More Like this

1. Unequal Impacts of Augmented Reality on Learning and Collaboration During Robot Programming with Peers

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3432944  

   Radu, Iulian ; Hv, Vivek ; Schneider, Bertrand ( January 2021 , Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction)

   Augmented reality (AR) applications are growing in popularity in educational settings. While the effects of AR experiences on learning have been widely studied, there is relatively less research on understanding the impact of AR on the dynamics of co-located collaborative learning, specifically in the context of novices programming robots. Educational robotics are a powerful learning context because they engage students with problem solving, critical thinking, STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) concepts, and collaboration skills. However, such collaborations can suffer due to students having unequal access to resources or dominant peers. In this research we investigate how augmented reality impacts learning and collaboration while peers engage in robot programming activities. We use a mixed methods approach to measure how participants are learning, manipulating resources, and engaging in problem solving activities with peers. We investigate how these behaviors are impacted by the presence of augmented reality visualizations, and by participants? proximity to resources. We find that augmented reality improved overall group learning and collaboration. Detailed analysis shows that AR strongly helps one participant more than the other, by improving their ability to learn and contribute while remaining engaged with the robot. Furthermore, augmented reality helps both participants maintain a common ground andmore »balance contributions during problem solving activities. We discuss the implications of these results for designing AR and non-AR collaborative interfaces.« less
2. The Affordance of Computer-Supportive Collaborative Learning in a Dynamics Course

   Lee, Y. ( July 2021 , Zone 1 Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education)

   Over the past two decades, educators have used computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) to integrate technology with pedagogy to improve student engagement and learning outcomes. Researchers have also explored the diverse affordances of CSCL, its contributions to engineering instruction, and its effectiveness in K-12 STEM education. However, the question of how students use CSCL resources in undergraduate engineering classrooms remains largely unexplored. This study examines the affordances of a CSCL environment utilized in a sophomore dynamics course with particular attention given to the undergraduate engineering students’ use of various CSCL resources. The resources include a course lecturebook, instructor office hours, a teaching assistant help room, online discussion board, peer collaboration, and demonstration videos. This qualitative study uses semi-structured interview data collected from nine mechanical engineering students (four women and five men) who were enrolled in a dynamics course at a large public research university in Eastern Canada. The interviews focused on the individual student’s perceptions of the school, faculty, students, engineering courses, and implemented CSCL learning environment. The thematic analysis was conducted to analyze the transcribed interviews using a qualitative data analysis software (Nvivo). The analysis followed a six step process: (1) reading interview transcripts multiple times and preliminary in vivomore »codes; (2) conducting open coding by coding interesting or salient features of the data; (3) collecting codes and searching for themes; (4) reviewing themes and creating a thematic map; (5) finalizing themes and their definitions; and (6) compiling findings. This study found that the students’ use of CSCL resources varied depending on the students’ personal preferences, as well as their perceptions of the given resource’s value and its potential to enhance their learning. For example, the dynamics lecturebook, which had been redesigned to encourage problem solving and note-taking, fostered student collaborative problem solving with their peers. In contrast, the professor’s example video solutions had much more of an influence on students’ independent problem-solving processes. The least frequently used resource was the course’s online discussion forum, which could be used as a means of communication. The findings reveal how computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environments enable engineering students to engage in multiple learning opportunities with diverse and flexible resources to both address and to clarify their personal learning needs. This study strongly recommends engineering instructors adapt a CSCL environment for implementation in their own unique classroom context.« less
3. Implementation of Security Modules with Model-Eliciting Activities in Computer Science Courses

   https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--34776  

   Yang, Jeong ; Earwood, Brandon ; Kim, Young Rae ; Lodgher, Akhtar ( June 2020 , 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference)

   Security is a critical aspect in the design, development, and testing of software systems. Due to the increasing need for security-related skills within software systems and engineering, there is a growing demand for these skills to be taught at the university level. A series of 41 security modules was developed to assess the impact of these modules on teaching critical cyber security topics to students. This paper presents the implementation and outcomes of the first set of six security modules in a Freshman level course. This set consists of five modules presented in lectures as well as a sixth module emphasizing encryption and decryption used as the semester project for the course. Each module is a collection of concepts related to cyber security. The individual cyber security concepts are presented with a general description of a security issue to avoid, sample code with the security issue written in the Java programming language, and a second version of the code with an effective solution. The set of these modules was implemented in Computer Science I during the Fall 2019 semester. Incorporating each of the concepts in these modules into lectures depends on both the topic covered and the approach to resolvingmore »the related security issue. Students were introduced to computing concepts related to both the security issue and the appropriate solution to fully grasp the overall concept. After presenting the materials to students, continual review with students is also essential. This reviewal process requires exploring use-cases for the programming mechanisms presented as solutions to the security issues discussed. In addition to the security modules presented in lectures, students were given a hands-on approach to understanding the concepts through Model-Eliciting Activities (MEAs). MEAs are open-ended, problem-solving activities in which groups of three to four students work to solve realistic complex problems in a classroom setting. The semester project related to encryption and decryption was implemented into the course as an MEA. To assess the effectiveness of incorporating security modules with the MEA project into the curriculum of Computer Science I, two sections of the course were used as a control group and a treatment group. The treatment group included the security modules in lectures and the MEA project while the control group did not. To measure the overall effectiveness of incorporating security modules with the MEA project, both the instructor’s effectiveness as well as the student’s attitudes and interest were measured. For instructors, the primary question to address was to what extent do instructors change their attitudes towards student learning and their teaching practices because of the implementation of cyber security modules through MEAs. For students, the primary question to address was how the inclusion of security modules with the MEA project improved their understanding of the course materials and their interests in computer science. After implementing security modules with the MEA project, students showed a better understanding of cyber security concepts and a greater interest in broader computer science concepts. The instructor’s beliefs about teaching, learning, and assessment shifted from teacher-centered to student-centered, during his experience with the security modules and MEA.« less
4. Feel the Force! An Inquiry-based Approach to Teaching Free-body Diagrams for Rigid-body Analysis

