Implementation of Interdisciplinary Group Learning and Peer Assessment in a Nanotechnology Engineering Course

Nanotechnology is an inherently interdisciplinary field that has generated significant scientific and engineering interest in recent years. In an effort to convey the excitement and opportunities surrounding this discipline to senior undergraduate students and junior graduate students, a nanotechnology engineering course has been developed in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at Northwestern University over the past two years. This paper examines the unique challenges facing educators in this dynamic, emerging field and describes an approach for the design of a nanotechnology engineering course employing the non‐traditional pedagogical practices of collaborative group learning, interdisciplinary learning, problem‐based learning, and peer assessment. Utilizing the same nanotechnology course given the year before as a historical control, analysis of the difference between measures of student performance and student experience over the two years indicates that these practices are successful and provide an educationally informed template for other newly developed engineering courses.     

Classes That Click: Fast,Rich Feedback to Enhance Student Learning and Satisfaction

Background Our goal is to improve student learning in foundation engineering courses. These courses are prerequisite to many higher‐level courses and are comprised of critically needed concepts and skills. Purpose (Hypothesis ) We hypothesize that learning is improved by providing rapid feedback to students on their understanding of key concepts and skills. Such feedback also provides students with insight into their strategies for learning. Design /Method In two consecutive years, we conducted this study in two sections of a lower‐level engineering mechanics course, Statics. One author taught both sections and a crossover design of experiment was used. In a crossover design, one section was randomly chosen to receive feedback with handheld computers (the “treatment” group) while the other received the “control,” which was either a feedback system using flashcards (in year 1) or no feedback (year 2). After a certain period, the two sections swapped the treatment and control. Student performance on a quiz at the end of each treatment period provided the data for comparison using an analysis of variance model with covariates. Results Findings from year 1 showed that there was no significant difference using either rapid‐feedback method. In year 2 we found a significant and positive effect when students received feedback. Conclusions This is a noteworthy finding, albeit within the constraints of the environment in which we conducted the study, that provides more evidence for the value of rapid feedback and the currently popular “clickers” that many professors are employing to promote classroom interaction and student engagement.     

Case Learning Methodology in Operations Engineering

Teaching operations engineering to traditional and non‐traditional engineering students using case learning methods presents both instructional challenges and provides learning rewards when performed properly. Unfortunately, few engineering faculty have had exposure to this learning approach. However, the skills are learnable and the results satisfying to instructor and student alike. The purpose of this paper is to explore case learning methods and illustrate their appropriateness for a course in operations engineering.     

The Role of Collaborative Reflection on Shaping Engineering Faculty Teaching Approaches

Over the last several years, engineering faculty and learning scientists from four universities worked in collaboration to develop educational materials to improve the quality of faculty teaching and student learning. Guided by the How People Learn (HPL) framework, engineering faculty worked in collaboration with learning scientists to develop learner‐centered, student‐focused instructional methods. In consultation with learning scientists, engineering faculty carried out educational inquiry in their classrooms aimed at investigating student learning and enhancing instruction. In this paper we discuss the extent to which faculty engaged in these collaborative endeavors and how their teaching approaches differed as a result of their level of engagement. Study findings reveal the role that collaborative reflection plays in shaping teaching approaches. Results from this study provide insights for researchers and other practitioners in engineering and higher education interested in implementing engineering faculty development programs to optimize the impact on teaching.     

Hands‐On CFD Educational Interface for Engineering Courses and Laboratories

This study describes the development, implementation, and evaluation of an effective curriculum for students to learn computational fluid dynamics (CFD) in introductory and intermediate undergraduate and introductory graduate level courses/laboratories. The curriculum is designed for use at different universities with different courses/laboratories, learning objectives, applications, conditions, and exercise notes. The common objective is to teach students from novice to expert users who are well prepared for engineering practice. The study describes a CFD Educational Interface for hands‐on student experience, which mirrors actual engineering practice. The Educational Interface teaches CFD methodology and procedures through a step‐by‐step interactive implementation automating the CFD process. A hierarchical system of predefined active options facilitates use at introductory and intermediate levels, encouraging self‐learning, and eases transition to using industrial CFD codes. An independent evaluation documents successful learning outcomes and confirms the effectiveness of the interface for students in introductory and intermediate fluid mechanics courses.     

