About

Karin Jeanne Jensen is an Adjunct Assistant Professor in Bioengineering at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. She holds a Ph.D. in Biomedical Engineering from the University of Virginia and a B.S. in Biological Engineering from Cornell University. Her research focuses on education in Biomedical Engineering, with primary interests in engineering education and systems engineering principles in signal transduction and cell-fate choice. Jensen has contributed to the development and implementation of laboratory exercises and practicals in bioengineering education, including virtual cell culture labs and enzyme kinetics measurements. She has been actively involved in professional societies such as the Biomedical Engineering Society (BMES) and the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE), serving in roles related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Jensen has received multiple teaching honors, including the ASEE Biomedical Engineering Division Teaching Award and being listed as a Teacher Ranked as Excellent multiple times. Her scholarly work includes research on drug discovery, cancer biology, and systems pharmacology, with a notable focus on engineering education within biomedical engineering.

Research topics

• Computer Science
• Engineering
• Mechanical engineering
• Sociology
• Social Science
• Aerospace engineering
• Computer network
• Engineering management
• Multimedia
• Psychology
• Pedagogy
• Operating system

Selected publications

• EXPERIENCES OF ENGINEERING STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES IN THE ACCOMMODATIONS PROCESS: A SCOPING LITERATURE REVIEW

  Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering · 2026-01-01

  articleSenior author

  Students with disabilities experience many barriers in higher education. Certain aspects of disciplinary culture may create more unwelcoming environments in engineering majors. The purpose of this literature review is to assess current scholarship describing the experiences of engineering students with disabilities as they engage in the accommodations process. Twelve studies met the criteria for this review. Common themes are that negative experiences are common; as students interact with instructors about disability and accommodations, there are various barriers to disclosure and using accommodations, including stigma, perceived negative attitudes of instructors, and costs for diagnosis; and instructor and institutional support are important to student success. When we can understand the structures that create barriers and unwelcoming climates for students with disabilities, as well as the supports and structures that create welcoming environments, then we can develop solutions that make engineering a more inclusive and equitable space.

  PublisherDOI

• Implementation of an Undergraduate Laboratory-Based Mammalian Genome Editing Course

  The CRISPR Journal · 2025-07-10

  article

  Genome engineering methods can be utilized to perform complex genetic manipulations in living cells with remarkable efficiency and precision. Given the transformative potential of these enabling technologies, their applications are steadily expanding into most biology and biomedical fields where they play a central role in many experimental frameworks. For these reasons, in order to effectively prepare future generations of biologists and bioengineers for successful careers, there is a high need to incorporate courses teaching genome editing fundamentals into existing curricula. To accomplish this objective, lecture-based courses are rapidly integrating genome editing concepts; however, there are few laboratory courses that teach the practical skills needed to successfully perform genome editing experiments. Here, we describe the development and implementation of a semester-long laboratory course that teaches students not only the techniques needed to perform gene knockout, gene activation, gene repression, and base editing in mammalian cells but also prepares them to design and troubleshoot experiments, write scientific manuscripts, as well as prepare and deliver scientific presentations. Course evaluations demonstrate that this class effectively equips students with the knowledge and hands-on experience needed to succeed in careers related to genome engineering, cell and tissue engineering, and, more broadly, biology.

  PublisherDOI

• Engineering students' attitudes and perceived norms toward disability and accommodations

