams through socially responsible projects. Decision Sci J Innov Edu. 2015;13(2):121-49.

16. Chen J, Kolmos A, Du X. Forms of implementation and challenges of PBL in engineering education: a review of literature. Eur J Eng Educ. 2021;46(1):90-115.

17. Walker ER, Lang DL, Caruso BA, Salas-Hernández L. Role of team dynamics in the learning process: a mixed-methods evaluation of a modified team-based learning approach in a behavioral research methods course. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2020;25(2):383-99.    DOI: 10.1007/s10459-019-09931-3    PMID: 31686293

18. Singaram VS, Dolmans DH, Lachman N, van der Vleuten CP. Perceptions of problem-based learning (PBL) group effectiveness in a socially-culturally diverse medical student population. Educ Health (Abingdon). 2008;21(2):116.    PMID: 19039743

19. Peterson TO. So you’re thinking of trying problem based learning?: three critical success factors for implementation. J Manag Educ. 2004;28(5):630-47.

20. Bolton MK. The role of coaching in student teams: a “just-in-time” approach to learning. J Manag Educ. 1999;23(3):233-50.

21. Yusof KM, Ahmad Helmi Syed Hassan S, Jamaludin MZ, Harun NF. Cooperative problem-based learning (CPBL): framework for integrating cooperative learning and problem-based learning. Procedia Soc Behav Sci. 2012;56:223-32.

22. Oxford RL. Cooperative learning, collaborative learning, and interaction: three communicative strands in the language classroom. Mod Lang J. 1997;81(4):443-56.

23. Forsyth DR. “Introduction to group dynamics,” in Group Dynamics, 6th ed. Wadsworth Cengage Learning; 2014: 1-34.

24. Beigpourian B. Understanding the relationship between team dynamics on peer evaluations and team effectiveness. Purdue University. 2010 (Thesis)

25. Borrego M, Karlin J, McNair LD, Beddoes K. Team effectiveness theory from industrial and organizational psychology applied to engineering student project teams: a research review. J Engineering Edu. 2013;102(4):472-512.

26. Lencioni PM. The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. John Wiley & Son; 2010.

27. Wildman JL, Nguyen DM, Duong NS, Warren C. Student teamwork during COVID-19: challenges, changes, and consequences. Small Group Res. 2021;52(2):119-34.    DOI: 10.1177/1046496420985185    PMID: 38603110

28. Wei S, Tan L, Zhang Y, Ohland M. The effect of the emergency shift to virtual instruction on student team dynamics. Eur J Eng Educ. 2024;49(1):139-63.

29. Jassawalla A, Sashittal H, Sashittal A. Students' perceptions of social loafing: its antecedents and consequences in undergraduate business classroom teams. Acad Manag Learn Educ. 2009;8(1):42-54.

30. Charbonnier E, Huguet P, Brauer M, Monteil J-M. Social loafing and self-beliefs: people’s collective effort depends on the extent to which they distinguish themselves as better than others. Soc Behav Pers. 1998;26(4):329-40.

31. Smith BN, Kerr NA, Markus MJ, Stasson MF. Individual differences in social loafing: need for cognition as a motivator in collective performance. Group Dyn Theory Res Pract. 2001;5(2):150-8.

32. Hart JW, Karau SJ, Stasson MF, Kerr NA. Achievement motivation, expected coworker performance, and collective task motivation: working hard or hardly Working? J Appl Soc Psychol. 2004;34(5):984-1000.

33. Liden RC, Wayne SJ, Jaworski RA, Bennett N. Social loafing: a field investigation. J Manag. 2004;30(2):285-304.

34. Price KH. Working hard to get people to loaf. Basic Appl Soc Psychol. 1993;14(3):329-44.

35. Ohland MW, Loughry ML, Woehr DJ,et al. The comprehensive assessment of team member effectiveness: development of a behaviorally anchored rating scale for self- and peer evaluation. Acad Manag Learn Educ. 2012;11(4):609-30.

36. Dickerson DA, Masta S, Ohland MW, Pawley AL. Is Carla grumpy? Analysis of peer evaluations to explore microaggressions and other marginalizing behaviors in engineering student teams. J Engineering Edu. 2024;113(3):603-34.