Dynamics of Peer Education in Cooperative Learning Workgroups

Many recent studies demonstrate that cooperative learning provides a variety of educational advantages over more traditional instructional models, both in general and specifically in engineering education. Little is known, however, about the interactional dynamics among students in engineering work groups. To explore these dynamics and their implications for engineering education, we analyzed work sessions of student groups in a sophomore‐level chemical engineering course at North Carolina State University. Using conversation analysis as a methodology for understanding how students taught and learned from one another, we found that group members generally engaged in two types of teaching‐learning interactions. In the first type, transfer‐of‐knowledge (TK) sequences, they took on distinct teacher and pupil roles, and in the second, collaborative sequences (CS), they worked together with no clear role differentiation. The interactional problems that occurred during the work sessions were associated primarily with TK sequences, and had to do with students who either habitually assumed the pupil's role (constant pupils) or habitually discouraged others' contributions (blockers). Our findings suggest that professors can facilitate student group interactions by introducing students to the two modes of teaching interaction so group members can effectively manage exchanges of knowledge, and also by helping students distribute tasks in a way that minimizes role imbalances.     

Creating a Student Centered Learning Environment at the University of Denver

A team of faculty members at the University of Denver changed the learning environment in key courses in the Department of Engineering from predominately teacher centered to student centered. Through this funded project new grading methods were implemented, classrooms were renovated and wired with studio layouts to facilitate learning, the Engineering Circuits Laboratory was rewired and instrumented for automated data acquisition and reporting, and two new pedagogical approaches were developed. At the onset of the project, six goals were established related to student learning. The introduction of industry standard hardware and software provided students with unprecedented hands‐on experience and project related activities stimulated faculty innovations in other current and future courses. Assessment results indicate that the new grading system improved the clarity of expectations for students before assignments were given resulting in increased reported motivation for learning in many courses. Even though course GPAs did not always reflect higher achievement on graded work, faculty members firmly believe that deeper understanding was achieved because more complex material was assimilated.     

Lessons Learned: Implementing the Case Teaching Method in a Mechanical Engineering Course

Background Case studies have been found to increase students' critical thinking and problem‐solving skills, higher‐order thinking skills, conceptual change, and their motivation to learn. Despite the popularity of the case study approach within engineering, the empirical research on the effectiveness of case studies is limited and the research that does exist has primarily focused on student perceptions of their learning rather than actual learning outcomes. Purpose (Hypothesis ) This paper describes an investigation of the impact of case‐based instruction on undergraduate mechanical engineering students' conceptual understanding and their attitudes towards the use of case studies. Design /Method Seventy‐three students from two sections of the same mechanical engineering course participated in this study. The two sections were both taught using traditional lecture and case teaching methods. Participants completed pre‐tests, post‐tests, and a survey to assess their conceptual understanding and engagement. Results Results suggested that the majority of participants felt the use of case studies was engaging and added a lot of realism to the class. There were no significant differences between traditional lecture and case teaching method on students' conceptual understanding. However, the use of case studies did no harm to students' understanding while making the content more relevant to students. Conclusions Case‐based instruction can be beneficial for students in terms of actively engaging them and allowing them to see the application and/or relevance of engineering to the real world.     

Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research

This study examines the evidence for the effectiveness of active learning. It defines the common forms of active learning most relevant for engineering faculty and critically examines the core element of each method. It is found that there is broad but uneven support for the core elements of active, collaborative, cooperative and problem‐based learning.     

Relationship Between Time of Class and Student Grades in an Active Learning Course

Background

A factor related to students’ course performance that has seen limited research compared to other academic factors is the time of day a class is offered. Because of students’ chronotypes (i.e., preferred time of day to study or work), time of class can influence attendance, which has a strong correlation with students’ performance in a course.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The goal of this study was to investigate the relationship between class time, students’ attendance including individual and average class attendance, and students’ final grades in an active learning course.

Design/Method

The grade and attendance records of 1,577 first‐year engineering (FYE) students enrolled in 15 sections at different times of the day were analyzed using Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference and Multi‐Level Modeling to identify whether the performance and attendance of students in the early morning sections were significantly different from those in the other sections and to differentiate the individual and class attendance in relation to students’ grades.

Results

Students enrolled in early morning and late Friday afternoon classes had lower attendance and final grades than students in other sections. Class average attendance had a significant relationship with students’ grades. Thus, in active learning classes, both an individual student's and classmates’ absences have a negative relationship with an individual student's grade.

