skip to main content

Title: Assessment of Metacognitive Skills in Design and Manufacturing
Metacognition is the understanding of your own knowledge including what knowledge you do not have and what knowledge you do have. This includes knowledge of strategies and regulation of one’s own cognition. Studying metacognition is important because higher-order thinking is commonly used, and problem-solving skills are positively correlated with metacognition. A positive previous disposition to metacognition can improve problem-solving skills. Metacognition is a key skill in design and manufacturing, as teams of engineers must solve complex problems. Moreover, metacognition increases individual and team performance and can lead to more original ideas. This study discusses the assessment of metacognitive skills in engineering students by having the students participate in hands-on and virtual reality activities related to design and manufacturing. The study is guided by two research questions: (1) do the proposed activities affect students’ metacognition in terms of monitoring, awareness, planning, self-checking, or strategy selection, and (2) are there other components of metacognition that are affected by the design and manufacturing activities? The hypothesis is that the participation in the proposed activities will improve problem-solving skills and metacognitive awareness of the engineering students. A total of 34 undergraduate students participated in the study. Of these, 32 were male and 2 were more » female students. All students stated that they were interested in pursuing a career in engineering. The students were divided into two groups with the first group being the initial pilot run of the data. In this first group there were 24 students, in the second group there were 10 students. The groups’ demographics were nearly identical to each other. Analysis of the collected data indicated that problem-solving skills contribute to metacognitive skills and may develop first in students before larger metacognitive constructs of awareness, monitoring, planning, self-checking, and strategy selection. Based on this, we recommend that the problem-solving skills and expertise in solving engineering problems should be developed in students before other skills emerge or can be measured. While we are sure that the students who participated in our study have awareness as well as the other metacognitive skills in reading, writing, science, and math, they are still developing in relation to engineering problems. « less
; ; ;
Award ID(s):
Publication Date:
Journal Name:
ASEE Annual Conference proceedings
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. When students repeatedly reflect, it can enhance their metacognitive abilities, including self-regulatory skills of planning, monitoring, and evaluating. In a fluid mechanics course for undergraduates at a large southeastern U.S. university, in-class problem solving in a flipped classroom was coupled with intentional metacognitive skills instruction and repeated reflection to enhance metacognition. The weekly reflective responses were coded by two analysts to identify the recurring themes and uncover evidence of the development and/or reinforcement of self-regulating behaviors for academic management. To enable a comparison, a flipped classroom without the metacognitive instruction and repeated reflection was also implemented (i.e., non-intervention group). The two cohorts completed identical final exams. Based on our preliminary analysis with year one data, a statistically and practically-significant difference between the two cohorts was found with the free-response scores on the final exam in favor of the intervention cohort that had received the metacognitive support ( p < 0.0005; Cohen's d = 0.72). Also, the Metacognitive Activities Inventory (MCAI) indicated a significantly-higher positive change in self-regulatory behavior for the intervention cohort ( p = 0.001; d = 0.50). Focus groups were conducted to gather students’ perspectives on the reflective activity, with differences found by demographic group. In addition, a significantly higher proportion of females (versus males) viewedmore »the reflections in a positive manner ( p = 0.05). Significant associations between themes in the weekly reflections and direct knowledge measures were also uncovered. This included a positive relationship between academic self-management (i.e., diligence and carefulness) and exam performance. Overall, our preliminary results point to a desirable impact of metacognitive instruction and repeated reflection on knowledge outcomes, metacognitive skills, and self-regulatory behaviors.

