More Like this

1. What instruments do researchers use to evaluate LXD? A systematic review study

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-024-09763-0  

   Tawfik, Andrew A; Payne, Linda; Ketter, Heather; James, Jedidiah (July 2024, Technology, Knowledge and Learning)

   Abstract In contrast to traditional views of instructional design that are often focused on content development, researchers are increasingly exploring learning experience design (LXD) perspectives as a way to espouse a broader and more holistic view of learning. In addition to cognitive and affective perspectives, LXD includes perspectives on human–computer interaction that consist of usability and other interactions (ie—goal-directed user behavior). However, there is very little consensus about the quantitative instruments and surveys used by individuals to assess how learners interact with technology. This systematic review explored 627 usability studies in learning technology over the last decade in terms of the instruments (RQ1), domains (RQ2), and number of users (RQ3). Findings suggest that many usability studies rely on self-created instruments, which leads to questions about reliability and validity. Moreover, additional research suggests usability studies are largely focused within the medical and STEM domains, with very little focus on educators' perspectives (pre-service, in-service teachers). Implications for theory and practice are discussed. 

   more » « less
2. Leveraging Mixed Reality and the Three Apprenticeships Model to Facilitate & Assess Authentic Learning Experiences for Civil Engineering Students

   https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9274289  

   Perry, Logan; London, Jeremi; Wu, Wei; Ayer, Steven; Smith, Kieren; Patil, Karan (October 2020, 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE))

   null (Ed.)

   This work-in-progress paper presents highlights from a multi-year study aiming to develop and assess the impact of a mixed reality experience that sufficiently replicates the learning civil engineering students experience during a physical design and construction task. Human Centered Design principles and tenets of the Carnegie Foundation's Three Apprenticeships Model (i.e., learning related to "Head", "Hand", and "Heart") inform the project design, development, and assessments. The development of heart-focused assessments is one focus during the second year in this three-year project. This paper includes a brief overview of the project progress, in general, along with preliminary findings regarding the instrument development. It summarizes the results of a pilot study, including an item analysis of the survey responses. These findings offer preliminary evidence for the content validity and substantive validity of the instrument. Next steps and implications for the engineering education community are also discussed. 

   more » « less
3. Leveraging Mixed Reality and the Three Apprenticeships Model to Facilitate & Assess Authentic Learning Experiences for Civil Engineering Students

   Logan Perry, Jeremi London (January 2020, The 2020 Frontiers in Education Conference)

   This work-in-progress paper presents highlights from a multi-year study aiming to develop and assess the impact of a mixed reality experience that sufficiently replicates the learning civil engineering students experience during a physical design and construction task. Human Centered Design principles and tenets of the Carnegie Foundation’s Three Apprenticeships Model (i.e., learning related to “Head”, “Hand”, and “Heart”) inform the project design, development, and assessments. The development of heart-focused assessments is one focus during the second year in this three-year project. This paper includes a brief overview of the project progress, in general, along with preliminary findings regarding the instrument development. It summarizes the results of a pilot study, including an item analysis of the survey responses. These findings offer preliminary evidence for the content validity and substantive validity of the instrument. Next steps and implications for the engineering education community are also discussed. 

   more » « less
4. Process Matter(s): Leveraging the Design Process to Build Self-Directed Learning

   Paretti, Marie C.; Kotys-Schwartz, Daria; Ford, Julie; Howe, Susannah; Ott, Robin. (May 2019, Clive L. Dym Mudd Design Workshop XI)

   Capstone design courses, an established component of undergraduate engineering curricula, offer students the opportunity to synthesize their prior engineering coursework and apply professional and technical skills towards projects with practical application. During this unique experience, capstone faculty enable mentored exploration, coaching students to navigate the design process to complete complex and open-ended projects. However, each capstone scope of work requires project specific knowledge and skills that capstone students need to independently research and comprehend. Findings from our study of recent graduates during their first year on the job suggest that self-directed learning isn’t just occurring in the capstone experience, but it is also an essential skill in professional workplaces. In this paper we share data regarding participants’ experiences relying on self-directed learning while working on their capstone projects and later in post-graduation environments. We consider the ways that capstone design educators can design course content and mentor students to help promote this critical skill and conclude by offering recommendations. 

   more » « less
5. Blaming yourself, your partner, or an unexpected event: Attribution biases and trust in a physical coordination task

   https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20998  

   Hsiung, Chi‐Ping; León, Gabriel A; Stinson, David; Chiou, Erin K (September 2023, Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries)

   Abstract As robots enabled by artificial intelligence become more agentic, people may come to develop trust schemas based on a robot's actions and attribute blame to the robot as they would with a human partner. Trust and blame have yet to be investigated during dynamic physical coordination tasks despite the potential ramifications for manufacturing and service industries that could benefit from effective human–robot physical coordination. In anticipation of future human–robot work configurations, we developed a joint physical coordination task as a preliminary test environment for understanding trust and blame in a work partner. Fifty‐five participants were asked to jointly balance and transport a weighted box along a fixed path, and we used this test environment to evaluate the impact of a surprising event on trust in a work partner, and attribution of blame following a negative performance outcome. Results indicate that the group who experienced a surprising event compared to the group who did not trusted their partner more, but there was no difference in the attribution of blame to themselves, their partner, or to the surprising event. Conversely, the group who did not experience a surprising event tended to blame themselves for the negative outcome. These findings suggest that environmental uncertainty may prompt people's attribution of blame across multiple parties, including themselves. Moreover, people may build trust in work partners through the shared experience of surprising events. Future work would benefit from adopting our study design to investigate whether these findings are extendable to human–robot joint actors. 

   more » « less