Conclusion

FYE students are more likely to miss early morning classes. In a course based on active learning, this lower attendance has a negative relationship with student performance for all students in the class, including the ones who attend the class regularly, suggesting active learning may amplify the negative effects of missing classes.     

Improving Learning in First‐Year Engineering Courses through Interdisciplinary Collaborative Assessment

This paper describes a feedback process that assessed first‐year engineering student learning using a mastery exam. The results were used to improve learning and teaching in first‐year courses. To design the initial exam, basic knowledge and concepts were identified by instructors from each of the host departments (Chemistry, Math, Physics and Computer Science). In 2004, the 45‐item exam was administered to 191 second‐year engineering students, and in September 2005, the revised exam was administered to the next class of second‐year engineering students. The exam was analyzed using Item Response Theory (IRT) to determine student abilities in each subject area tested. Between exam administrations, workshops were conducted with the four department instructor groups to present exam results and discuss teaching issues. The exam provided a learning assessment mechanism that can be used to engage faculty in science, mathematics, and engineering in productive linkages for continual improvement to curriculum.     

A Multimodal Exploration of Engineering Students' Emotions and Electrodermal Activity in Design Activities

Background

This exploratory study uses multimodal approaches to explore undergraduate student engagement via topic emotions and electrodermal activity (EDA) in different engineering design method activities and with different instructional delivery formats (e.g., lecture vs. active learning).

Purpose/Hypothesis

The goal of this research is to improve our understanding of how students respond, via engagement, to their engineering design activities during class. This study hypothesizes that students would experience no self‐reported mean changes in topic emotions from their preassessment scores for each engineering design topic and instructional format nor would electrodermal activities (EDA) associate to these topic emotions throughout the design activities.

Design/Method

Eighty‐eight freshmen engineering students completed online pretopic and posttopic emotions surveys for five engineering design activities. A subset of 14–18 participants, the focal point of this study, wore an EDA sensor while completing the surveys and participating in these sessions.

Results

Preliminary findings suggest that EDA increased for individual and collaborative active learning activities compared to lectures. No significant changes in EDA were found between individual and collaborative active learning activities. Moderate negative correlations were found between EDA and negative topic emotions in the first engineering design activity but not across the rest. At the end of the semester, active learning activities showed higher effect sizes indicating a re‐enforcement of students' engagement in the engineering design method activities.

Conclusion

This study provides initial results showing how multimodal approaches can help researchers understand students' closer‐to‐real‐time engagement in engineering design topics and instructional delivery formats.     

Student Performance and Acceptance of Instructional Technology: Comparing Technology‐Enhanced and Traditional Instruction for a Course in Statics

The College of Engineering at the University of Cincinnati has evaluated the use of instructional technologies to improve the learning process for students in fundamental engineering science courses. The goal of this effort was to both retain more students in engineering programs and improve student performance through appropriate use of technology. Four modes of instruction were used to teach an engineering fundamentals course in statics. A traditional instructor‐led course, a Web‐assisted course, a streaming media course, and an interactive video course were all presented using a common syllabus, homework, tests, and grading regimen. Evaluations of final course grades indicate that use of instructional technology improved student performance when compared with traditional teaching methods. Student satisfaction with technology varied considerably with the Web‐assisted format having the highest student approval rating of the technologies. The results indicate that time on task and interest in content can be improved through the appropriate use of technology.     

2006 Bernard M. Gordon Prize Lecture*: The Learning Factory: Industry‐Partnered Active Learning

On February 21, 2006, the National Academy of Engineering recognized the achievements of the Learning Factory with the Bernard M. Gordon Prize for Innovation in Engineering and Technology Education. The co‐founders were commended “for creating the Learning Factory, where multidisciplinary student teams develop engineering leadership skills by working with industry to solve real‐world problems.” This paper describes the origins, motivation, philosophy, and implementation of the Learning Factory. The specific innovations of the Learning Factory partnership were: active learning facilities, called Learning Factories, that provide experiential reinforcement of engineering science, and a realization of its limitations; strong collaborations with industry through advisory boards, engineers in the classroom, and industry‐sponsored capstone design projects; practice‐based engineering courses integrating analytical and theoretical knowledge with manufacturing, design, business concepts, and professional skills; and dissemination to other academic institutions (domestic and international), government and industry.     