    « less
  2. Problem-solving is an iterative process that requires brainstorming, analysis of the problem, development and testing of solutions. It relies on under-standing what is known and what is unknown about the problem. That knowledge of the knowns and unknowns is called metacognition. Today’s engineers must understand their own metacognition and that of other team members to derive the best solutions for engineering problems given the different constraints. Engineers working in design and manufacturing fields confront challenges due to a lack of important metacognitive understanding of their own and their team’s problem-solving skills. This research suggests measuring metacognition within teams by using manufacturing simulations with virtual reality and eye tracking
  3. Early in the pandemic we gathered a group of educators to create and share at-home educational opportunities for families to design and make STEAM projects while at home. As this effort, CoBuild19, continued, we decided to extend our offerings to include basic computer programming. To accomplish this, we created an offering called the Design with Code Club (DwCC). We structured DwCC to be different from other common coding offerings in that we wanted the main focus to be on kids designing solutions to problems that might include the use of technology and coding. We were purposeful in this decision for two main reasons. First, we wanted to make our coding club more interesting to girls, where previous research demonstrates their interest in designing solutions. Second, we wanted this effort to be different from most programming instruction, where coding activities use programming as the core of instruction and application in authentic and student-selected contexts plays a secondary role. DwCC was set up so that each of the first four weeks had a different larger challenge that was COVID-19 related and sessions unfolded with alternating smaller challenges, discussion around design and coding instruction that would develop their skills and knowledge of micro:bitmore »capabilities. We culminated DwCC with an open-ended project where the kids were given the challenge of coming up with their own problem for which they might incorporate micro:bit as part of the solution. Because we were doing all of this online, we used the micro:bit interface through Microsoft MakeCode, which includes a functional simulator. From our experiences we realized that simulations are not as enticing as physical computing with a tangible device, so we set up an incentive where youth who participated in at least three sessions of the club would receive a physical micro:bit. We advertised DwCC through Facebook and twitter and had nearly 200 families register their kids to participate. In the end, a total of 52 micro:bits were sent to youth participants. Based on this success, we sought to expand the effort and increase accessibility for groups that are traditionally underrepresented in STEM. In spring 2021, we offered a Girls DwCC. This was a redesigned version of the club where the focus was even more on problem-solving through design. The club was run by all women, including one from the US, an Industrial Engineer from Mexico and a computer programmer from Albania. More than 50 girls from 17 countries participated in the club! We are working on another version of GDwCC that will be offered in Spanish and focus on Latina girls in the US and Mexico. In the most recent iteration of DwCC we are working with an educator at a school for deaf students to create a version of the club that works for their students. We are doing some modification of activities and recreating videos that involve sign language interpretation. In this presentation we will report on the variants of DwCC, results from participant feedback surveys and plans for future versions.« less
  4. Engineers are called to play an important role in addressing the complex problems of our global society, such as climate change and global health care. In order to adequately address these complex problems, engineers must be able to identify and incorporate into their decision making relevant aspects of systems in which their work is contextualized, a skill often referred to as systems thinking. However, within engineering, research on systems thinking tends to emphasize the ability to recognize potentially relevant constituent elements and parts of an engineering problem, rather than how these constituent elements and parts are embedded in broader economic, sociocultural, and temporal contexts and how all of these must inform decision making about problems and solutions. Additionally, some elements of systems thinking, such as an awareness of a particular sociocultural context or the coordination of work among members of a cross-disciplinary team, are not always recognized as core engineering skills, which alienates those whose strengths and passions are related to, for example, engineering systems that consider and impact social change. Studies show that women and minorities, groups underrepresented within engineering, are drawn to engineering in part for its potential to address important social issues. Emphasizing the importance of systemsmore »thinking and developing a more comprehensive definition of systems thinking that includes both constituent parts and contextual elements of a system will help students recognize the relevance and value of these other elements of engineering work and support full participation in engineering by a diverse group of students. We provide an overview of our study, in which we are examining systems thinking across a range of expertise to develop a scenario-based assessment tool that educators and researchers can use to evaluate engineering students’ systems thinking competence. Consistent with the aforementioned need to define and study systems thinking in a comprehensive, inclusive manner, we begin with a definition of systems thinking as a holistic approach to problem solving in which linkages and interactions of the immediate work with constituent parts, the larger sociocultural context, and potential impacts over time are identified and incorporated into decision making. In our study, we seek to address two key questions: 1) How do engineers of different levels of education and experience approach problems that require systems thinking? and 2) How do different types of life, educational, and work experiences relate to individuals’ demonstrated level of expertise in solving systems thinking problems? Our study is comprised of three phases. The first two phases include a semi-structured interview with engineering students and professionals about their experiences solving a problem requiring systems thinking and a think-aloud interview in which participants are asked to talk through how they would approach a given engineering scenario and later reflect on the experiences that inform their thinking. Data from these two phases will be used to develop a written assessment tool, which we will test by administering the written instrument to undergraduate and graduate engineering students in our third study phase. Our paper describes our study design and framing and includes preliminary findings from the first phase of our study.« less
  5. Gardner, Stephanie (Ed.)
    Stronger metacognition, or awareness and regulation of thinking, is related to higher academic achievement. Most metacognition research has focused at the level of the individual learner. However, a few studies have shown that students working in small groups can stimulate metacognition in one another, leading to improved learning. Given the increased adoption of interactive group work in life science classrooms, there is a need to study the role of social metacognition, or the awareness and regulation of the thinking of others, in this context. Guided by the frameworks of social metacognition and evidence-based reasoning, we asked: 1) What metacognitive utterances (words, phrases, statements, or questions) do students use during small-group problem solving in an upper-division biology course? 2) Which metacognitive utterances are associated with small groups sharing higher-quality reasoning in an upper-division biology classroom? We used discourse analysis to examine transcripts from two groups of three students during breakout sessions. By coding for metacognition, we identified seven types of metacognitive utterances. By coding for reasoning, we uncovered four categories of metacognitive utterances associated with higher-quality reasoning. We offer suggestions for life science educators interested in promoting social metacognition during small-group problem solving.