  Journal of Engineering Education · 2025-08-18 · 1 citations

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  Abstract Background Engineering has its own unique disciplinary culture that establishes norms and ideals. Many of these norms and ideals are centered on White, masculine, heteronormative constructs, which tend to presuppose able‐bodiedness. Students with disabilities in engineering must navigate spaces that contain inherent social and physical barriers. Purpose/Hypothesis(es) The overarching goal of this research project is to understand the experiences of students with disabilities in engineering and to understand engineering students' attitudes and perceived norms toward disability and accommodations. Design/Method In a mixed‐methods design, quantitative survey and qualitative interview data were collected from undergraduate engineering students at a public, Midwest, R1 institution. Quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed separately and interpreted together. Results Attitudes for Academic Integrity, Accommodations Process, and Classroom Climate tended toward more positive attitudes, while Disability Acceptance and Disability Disclosure tended toward negative attitudes. Qualitative findings exploring the nuances of attitudes include the ideas of faking disability and reluctance to disclose disability. Conclusions Hidden notions of ableist ideology seem to undercurrent perceptions of disability and accommodations. Attitudes toward disability and requesting accommodations are generally positive, but some students are still reluctant to disclose their disability or use accommodations.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Composite Narratives with Arts-Based Analysis of Undergraduate Engineering Students’ Stress and Social Supports to Identify Structural Barriers

  Studies in Engineering Education · 2025-06-10 · 1 citations

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  Background: Undergraduate engineering students experience high stress and exhibit help-seeking behaviors less than non-engineering peers. Developing a deeper, comprehensive understanding of their experiences is a critical step to identifying potential changes to reduce their stress. Research identifying structural components that impact student stress can inform structural changes that decrease student stress and thus support engineering students’ mental health. Purpose/Hypothesis: We examined how narratives of engineering undergraduate experiences with stress highlight the relationship between control and identified hindrances. We then used these relationships to investigate underlying structural elements. Design/Method: We interviewed fourteen undergraduate engineering students at an R2 institution in the northeastern United States. To create narratives, we conducted a tri-fold process that consisted of thematic analysis, identification of key quotes, and arts-based memo analysis. These narratives were mapped onto the Job-Hindrance-Control-Support (JHCS) model to identify structural elements for potential change. Results: The resulting composite narratives of George and Maya presented compelling stories of students’ experiences with stress and social support that highlight underlying structural systems, and their sources of support differed. Identified structural elements impacting their experiences included their physical proximity to campus, financial resources, and support for both time management and social-emotional regulation. Conclusions: Undergraduate engineering students commonly experience high levels of stress, and recognition of identified key structural elements followed by informed, deliberate action may be one way to support student mental health.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Mental Health is Health: Insights for Supporting Student Mental Health and Well-Being from the 2024 BMES Education Summit

  Biomedical Engineering Education · 2025-07-01 · 2 citations

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding
  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• BOARD # 383: Investigating the development and manifestation of engineering students’ conceptualizations of well-being in engineering programs and careers

  2025-08-21

  article
  PublisherDOI

• BOARD # 411: NSF RFE Project Update: An exploration of how faculty advising influences doctoral student psychological safety and the impact on work-related outcomes

  2025-08-21

  article
  PublisherDOI

• Stressors and normalized stress in undergraduate engineering education culture: development of the Engineering Stress Culture Scale and Undergraduate Engineering Stressors Questionnaire

  International Journal of STEM Education · 2025-03-24 · 6 citations

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  Abstract Background Undergraduate engineering students report increased rates of mental health distress. Evidence suggests that these students experience high stress, which can perpetuate mental health challenges. Further, engineering students may engage in help-seeking and self-care activities more rarely than students in other disciplines. We hypothesize the existence of a culture of high stress that is normalized and expected by undergraduate engineering students. We leveraged interviews previously conducted by our team to develop two survey measures: (1) the Engineering Stress Culture (ESC) Scale, which measures cultural norms and expectations surrounding stress, and (2) the Undergraduate Engineering Stressors Questionnaire (U-ESQ), which measures factors that contribute to undergraduate engineering student stress experiences (stressors). Results We developed a novel, exploratory battery of items to measure students’ experiences with stress in undergraduate engineering education. After administering the new 81-item survey ( N = 624) comprising both the U-ESQ and ESC Scale, we performed exploratory factor analysis and tested the internal consistency for each factor subscale. We then refined the survey to 58 items and administered it to a second sample of participants ( N = 561) at a second institution for confirmatory factor analyses. We present evidence that the ESC Scale is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring an engineering stress culture. The final factor structure of the U-ESQ revealed eight distinct factors, each representing different stressors such as competition or identity-related experiences. We provide validity evidence for the U-ESQ. While the confirmatory evidence of the reliability of the U-ESQ instrument is less robust compared to the ESC Scale, there is acceptable evidence of reliability. This may be partially attributed to the inclusion of career-related and faculty-interaction-related stressors that may become more for salient later-stage undergraduate students, who are undersampled in our results. Conclusions We present validity and reliability evidence for the developed measures that quantify engineering student stressors and the associated high-stress culture. These measures may apply to students in other non-engineering STEM disciplines, warranting future investigations. The developed measure is a first step towards identifying and dismantling a culture of stress in engineering, which will promote student well-being and thriving.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• BOARD # 317: A Qualitative Study of Undergraduate Engineering Students’ Feelings of Being Overwhelmed