Using Log Assignments to Foster Learning: Revisiting Writing across the Curriculum

During the past several years, the authors have conducted experiments in the use of writing to learn (WTL) techniques in sophomore‐level engineering mechanics courses at West Virginia University (WVU). The work was a collaborative effort between a doctoral candidate in the Curriculum and Instruction Department and an Associate Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering. This paper focuses on the effectiveness of several writing to learn strategies, assigned and completed in the Engineer's Log, which students identified as successful methods for learning. We present and discuss these strategies using sample log entries to illustrate their use and to suggest that expressive writing, or writing for the self, continues to prove itselfa successful technique for learning. Finally, we evaluate the data provided and discuss our results.     

Hands‐On,Minds‐On Electric Power Education*

ABET Engineering Criteria 2000 has encouraged changes in engineering education. The deregulation of the electric power industry is also causing changes in the types of jobs power engineers take upon graduation. This paper describes efforts by power faculty at Kansas State University to provide students more hands‐on active learning experience with power systems and machinery. A summary of the power curriculum is provided. The courses affected include an energy conversion course required of all electrical engineering students, and a new power laboratory course required of students taking the electric power option. Examples of student assignments are provided. Observations and discussion of the in‐class experiences are provided. The paper describes work done and in progress to convert the traditional power courses into studio‐type courses in which instruction can flow from lecture to laboratory to computer demonstration formats with ease. Future plans for the project are also discussed.     

The Effect of Social Presence on Affective and Cognitive Learning in an International Engineering Course Taught via Distance Learning

Background Distance learning course formats can alter modes of information exchange and interpersonal interaction relative to traditional course formats. Purpose (Hypothesis ) To determine the effect of a distance course format on the knowledge acquisition (cognitive learning) and satisfaction (affective learning) of students, we investigated student learning responses and social presence during a graduate‐level engineering course taught via traditional (i.e., professor present in the classroom) and synchronous distance‐learning formats. Design /Method Direct quantification of participation, academic performance assessment based on homework and exam scores, and survey‐based assessments of student perceptions of the course were collected. Based on these data, cognitive and affective learning responses to different technological and interaction‐based aspects of the course were determined for each course format. Results We show that while affective learning decreased for students in the distance format course relative to the traditional format, cognitive learning was comparable. Our results suggest that loss of satellite connection and audio losses had a stronger negative effect on student perceptions than video disturbances, and that participation was the most important factor influencing affective learning. Conclusions While our findings do not suggest that cognitive learning is strongly affected by social presence, implementing strategies to enhance social presence may improve the overall learning experience and make distance learning more enjoyable for students.     

e‐Lab: An Electronic Classroom for Real‐Time Distance Delivery of a Laboratory Course

The Internet continues to demonstrate its versatility as a learning tool in the realm of higher education. As courses in everything from art history to engineering are offered on the Internet, we are experiencing a transition from traditional textbook and lecture teaching method to the virtual classroom. Yet, effective distance delivery of engineering laboratory courses remains a challenging problem. This paper introduces a new approach to deliver a senior‐level laboratory course at a distance in real‐time. The enabling technology is the combination of an interactive TV system and the Internet. The paper presents details of the laboratory setup and five sessions. Data collected for the past two years are analyzed statistically to assess student learning and achievement of learning objectives of each laboratory. Results of the analysis as well as surveys indicate that the e‐Lab created an effective learning environment.     

Experiences of First‐Year Engineering Students Working on Ill‐Structured Problems in Teams

Background

As engineers solve problems that are ill‐structured and require collaboration, a common goal of engineering programs is to develop students' competencies for solving such problems in teams, often using cornerstone design experiences.

Purpose

With the goal of designing effective learning environments, this study identifies qualitatively different ways that engineering students experienced ill‐structured problems while working in teams.

Design/Method

This phenomenographic study employs interview data from 27 first‐year engineering students. Iterative data analysis resulted in categories of student experiences and their logical relationships.

Results

Seven categories describing collaborative, ill‐structured problem‐solving experiences emerged: completion, transition, iteration, organization, collaboration, reasoning, and growth. These categories are organized in an outcome space along dimensions we call reaction to ambiguity and use of multiple perspectives that can be used to frame students' perspectives from less comprehensive to more comprehensive.

Conclusions

First‐year engineering students experience team‐based, ill‐structured problem solving in a variety of ways. The resulting outcome space is of practical use to educators who teach courses involving collaborative, ill‐structured problem solving.