Proceedings of ESCAPE 36ISSN: 2818-4734
Volume: 5 (2026)
Table of Contents
LAPSE:2026.0530
Published Article
LAPSE:2026.0530
Assessing Workflow Automation Platforms in Engineering Education: Towards an Ethical, Technical, and Pedagogical Framework
June 12, 2026
Abstract
Workflow automation platforms connect applications and services to automate data transfer and multistep processes. Although widely used in engineering research and institutional administration, including engineering institutions, they are rarely integrated into undergraduate engineering curricula, and their educational adoption introduces ethical, technical, and pedagogical risks. This paper proposes a practical framework for developing, deploying, and assessing workflow-automation-enabled learning tools coupled with generative AI, with explicit attention to institutional constraints and learning outcomes. As a conceptual case study, we present it in a second-year chemical engineering course (Heat and Mass Transfer) to support learning of heat conduction. The platform includes instructor-approved assets such as content slides, solved problems, pre-prompts, and a validated question database, through an automation pipeline that issues structured API calls to a generative AI system and returns explanations and worked examples. A subject matter expert (SME) authors and tests prompt modules aligned with learning outcomes mapped to Bloom's taxonomy levels (understand, apply, analyze, evaluate) and aligned with accreditation expectations. Effectiveness metrics are proposed to estimate learning gains, and a tool quality audit and an SME review are used to verify conceptual correctness and computational validity. To assess risks, we apply a likelihood-impact risk matrix and define five categories: data privacy and protection, transparency, pedagogical impact, institutional compliance, and ethical considerations. Preliminary analysis suggests potential concept gains from structured prompt/content integration but indicates that numerical problem reliability depends strongly on question-database coverage. The highest perceived risks relate to privacy and transparency, followed by pedagogical impact, motivating mitigations such as anonymization protocols, restricted data pathways, and human verification throughout the lifecycle.
Keywords
Bloom taxonomy, effectiveness assessment, Generative AI, risk assessment, Workflow automation platforms
Suggested Citation
Galatro D, Grey S, Chakraborty S. Assessing Workflow Automation Platforms in Engineering Education: Towards an Ethical, Technical, and Pedagogical Framework. Systems and Control Transactions 5:2607-2612 (2026) https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.103221
Author Affiliations
Galatro D: University of Toronto, Department of Chemical Engineering & Applied Chemistry, Toronto, Ontario, Canada [ORCID]
Grey S: University of Glasgow, James Watt School of Engineering, Glasgow, United Kingdom [ORCID]
Chakraborty S: Johns Hopkins University, Whiting School of Engineering, Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Baltimore, Maryland, United States [ORCID]
[Login] to see author email addresses.
Journal Name
Systems and Control Transactions
Volume
5
First Page
2607
Last Page
2612
Year
2026
Publication Date
2026-06-12
Version Comments
Original Submission
Other Meta
PII: 2607-2612-43-SCT-5-2026, Publication Type: Journal Article
Record Map
Published Article

LAPSE:2026.0530
This Record
External Link

https://doi.org/10.69997/sct.103221
Publisher Version
Download
Files
Jun 12, 2026
Main Article
License
CC BY-SA 4.0
Meta
Record Statistics
Record Views
300
Version History
[v1] (Original Submission)
Jun 12, 2026
 
Verified by curator on
Jun 12, 2026
This Version Number
v1
Citations
Most Recent
This Version
URL Here
https://psecommunity.org/LAPSE:2026.0530
 
Record Owner
PSE Press
Links to Related Works
Directly Related to This Work
Publisher Version
References Cited
  1. Tuyishime A, Basciani F, Iovino L, Izquierdo JLC, Cabot J, Pierantonio A. Bridging workflow automation tools and EMF modeling ecosystems. 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems Companion (MODELS-C) :893-897 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1109/models-c59198.2023.00140
  2. Siva Prakash Bikka . Workflow automation engines: driving innovation in cloud-native and ai-enhanced business processes. Int. J. Sci. Res. Comput. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol 11:282-289 (2025) https://doi.org/10.32628/cseit25111227
  3. Marchena Sekli G, Godo A. Transforming teaching and learning with robotic process automation: a systematic review of pedagogical applications. JITE:Research 24:039 (2025) https://doi.org/10.28945/5655
  4. Abduvohid X. The role and importance of using automated design systems in the educational process. eijp 5:75-79 (2025) https://doi.org/10.55640/eijp-05-09-16
  5. Hawkinson E. Is education falling into the automation abyss? why struggle and human connection is essential for learning in an ai-driven world. together 2: (2025) https://doi.org/10.62883/ijpj5817
  6. Ma Y, Li X, Hu S, Liu S, Cheong KH. Trustworthy AI in education: framework, cases, and governance strategies. Innov. Emerg. Technol. 12: (2025) https://doi.org/10.1142/s2737599425500264
  7. Dabis A, Csáki C. AI and ethics: investigating the first policy responses of higher education institutions to the challenge of generative AI. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11: (2024) https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03526-z
  8. Geethanjali KS, Umashankar N. Enhancing educational outcomes with explainable AI: bridging transparency and trust in learning systems. 2025 International Conference on Emerging Systems and Intelligent Computing (ESIC) :325-328 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1109/esic64052.2025.10962568
  9. Vivian R. From artificial intelligence to real dummies. Digital Technol. Res. Appl. 4:1-13 (2025) https://doi.org/10.54963/dtra.v4i2.1205
  10. Westover JH. AI in education: building learning systems that elevate rather than erode human capability. HCLReview 27: (2025) https://doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.27.4.4
  11. Gonsalves C. Generative ai's impact on critical thinking: revisiting bloom's taxonomy. Journal of Marketing Education 48:4-19 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1177/02734753241305980
  12. Tian J, Zhang R. Learners' AI dependence and critical thinking: the psychological mechanism of fatigue and the social buffering role of AI literacy. Acta Psychologica 260:105725 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105725
  13. Qian K, Liu S, Li T, Rakovi? M, Li X, Guan R, Molenaar I, Nawaz S, Swiecki Z, Yan L, Gaševi? D. Towards reliable generative ai-driven scaffolding: reducing hallucinations and enhancing quality in self-regulated learning support. Computers & Education 240:105448 (2026) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2025.105448
(0.1 seconds)

[0.1 s]