skip to main content

Title: Web Conferencing Facilitation Within Problem-Based Learning Biomedical Engineering Courses
Abstract Problem-based learning (PBL) has been effectively used within BME education, though there are several challenges in its implementation within courses with larger enrollments. Furthermore, the sudden transition to online learning from the COVID-19 pandemic introduced additional challenges in creating a similar PBL experience in an online environment. Online constrained PBL was implemented through asynchronous modules and synchronous web conferencing with rotating facilitators. Overall, facilitators perceived web conferencing facilitation to be similar to in-person, but noted that students were more easily “hidden” or distracted. Students did not comment on web conferencing facilitation specifically, but indicated the transition to online PBL was smooth. Course instructors identified that a fully synchronous delivery as well as modifications of Group Meeting Minutes assignments as potential modifications for future offerings. Future work will aim to address the perceptions and effectiveness of web conferencing facilitation for PBL courses within an undergraduate BME curriculum, as web conferencing could prove to be another significant breakthrough in addressing challenges of problem-based learning courses.
; ; ; ; ;
Award ID(s):
Publication Date:
Journal Name:
Biomedical Engineering Education
Page Range or eLocation-ID:
127 to 131
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Objective Over the past decade, we developed and studied a face-to-face video-based analysis-of-practice professional development (PD) model. In a cluster randomized trial, we found that the face-to-face model enhanced elementary science teacher knowledge and practice and resulted in important improvements to student science achievement (student treatment effect, d = 0.52; Taylor et al, 2017; Roth et al, 2018). The face-to-face PD model is expensive and difficult to scale. In this paper, we present the results of a two-year design-based research study to translate the face-to-face PD into a facilitated online PD experience. The purpose is to create an effective, flexible, and cost-efficient PD model that will reach a broader audience of teachers. Perspective/Theoretical Framework The face-to-face PD model is grounded in situated cognition and cognitive apprenticeship frameworks. Teachers engage in learning science content and effective science teaching practices in the context in which they will be teaching. There are scaffolded opportunities for teachers to learn from analysis of model videos by experienced teachers, to try teaching model units, to analyze video of their own teaching efforts, and ultimately to develop their own unit, with guidance. The PD model attends to the key features of effective PD as described by Desimonemore »(2009) and others. We adhered closely to the design principles of the face-to-face model as described by Authors, 2019. Methods We followed a design-based research approach (DBR; Cobb et al., 2003; Shavelson et al., 2003) to examine the online program components and how they promoted or interfered with the development of teachers’ knowledge and reflective practice. Of central interest was the examination of mechanisms for facilitating teacher learning (Confrey, 2006). To accomplish this goal, design researchers engaged in iterative cycles of problem analysis, design, implementation, examination, and redesign (Wang & Hannafin, 2005) in phase one of the project before studying its effect. Data Three small pilot groups of teachers engaged in both synchronous and asynchronous components of the larger online course which began implementation with a 10-week summer course that leads into study groups of participants meeting through one academic year. We iteratively designed, tested, and revised 17 modules across three pilot versions. On average, pilot groups completed one module every two weeks. Pilot 1 began the work in May 2019; Pilot 2 began in August 2019, and Pilot 3 began in October 2019. Pilot teachers responded to surveys and took part in interviews related to the PD. The PD facilitators took extensive notes after each iteration. The development team met weekly to discuss revisions. We revised all modules between each pilot group and used what we learned to inform our development of later modules within each pilot. For example, we applied what we learned from testing Module 3 with Pilot 1 to the development of Module 3 for Pilots 2, and also applied what we learned from Module 3 with Pilot 1 to the development of Module 7 for Pilot 1. Results We found that community building required the same incremental trust-building activities that occur in face-to-face PD. Teachers began with low-risk activities and gradually engaged in activities that required greater vulnerability (sharing a video of themselves teaching a model unit for analysis and critique by the group). We also identified how to contextualize technical tools with instructional prompts to allow teachers to productively interact with one another about science ideas asynchronously. As part of that effort, we crafted crux questions to surface teachers’ confusions or challenges related to content or pedagogy. We called them crux questions because they revealed teachers’ uncertainty and deepened learning during the discussion. Facilitators leveraged asynchronous responses to crux questions in the synchronous sessions to push teacher thinking further than would have otherwise been possible in a 2-hour synchronous video-conference. Significance Supporting teachers with effective, flexible, and cost-efficient PD is difficult under the best of circumstances. In the era of covid-19, online PD has taken on new urgency. NARST members will gain insight into the translation of an effective face-to-face PD model to an online environment.« less
  2. Bucks County Community College (Bucks) in collaboration with Drexel University (Drexel) is committed to increasing the number of workforce ready engineers and engineering technicians and to creating a blueprint for 2+2 engineering education programs nationally. Recently, educational reform took an unexpected turn to remote teaching due to the world-wide COVID-19 pandemic. Within our NSF ATE grant to enhance our present engineering technology curriculum we modified and enhanced instructional and student engagement methods to assure workforce readiness of our students in a remote world. Curriculum enhancements within the engineering technology (ET) occupational major at Bucks and the B.S. in ET degree program at Drexel, modifications to delivery of workforce development certification programs through the Bucks Center for Workforce Development (CWD), and college-wide student engagement strategies were implemented to assure quality education and student engagement. Modifications to credit courses included asynchronous online courses, synchronous remote courses, and hybrid courses, which combined remote and on campus laboratory instruction. Our CWD implemented hybrid instruction that included necessary resources for students such as tool kits and borrowed laptop computers. In addition, a college wide program called Bucks+ was implemented through the Bucks Business and Innovation Department to increase enrollment, retention, and workforce readiness of students.more »The Bucks+ program focuses on student engagement through competition within curriculum, and extracurricular endeavors that prepare students for industry. We will share our successes and challenges within our call to action to engage students in a remote world and to enhance their educational experience through innovative instructional techniques.« less
