This content will become publicly available on June 13, 2025
- PAR ID:
- 10528130
- Publisher / Repository:
- Springer
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Computing in Higher Education
- ISSN:
- 1042-1726
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- Affordances · Engineering epistemic practices · Environmental engineering · Instructional design · Physical laboratory · Virtual laboratory
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
We use qualitative methods to investigate students’ engagement in an upper-division laboratory. Laboratory activities are recognized as key curricular elements in engineering education. These activities have traditionally been delivered in person, but new laboratory modalities (such as virtual laboratories) have been gaining popularity, boosted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding how laboratory modality influences student learning is important to be able to design and implement effective laboratories. While some educators have investigated if virtual laboratories can replace their analogous physical laboratory counterparts, others have looked at using virtual laboratories in combination with physical laboratories. Taking this latter approach, they argue the two modes have different affordances and therefore could be complementary - meaning that each mode may lend itself to more effectively engaging students in certain productive practices. We have previously reported on the development of two environmental engineering laboratories, one physical and one virtual. Both laboratories address the topic of jar testing, an important process in drinking water treatment, with the design of each mode being based on that mode's affordances. These laboratories were implemented in an upper-level chemical engineering course. Twelve students split into four groups consented to be audio and video recorded during their time in the laboratory and have the work they turn in collected, with most also volunteering to be interviewed about their experiences. A first pass of this data has been completed in which we viewed learning from the lens of participation in disciplinary practice. We applied the theory of engineering epistemic practices, which are the socially organized and interactionally accomplished ways engineers develop, justify, and communicate ideas when completing engineering work. Transcripts of the laboratory observations were coded to identify students’ engagement with specific epistemic practices, which were categorized as either conceptual, material, or social. These codes were then counted and cross-validated with interview responses to draw conclusions about how student's engagement differed in each mode. This prior research has indicated that students engage with each design using different epistemic practices. While the first pass analysis showed differences in counts of epistemic practices between modes, it provided limited insight into how and why the epistemic practices are elicited and coordinated among students. In this paper, we extend the discourse analysis by illustrating our developing methodology for a second pass analysis of the video recordings. We seek to develop a thick description by identifying how particular epistemic practices fit together temporally and serve to promote or hinder students’ progress. Engagement in epistemic practices does not happen in a vacuum and instead happens contextually, influenced by students' previous engagement and the laboratory environment and their social and academic history. This analysis allows a deeper understanding of how students engage in engineering practice while completing laboratories, knowledge that can be applied to enhance engineering physical and virtual laboratory instruction and design. Additionally, this work contributes to the methodological conversation of ways to use interaction analyses to extract understanding from a rich set of qualitative data.more » « less
-
Professional engineering demands more than the ability to proficiently carry out engineering calculations. Engineers need to approach problems with a holistic view, make decisions based on evidence, collaborate effectively in teams, and learn from setbacks. Laboratory work plays a crucial role in shaping the professional development of university engineering students, as it enables them to cultivate these essential practices. A successful laboratory task design should provide students opportunities to develop these practices but also needs to adhere to the constraints of the educational environment. In this project, we explore how both virtual (simulation-based) and physical (hands-on) laboratories, based on the same real-world engineering process, prepare students for their future careers. Specifically, we seek to determine whether the virtual and physical laboratory modes foster different yet complementary epistemic practices. Epistemic practices refer to the ways in which group members propose, communicate, justify, assess, and validate knowledge claims in a socially organized and interactionally accomplished manner. To accomplish these objectives, we are conducting a microgenetic analysis of student teams engaging in both the virtual and physical versions of the same laboratory exercise, the Jar Test for Drinking Water Treatment. Jar testing is a standard laboratory procedure used by design engineers and water treatment plant operators to optimize the physical and chemical conditions for the effective removal of particulate contaminants from water through coagulation, flocculation, and settling. The central hypothesis guiding this research is that physical laboratories emphasize social and material epistemic practices, while virtual laboratories highlight social and conceptual epistemic practices. The goal is to gain transferable knowledge about how the laboratory format and instructional design influence students' engagement in epistemic practices. To date we have developed physical and virtual versions of the Jar Test laboratory, each built around the affordances of their respective modes. We have completed two rounds of data collection resulting in data from 21 students (7 groups of 3). The primary data sources have included video recordings and researcher observations of the teams during the laboratory work, semi-structured stimulated recall interviews with students and laboratory instructors, and student work products. Using discourse analysis methods within a sociocultural framework, we are addressing the following research questions: 1. In what ways and to what extent does conducting an experiment in a physical mode to develop a process recommendation influence students’ engineering epistemic practices? 