Michael J. Prince

Self-regulation and autonomy in problem- and project-based learning environments

Investigations of the relationships between contexts in which learning occurs and students’ behaviours, cognitions and motivations may further our understanding of how instruction is related to students’ development as self-regulated learners. In this study, student self-regulated learning strategies in problem-based learning and project-based learning environments were examined to determine whether student self-regulation outcomes differed depending on the instructional design. Quantitative results showed that student motivations and behaviours were not statistically different in the two settings. Differences in cognitions associated with self-regulated learning were, however, observed in the two settings, with students in the project-based environments reporting higher levels of elaboration, critical thinking and metacognition. In addition, students in the project-based courses reported higher perceived autonomy support, or the degree to which they perceived their instructors provided them with supportive opportunities to act and think independently compared to students in the problem-based courses. These findings indicate that different non-traditional student-centred learning environments may support different outcomes related to self-regulated learning.

Estimates of Use of Research-Based Instructional Strategies in Core Electrical or Computer Engineering Courses

Many research-based instruction strategies (RBISs) have been developed; their superior efficacy with respect to student learning has been demonstrated in many studies. Collecting and interpreting evidence about: 1) the extent to which electrical and computer engineering (ECE) faculty members are using RBISs in core, required engineering science courses, and 2) concerns that they express about using them, are important aspects of understanding how engineering education is evolving. The authors surveyed ECE faculty members, asking about their awareness and use of selected RBISs. The survey also asked what concerns ECE faculty members had about using RBISs. Respondent data showed that awareness of RBISs was very high, but estimates of use of RBISs, based on survey data, varied from 10% to 70%, depending on characteristics of the strategy. The most significant concern was the amount of class time that using an RBIS might take; efforts to increase use of RBISs must address this.

Project Catalyst: promoting systemic change in engineering education

Project Catalyst is an NSF-funded initiative to promote systemic change in engineering education by integrating instructional design techniques, transforming the classroom into a cooperative learning environment, and incorporating the use of information technology in the teaching/learning process. A conceptual framework is described to aid in shifting and supporting students and instructors activities in a transition from a traditional mode to a collaborative mode of instruction. In the first year of Project Catalyst, a core group of engineering faculty has begun implementing this focused shift by introducing a greater emphasis on team building, teamwork, cooperative learning, problem-based learning, and information technology. This paper discusses our enhanced instructional model and the supplementary skills modules that we will develop and use to implement this model. It concludes with the future work for the remaining two years of the NSF-funded project.

Repairing Engineering Students’ Misconceptions About Energy and Thermodynamics

The concept of “energy” is central to the discipline of engineering; design of systems from heart valves to aircraft carriers relies in significant part on manipulation of energy to the engineer’s ends. Undergraduate engineering students encounter energy and energy-related concepts in a number of courses throughout their curricula in preparation for designing such systems in their careers. To work successfully with energy, engineering students need to understand the impacts of the allied concepts of the second law, internal energy and enthalpy, the distinction between energy and temperature, and the distinction between rate and amount of energy transfer. Students who demonstrate computational faculty with these areas may still exhibit significant misunderstandings about the underlying concepts when asked purely conceptual questions. Misunderstanding of energy related concepts will hinder students’ ability to correctly address problems at an expert level. Further, accurate conceptual understanding is key to sharing their work with the broader public. Understanding energy related concepts more accurately will enable broader society to make better choices about technology, energy conservation, and investment of resources. While standard lecture courses do little to reverse misconceptions in this and other areas, active engagement methods show significant promise for improving students’ understanding. We describe one approach, inquiry-based activities, that has shown promise in long-term repair of engineering students’ misconceptions in energy-related areas.

