Susan J. Gribble

Learning to be real engineers. The dam game simulation

Abstract Most engineering programmes around the world now ensure students develop specified graduate attributes and achieve clearly stated learning outcomes. Not only do engineering graduates require technical knowledge and skills, they also need to demonstrate that they have acquired competencies related to the more social aspects of engineering practice. Working in teams, communicating with people from diverse backgrounds and conducting themselves in an ethical and responsible way are some of these types of learning outcomes that are expected of engineering graduates. An 18-month study has been conducted with more than 250 undergraduate students at Curtin University of Technology (Perth, Australia) into the effectiveness of a simulation in developing these outcomes. In the study, close attention was paid to learning theory and research methodology associated with investigating educational settings. The information gathered focused on how students reacted to the simulation as a learning tool, the ways in which students used the simulation to learn and the learning outcomes students achieved through their learning experiences. The study demonstrated, in the main, that students believed that the simulation was an effective learning tool for them and they recognized that the simulation helped them to develop skills in applying their fundamental engineering knowledge to a civil engineering construction project. They also developed understanding about how their engineering decisions affected the workplace, people and the environment. Students were confident that the simulation taught them much about working as part of a professional team because they had to cooperatively plan, monitor, control and report on their project. Furthermore, the study showed that the simulation should be part of a holistic teaching and learning experience in which explicit teaching strategies are required so that students gain optimum learning by using the simulation.

Negotiating Values for the Science Curriculum: The Need for Dialogue and Compromise.

Recently, a Curriculum Framework has been developed and mandated for implementation in all school systems— government, Catholic and independent— in Western Australia (WA). A statement of core shared values is a significant part of the Framework. The curriculum is divided into eight learning area statements, science being one of these. The Science Learning Area Statement, with its roots in the Australian Education Council (1994) statement on science, includes a definition of science and a rationale for teaching it in schools; major outcome statements concerned with working scientifically and developing conceptual understandings; principles for science learning, teaching and assessment; and sections about science as it relates to different phases of schooling, and how science can be integrated into other areas of the curriculum. Thirty two core shared values have been espoused as integral to the Cirriculum Framework. These values have been clustered into five main statements: a pursuit of knowledge and a commitment to achievement of potential; self acceptance and respect for self; respect and concern for others and their rights; social and civic responsibility; and environmental responsibility. One of the main tasks for us as writers of the Science Learning Area Statement was to explicate the core shared values into a description of the science curriculum. This article documents, from our point of view, the process by which a mandated set of core shared values were incorporated into a statement describing the curriculum in the science learning area. The process was under the direction of a Science Learning Area Committee. At several points, conflict, or potential conflict, about the interpretation of the core shared values in relation to science in the classroom was resolved by negotiation amongst ourselves in the first instance, the Science Learning Area Committee, and the Values Consultative Group. While the central narrative in this paper is about our journey through the process, there are the antecedent themes relating to how and why the core shared values were developed and subsequently mandated. The arising tensions, as yet unexplored, relate to how, or even whether, the values might be explicated in science classrooms. In reflecting on these tensions, we provide a re-analysis of some of the issues in school science, which of course are not new. We believe that science as taught in classrooms cannot be value-free, even when teachers believe otherwise.