  3. This paper describes an evidence based-practice paper to a formative response to the engineering faculty and students’ needs at Anonymous University. Within two weeks, the pandemic forced the vast majority of the 1.5 million faculty and 20 million students nationwide to transition all courses from face-to-face to entirely online. Never in the history of higher education has there been a concerted effort to adapt so quickly and radically, nor have we had the technology to facilitate such a rapid and massive change. At Anonymous University, over 700 engineering educators were racing to transition their courses. Many of those faculty had never experienced online course preparation, much less taught one synchronously or asynchronously. Faculty development centers and technology specialists across the university made a great effort to aid educators in this transition. These educators had questions about the best practices for moving online, how their students were affected, and the best ways to engage their students. However, these faculty’s detailed questions were answerable only by faculty peers’ experience, students’ feedback, and advice from experts in relevant engineering education research-based practices. This paper describes rapid, continuous, and formative feedback provided by the Engineering Education Faculty Group (EEFG) to provide an immediate responsemore »for peer faculty guidance during the pandemic, creating a community of practice. The faculty membership spans multiple colleges in the university, including engineering, education, and liberal arts. The EEFG transitioned immediately to weekly meetings focused on the rapidly changing needs of their colleagues. Two surveys were generated rapidly by Hammond et al. to characterize student and faculty concerns and needs in March of 2020 and were distributed through various means and media. Survey 1 and 2 had 3381 and 1506 respondents respectively with most being students, with 113 faculty respondents in survey 1, the focus of this piece of work. The first survey was disseminated as aggregated data to the College of Engineering faculty with suggested modifications to course structures based on these findings. The EEFG continued to meet and collaborate during the remainder of the Spring 2020 semester and has continued through to this day. This group has acted as a hub for teaching innovation in remote online pedagogy and techniques, while also operating as a support structure for members of the group, aiding those members with training in teaching tools, discussion difficult current events, and various challenges they are facing in their professional teaching lives. While the aggregated data gathered from the surveys developed by Hammond et al. was useful beyond measure in the early weeks of the pandemic, little attention at the time was given to the responses of faculty to that survey. The focus of this work has been to characterize faculty perceptions at the beginning of the pandemic and compare those responses between engineering and non-engineering faculty respondents, while also comparing reported perceptions of pre- and post-transition to remote online teaching. Interviews were conducted between 4 members of the EEFG with the goal of characterizing some of the experiences they have had while being members of the group during the time of the pandemic utilizing Grounded theory qualitative analysis.« less
  4. The COVID-19 pandemic led the majority of educational institutions to rapidly shift to primarily conducting courses through online, remote delivery. Across different institutions, the tools used for synchronous online course delivery varied. They included traditional video conferencing tools like Zoom, Google Meet, and WebEx as well as non-traditional tools like Gather.Town, Gatherly, and YoTribe. The main distinguishing characteristic of these nontraditional tools is their utilization of 2-D maps to create virtual meeting spaces that mimic real-world spaces. In this work, we aim to explore how such tools are perceived by students in the context of learning. Our intuition is that utilizing a tool that features a 2-D virtual space that resembles a real world classroom has underlying benefits compared to the more traditional video conferencing tools. The results of our study indicate that students' perception of using a 2-D virtual classroom improved their interaction, collaboration and overall satisfaction with an online learning experience.
  5. The Introduction to engineering (EGGN-100) is a project-based course offered every fall semester to first-year students with undecided engineering majors at California State University, Fullerton (CSUF). The primary objective of this course is to provide project-based learning (PBL) and introduce these students to major projects in Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, and Computer Engineering projects so that they can make an informed decision about their major. The PBL is an active learning method that aims to engage students in acquiring knowledge and skills through real-world experiences and well-planned project activities in engineering disciplines. The course comprises four team-based unique projects related to Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, and Computer Engineering. The project involves using a variety of engineering tools like AutoCAD, Multisim, and Arduino platforms. For the first time, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the hands-on project-based EGGN-100 course was offered virtually. In this research, we document the learning experiences of students who attended EGGN-100 in a traditional face-to-face mode of instruction and students who participated in the same course in a virtual instruction mode. Surveys conducted during seemingly different modes of instruction show varying levels of satisfaction among students. Of the students who attended the course in traditional and instructional instruction mode, 69%more »and 90% responded that discipline-specific projects enabled them to make an informed decision, and PBL helped them choose their preferred major. Even the percentage of students who believed the PBL helped them make an informed decision about their major, they like to do more hands-on projects and prefer to attend the classes on campus. Students rated higher satisfaction in virtual instructional mode primarily due to the availability of video lectures, self-paced learning, and readily accessible project simulations. Learning by doing would have bought out the challenges and minor nuances of designing and executing an engineering project. Learning by watching is surficial and not necessarily exposes students to minor details that are critical. As such, the significance of this study is that maybe, after all, not all courses can be taught in a virtual environment, and some courses may be strictly taught in a traditional, hands-on instruction mode. We also study the socio-psychological impact of traditional and virtual learning experiences and report the remedies to cope with stress and loneliness in the online learning environment.« less