37. Beddoes K, Panther G. Gender and teamwork: an analysis of professors’ perspectives and practices. Eur J Eng Educ. 2018;43(3):330-43.

38. Trytten D, Pan R, Foor C, Shehab R, Walden S. Inclusion or exclusion? the impact of the intersection of team culture and student identity and pathway on team diversity. 2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition Proceedings; 2015.

39. Williams CE, Woehr DJ, Loignon AC, Loughry M, Ohland MW. “Men behaving badly or gender bias? An examination of gender effects in peer assessment ratings”. Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology; 2018.

40. Wolfe J, Powell B, Schlisserman S, Kirshon A. Teamwork in engineering undergraduate classes: what problems do students experience? 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings; 2016.

41. Tonso KL. Teams that work: campus culture, engineer identity, and social interactions. J Eng Educ. 2006;95(1):25-37.

42. Sue DW, Capodilupo CM, Torino GC,et al. Racial microaggressions in everyday life: implications for clinical practice. Am Psychol. 2007;62(4):271-86.

43. Newman A, Donohue R, Eva N. Psychological safety: a systematic review of the literature. Hum Resour Manag Rev. 2017;27(3):521-35.

44. Leonardi PM, Jackson MH, Diwan A. The enactment-externalization dialectic: rationalization and the persistence of counterproductive technology design practices in student engineering. Acad Manag J. 2009;52(2):400-20.

45. Stein RE, Colyer CJ, Manning J. Student accountability in team-based learning classes. Teach Sociol. 2016;44(1):28-38.

46. Lopes L, Aronson M, Carstensen G, Smith C. Optimization support for senior design project assignments. Interfaces. 2008;38(6):448-64.

47. Zhou Z, Pazos P. Managing engineering capstone design teams: A review of critical issues and success factors. In: Guan Y, H. Liao H, eds. 2014 Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference. , 2014: 3006-3011.

48. Laguette S. Development of high-performance capstone project teams and the selection process. 2010 Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings; 2010: 15.419.1-15.419.10.

49. Layton RA, Loughry ML, Ohland MW, Ricco GD. Design and validation of a web-based system for assigning members to teams using instructor-specified criteria. Adv Eng Educ. 2010;2(1):1-28.

50. Beigpourian B, Ohland MW. Dynamics of mixed-gender teams in engineering education. Int J Eng Educ. 2022;38(3):774-785.

51. Felder RM Brent R. “Teamwork skills,” in Teaching and Learning STEM: A Practical Guide. CA: John Wiley & Son; 2016:245-269.

52. Wei S, Ohland M, Ferguson D. Comparing teamwork peer evaluations between culturally homogenous teams and culturally diverse teams. 2019 FYEE Conference Proceedings; 2019.

53. Wei S, Ohland M. Team tenure - the longitudinal study of engineering student peer rating quality. 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings; 2022.

54. Rodríguez-Simmonds HE, Godwin A, Langus T, Pearson N, Kirn A. Building inclusion in engineering teaming practices. Stud Eng Educ. 2023;3(2):31-59.

55. Magana AJ, Amuah T, Aggrawal S, Patel DA. Teamwork dynamics in the context of large-size software development courses. Int J STEM Educ. 2023;10(1):57.

56. Tuckman BW, Jensen MAC. Stages of small-group development revisited. Group Organ Stud. 1977;2(4):419-27.

57. Wei S, Mehrabi A, Tan L, Ohland M. Revisiting tuckman’s team development model in first-year engineering multicultural teams. 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings; 2023.

58. Beigpourian B, Luchini F, Ohland M, Ferguson D. Psychological safety as an effective measurement in engineering classrooms. 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings; 2019.

59. Edmondson AC. Managing the risk of learning: Psychological safety in work teams. In: West M, Tjosvold D, Smith K, eds. International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Work, , Wiley; 2003: 255-275.

60. Edmondson A. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Adm Sci Q. 1999;44(2):350-83.

61. Wei S, Ohland MM. WIP: predicting psychological safety by individual and team-level factors across engineering project life span using multilevel models of change. 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE); 2022: 1-4.

62. Zhang Y, Wan MM. The double-edged sword effect of psychological safety climate: a theoretical framework. Team Perform Manag. 2021;27(5/6):377-90.