  2025-08-21

  article
  PublisherDOI

• Affordances and limitations of using large language models to generate qualitative data about mental health perceptions in engineering

  Journal of Engineering Education · 2025-12-01 · 1 citations

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  Abstract Background Generative artificial intelligence (AI) large‐language models (LLMs) have significant potential as research tools. However, the broader implications of using these tools are still emerging. Few studies have explored using LLMs to generate data for qualitative engineering education research. Purpose/Hypothesis We explore the following questions: (i) What are the affordances and limitations of using LLMs to generate qualitative data in engineering education, and (ii) in what ways might these data reproduce and reinforce dominant cultural narratives in engineering education, including narratives of high stress? Design/Methods We analyzed similarities and differences between LLM‐generated conversational data (ChatGPT) and qualitative interviews with engineering faculty and undergraduate engineering students from multiple institutions. We identified patterns, affordances, limitations, and underlying biases in generated data. Results LLM‐generated content contained similar responses to interview content. Varying the prompt persona (e.g., demographic information) increased the response variety. When prompted for ways to decrease stress in engineering education, LLM responses more readily described opportunities for structural change, while participants' responses more often described personal changes. LLM data more frequently stereotyped a response than participants did, meaning that LLM responses lacked the nuance and variation that naturally occurs in interviews. Conclusions LLMs may be a useful tool in brainstorming, for example, during protocol development and refinement. However, the bias present in the data indicates that care must be taken when engaging with LLMs to generate data. Specially trained LLMs that are based only on data from engineering education hold promise for future research.

  PublisherDOI

Recent grants

• Collaborative Research: Workshop proposal: Building Foundations for Engineering Faculty in Engineering Education Research

  NSF · $68k · 2020–2023

• EAGER Collaborative Proposal: Building a Community of Mentors in Engineering Education Research Through Peer Review Training

  NSF · $83k · 2020–2023

• CAREER: Supporting Undergraduate Mental Health by Building a Culture of Wellness in Engineering

  NSF · $351k · 2020–2023

• EAGER Collaborative Proposal: Developing Engineering Faculty as Engineering Education Researchers Through Mentorship

  NSF · $232k · 2019–2023

• Research Initiation: Understanding Student Perceptions of Engineering Stress Culture (ESC)

  NSF · $196k · 2017–2020

Frequent coauthors

• Joseph Mirabelli

  University of Tennessee at Knoxville

  83 shared

• Lisa Benson

  University of Michigan–Ann Arbor

  57 shared

• Kelsey Watts

  University of Virginia

  56 shared

• Rebecca Bates

  Minnesota State University, Mankato

  55 shared

• Gary Lichtenstein

  Arizona State University

  55 shared

• Andrea Kunze

  Delta State University

  48 shared

• Kelly Cross

  Communications Technology Laboratory

  48 shared

• Evan Ko

  University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

  43 shared

Awards & honors

• ASEE Biomedical Engineering Division Teaching Award (2020)
• List of Teachers Ranked as Excellent (15 times) (2015, 2016,…
• NSF CAREER Award (2019)
• Scholar Award, Women In Cancer Research (WICR), American Ass…
• Scholar Award, ARCS Foundation (2012)