   https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--34669  

   Davishahl, Eric ; Haskell, Todd ; Singleton, Lee ( June 2020 , 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access)

   Perusal of any common statics textbook will reveal a reference table of standard supports in the section introducing rigid body equilibrium analysis. Most statics students eventually memorize a heuristic approach to drawing a free-body diagram based on applying the information in this table. First, identify the entry in the table that matches the schematic representation of a connection. Then draw the corresponding force and/or couple moment vectors on the isolated body according to their positive sign conventions. Multiple studies have noted how even high performing students tend to rely on this heuristic rather than conceptual reasoning. Many students struggle when faced with a new engineering connection that does not match an entry in the supports table. In this paper, we describe an inquiry-based approach to introducing support models and free-body diagrams of rigid bodies. In a series of collaborative learning activities, students practice reasoning through the force interactions at example connections such as a bolted flange or a hinge by considering how the support resists translation and rotation in each direction. Each team works with the aid of a physical model to analyze how changes in the applied loads affect the reaction components. A second model of the isolated bodymore »provides opportunity to develop a tactile feel for the reaction forces. We emphasize predicting the direction of each reaction component, rather than following a standard sign convention, to provide opportunities for students to practice conceptual application of equilibrium conditions. Students’ also draw detailed diagrams of the force interactions at the mating surfaces in the connection, including distributed loadings when appropriate. We use equivalent systems concepts to relate these detailed force diagrams to conventional reaction components. Targeted assessments explore whether the approach described above might improve learning outcomes and influence how students think about free-body diagrams. Students use an online tool to attempt two multiple-choice concept questions after each activity. The questions represent near and far transfer applications of the concepts emphasized and prompt students for written explanation. Our analysis of the students’ explanations indicates that most students engage in the conceptual reasoning we encourage, though reasoning errors are common. Analysis of final exam work and comparison to an earlier term in which we used a more conventional approach indicate a majority of students incorporate conceptual reasoning practice into their approach to free-body diagrams. This does not come at the expense of problem-solving accuracy. Student feedback on the activities is overwhelmingly positive.« less
5. Feel the force! An inquiry-based approach to teaching free-body diagrams for rigid body analysis

   Davishahl, Eric ; Haskell, Todd ; Singleton, Lee W. ( January 2020 , ASEE annual conference exposition)

   Perusal of any common statics textbook will reveal a reference table of standard supports in the section introducing rigid body equilibrium analysis. Most statics students eventually memorize a heuristic approach to drawing a free-body diagram based on applying the information in this table. First, identify the entry in the table that matches the schematic representation of a connection. Then draw the corresponding force and/or couple moment vectors on the isolated body according to their positive sign conventions. Multiple studies have noted how even high performing students tend to rely on this heuristic rather than conceptual reasoning. Many students struggle when faced with a new engineering connection that does not match an entry in the supports table. In this paper, we describe an inquiry-based approach to introducing support models and free body diagrams of rigid bodies. In a series of collaborative learning activities, students practice reasoning through the force interactions at example connections such as a bolted flange or a hinge by considering how the support resists translation and rotation in each direction. Each team works with the aid of a physical model to analyze how changes in the applied loads affect the reaction components. A second model of the isolatedmore »body provides opportunity to develop a tactile feel for the reaction forces. We emphasize predicting the direction of each reaction component, rather than following a standard sign convention, to provide opportunities for students to practice conceptual application of equilibrium conditions. Students’ also draw detailed diagrams of the force interactions at the mating surfaces in the connection, including distributed loadings when appropriate. We use equivalent systems concepts to relate these detailed force diagrams to conventional reaction components. Targeted assessments explore whether the approach described above might improve learning outcomes and influence how students think about free-body diagrams. Students use an online tool to attempt two multiple-choice concept questions after each activity. The questions represent near and far transfer applications of the concepts emphasized and prompt students for written explanation. Our analysis of the students’ explanations indicates that most students engage in the conceptual reasoning we encourage, though reasoning errors are common. Analysis of final exam work and comparison to an earlier term in which we used a more conventional approach indicate a majority of students incorporate conceptual reasoning practice into their approach to free-body diagrams. This does not come at the expense of problem-solving accuracy. Student feedback on the activities is overwhelmingly positive.« less