Strategies to mitigate student resistance to active learning

BackgroundResearch has shown that active learning promotes student learning and increases retention rates of STEM undergraduates. Yet, instructors are reluctant to change their teaching approaches for several reasons, including a fear of student resistance to active learning. This paper addresses this issue by building on our prior work which demonstrates that certain instructor strategies can positively influence student responses to active learning. We present an analysis of interview data from 17 engineering professors across the USA about the ways they use strategies to reduce student resistance to active learning in their undergraduate engineering courses.ResultsOur data reveal that instructor strategies for reducing student resistance generally fall within two broad types: explanation and facilitation strategies. Explanation strategies consist of the following: (a) explain the purpose, (b) explain course expectations, and (c) explain activity expectations. Facilitation strategies include the following: (a) approach non-participants, (b) assume an encouraging demeanor, (c) grade on participation, (d) walk around the room, (e) invite questions, (f) develop a routine, (g) design activities for participation, and (h) use incremental steps. Four of the strategies emerged from our analysis and were previously unstudied in the context of student resistance.ConclusionsThe findings of this study have practical implications for instructors wishing to implement active learning. There is a variety of strategies to reduce student resistance to active learning, and there are multiple successful ways to implement the strategies. Importantly, effective use of strategies requires some degree of intentional course planning. These strategies should be considered as a starting point for instructors seeking to better incorporate the use of active learning strategies into their undergraduate engineering classrooms.

Integrating quantitative and qualitative research methods to examine student resistance to active learning

ABSTRACT Engineering education researchers are increasingly integrating qualitative and quantitative research methods to study learning and retention in engineering. While quantitative methods can provide generalisable results, qualitative methods generate rich, descriptive understanding of the investigated phenomenon. On the other hand, a mixed methods approach provides benefits of the two approaches by incorporating them in a single study. However, engineering faculty often faces difficulty in integrating qualitative and quantitative methods and designs in their education research. This article discusses mixed methods in the context of an actual ongoing engineering education research project investigating student resistance to active learning. We describe the research design in phases that show the integration of quantitative and qualitative results, and how these data sources can help influence the direction of the research and triangulate findings. Our mixed method research experience highlights the importance of thinking iteratively between qualitative and quantitative data sources during the instrument development process.

Undergraduate Engineering Students’ Understanding of Heat, Temperature, and Energy: An Examination by Gender and Major

Previous research has found that engineering students have difficulty distinguishing among heat, energy, and temperature concepts. Factors affecting the rate and amount of heat transferred, distinctions between temperature and energy, differences between temperature and how hot/cold something feels, and the effects of surface properties on heat transfer by radiation have been recurrently problematic. Since graduates need to understand these concepts to work with a variety of process operations, there is a need for them to understand these concepts after instruction. This exploratory study sought to determine whether undergraduate engineering students’ knowledge of four crucial concept areas in heat transfer significantly changed after instruction and whether this differed by gender and engineering major. Results showed that while participants significantly improved from pre-test to post-test, there was a moderate effect and the mean score on the post-test was below what most have considered concept mastery. The mean post-test score for males was significantly higher than that of females, and females did not significantly improve from pre-test to post-test. A significant interaction between gender and major was also found. Implications of the findings and suggestions for future research are provided.

Mini-workshop — Inquiry based learning activities: Hands on activities to improve conceptual understanding

The primary goal of this mini-workshop is to assist participants in creating Inquiry Based Learning Activities (IBLAs) that promote better conceptual understanding for their students. This is part of more general goal of transforming engineering classrooms into more interactive formats that promote student engagement and lead to improved student outcomes. Specifically the workshop will introduce participants to the theoretical basis of IBLAs, provide examples of successful IBLAs and finally participants will develop their own IBLAs designed to repair common student misconceptions in the courses they teach. Through a highly interactive hands- on environment, participants are expected to leave this mini-workshop with: 1) Knowledge of the educational foundations of IBLAs, 2) A thorough understanding of the elements of IBLAs, 3) Experience working with several research-tested and classroom-proven IBLAs and 4) A preliminary design of an IBLA for one of their courses, reviewed by the workshop facilitators and participants. The workshop is intended as a forum for educators to learn about and to create innovative and research-based best practices to transform engineering education.

Starting a grassroots teaching workshop: experiences of a recent convert [engineering education]

The author describes how, since the fall of 1998, he has coordinated a teaching workshop for engineering faculty at Bucknell University, USA. He details how the goal of the workshop is to stimulate a discussion of issues in engineering education and to raise the general level of awareness of recent advances in instructional theory and practice.