63. Edmondson AC, Lei Z. Psychological safety: the history, renaissance, and future of an interpersonal construct. Annu Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behav. 2014;1:23-43.

64. Traylor AM, Wettergreen M, Woods G, Oden ZM, E. Salas E. Ten teamwork findings from student design teams. Int J Eng Educ. 2020;36(1B):378-387.

65. Takai S,Bittorf J.A study of team characteristics that correlate with team performance in a capstone design course. Int J Eng Educ. 2020;36(5):1681-90.

66. Akan OH, Jack EP, Mehta A. Concrescent conversation environment, psychological safety, and team effectiveness. Team Perform Manag. 2020;26(1/2):29-51.

67. Ostermeier K, Davis M, Pavur R. Personality configurations in teams: a comparison of compilation and composition models. Team Perform Manag. 2020;26(3/4):227-46.

68. Zhou W, Zhu Z, Vredenburgh D. Emotional intelligence, psychological safety, and team decision making. Team Perform Manag. 2020;26(1/2):123-41.

69. Huggins RAC, Scheepers CB. An integration team’s diagnosing of context, spanning boundaries and creating psychological safety within a multiteam system. Team Perform Manag. 2019;25(5/6):279-98.

70. Van den Bossche P, Gijselaers WH, Segers M, Kirschner PA. Social and cognitive factors driving teamwork in collaborative learning environments. Small Group Res. 2006;37(5):490-521.

71. Harrison DA, Klein KJ. What’s the difference?diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Acad Manag Rev. 2007;32(4):1199-228.

72. Beigpourian B. Psychological safety and team member effectiveness of minoritized students in engineering education. J Women Minor Sci Eng. 2024;30(6):7-84.

73. Bransby DP, Kerrissey M, Edmondson AC. Paradise lost (and restored?): a study of psychological safety over time. Acad Manag Discov.    DOI: 10.5465/amd.2023.0084

74. Dulebohn JH, Hoch JE. Virtual teams in organizations. Hum Resour Manag Rev. 2017;27(4):569-74.

75. Marlow SL, Lacerenza CN, Salas E. Communication in virtual teams: a conceptual framework and research agenda. Hum Resour Manag Rev. 2017;27(4):575-89.

76. Magana AJ, Karabiyik T, Thomas P, Jaiswal A, Perera V, Dworkin J. Teamwork facilitation and conflict resolution training in a HyFlex course during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Eng Edu. 2022;111(2):446-73.    DOI: 10.1002/jee.20450    PMID: 37745167

77. Wei S.Psychological safety in first-year engineering teams. Purdue University. 2024. (Thesis)

78. Wei S , Ohland MW. Exploring personal cultural orientation as an antecedent of psychological safety in teams of first-year engineering students. 34th Australasian Association for Engineering Education Conference; 2023.

79. Wei S, Ferguson D, Ohland M, Beigpourian B. Examining the cultural influence on peer ratings of teammates between international and domestic students. 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings; 2019.

80. Castaneda DI, Mejia JA. Culturally relevant pedagogy: an approach to foster critical consciousness in civil engineering. J Prof Issues Eng Educ Pract. 2018;144(2):02518002.

81. Jordan SS, Foster CH, Anderson IK, Betoney CA, Pangan TJD. Learning from the experiences of Navajo engineers: looking toward the development of a culturally responsive engineering curriculum. J Engineering Edu. 2019;108(3):355-76.

82. McGee EO. Devalued Black and Latino racial identities: A by-product of STEM college culture? Am Educ Res J. 2016;53(6):1626-62.    DOI: 10.3102/0002831216676572

83. Gallo A. What is psychological safety. Harvard Business Review.Accessed March 14, 2024. https://hbr.org/2023/02/what-is-psychological-safety?utm_medium=paidsearch&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=domcontent_leadership&utm_term=Non-Brand&tpcc=domcontent_leadership&gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAAD9b3uQll8kVrM-gWeAi3ZxDWHj2J&gclid=Cj0KCQiAkJO8BhCGARIsAMkswyg4v48Y-tvytwxutSUMhzFqb5Aejk6wUWXNQUW0m7VfEq4_3tygnfUaAkwfEALw_wcB

84. Edmondson AC, Bransby DP. Psychological safety comes of age: observed themes in an established literature. Annu Rev Organ Psychol Organ Behav. 2023;10:55-78