2. In what ways and to what extent does conducting an experiment in a virtual mode to develop a process recommendation influence students’ engineering epistemic practices? 3. How do students in each laboratory mode respond to being “stuck”? Do students’ views on the iterative nature of science/engineering and their tolerance for mistakes depend on the instructional design afforded by the laboratory mode? While this study focuses on a process specific to environmental engineering, its findings have the potential to positively impact teaching and learning practices across all engineering and science disciplines that rely on laboratory investigations in their curriculum.more » « less
-
To support teachers in providing all students with opportunities to engage in engineering learning activities, research must examine the ways that elementary teachers support how diverse learners engage with engineering ideas and practices. This study focuses on two teachers' verbal supports in classroom discussions across two class sections of a four-week, NGSS-aligned unit that challenged students to redesign their school to reduce water runoff. We examine the research question: How and to what extent do upper-elementary teachers verbally support students' engagement with engineering practices across diverse classroom contexts in an NGSS-aligned integrated science unit? Classroom audio data was collected daily and coded to analyze support through different purposes of teacher talk. Results reveal the purpose of teachers’ talk often varied between the class sections depending on the instructional activity and indicate that teachers utilized a variety of supports toward students' engagement in different engineering practices. In one class, with a large percentage of students with individualized educational plans, teachers provided more epistemic talk about the engineering practices to contextualize the particular activities. For the other class, with a large percentage of students in advanced mathematics, teachers provided more opportunities for students to engage in discussion and support for students to do engineering. This difference in supports may decrease the opportunities for some students to rigorously engage in engineering ideas and practices. This study can inform future research on the kinds of educative supports needed to guide teaching of integrated engineering activities for diverse students.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)We worked with local K–6 teachers to develop lesson plans that would connect a 50-minute engineering design challenge, completed during a field trip, to the students’ classroom learning. The result was a model for designing pre-visit classroom activities that develop students’ familiarity with phenomena, tools, and processes that will be used during the field trip and post-visit classroom activities that provide students with opportunities to reflect on some of their field trip experiences. While the field trip activity alone is an exciting and productive learning opportunity, students who complete the full set of classroom and field trip activities participate in a richer experience that engages them in more of the practices of science and engineering and more fully develops the disciplinary core ideas related to engineering and physical science. Each Engineering Exploration module includes four activities: an engineering design activity completed during a field trip to an interactive science museum, accompanied by two preactivities and one post activity done in students’ classroom and facilitated by their elementary school teacher. While each classroom activity was designed to take no more than 50 minutes, many teachers found it valuable to extend each lesson to allow for deeper discussion and engagement with the activities. The classroom experiences presented here are associated with a field trip program in which students iteratively design a craft out of paper and tape that will hover above a “fire” (upward moving column of air) while carrying a “sensor” (washer). The classroom activities surrounding this field trip help students develop conceptual understandings of forces to navigate the engineering design challenge.more » « less
-
In introductory physics laboratory instruction, students often expect to confirm or demonstrate textbook physics concepts. This expectation is largely undesirable: labs that emphasize confirmation of textbook physics concepts are generally unsuccessful at teaching those concepts and even in contexts that do not emphasize confirmation, such expectations can lead to students disregarding or manipulating their data in order to obtain the expected result. In other words, when students expect their lab activities to confirm a known result, they may relinquish epistemic agency and violate disciplinary practices. We present a contrasting case where, we claim, confirmatory expectations can actually support productive disciplinary engagement. In this case study, we analyze the complex dynamics of students’ epistemological framing in a lab where students’ confirmatory expectations support and even generate epistemic agency and disciplinary practices, including developing original ideas, measures, and apparatuses to apply to the material world.
Published by the American Physical Society 2024