More Like this

1. Board 208: Achieving Active Learning through Collaborative Online Lab Experiences

   https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--42620  

   Yoo, Julia; Sayil, Selahattin; Tcheslavski, Gleb (June 2023, ASEE Conferences)

   In engineering education, laboratory learning that is well aligned with core content knowledge is instrumental as it plays a significant role in students’ knowledge construction, application, and distribution. Learning in laboratories is interactive in nature, and therefore students who learn engineering through online platforms can face many challenges with labs, which were frequently documented during the recent pandemic. To address those reported challenges, innovative online lab learning modules were developed and learning strategies were implemented in five courses in electrical engineering, Circuits I, Electronics I, Electronics II, Signals and Systems, and Microcomputers I, through which students gain solid foundation before students take on senior design projects. Lab modules with open-ended design learning experience through using a lab-in-a-box approach were developed to allow students to solve lab problems with multiple approaches that allow problem solving independently and collaboratively. Because this innovative lab design allows problem solving at various cognitive levels, it is better suited for concept exploration and collaborative lab learning environments as opposed to the traditional lab works with a “cookbook” approach that tend to lead students to follow certain procedures for expected solutions with the absence of problem exploration stage. In addition to the open-ended lab modules, course instructors formed online lab groups through which students shared the entire problem-solving process from ideas formation to solutions through trial and error. To investigate the effectiveness of the open-ended online lab learning experiences, students in all courses were randomly divided into experimental and control groups. Students in the control group learned in labs through learning materials that are aligned with core concepts by following a completed given procedures students in the experimental group learned through inquiry-based labs learning materials that required them to work in teams by integrating core concepts together to find solutions with multiple approaches. To maximize the online lab learning effect and to replicate the way industry, commerce and research practice, instructor structured cooperative learning strategies were applied along with pre-lab simulations and videos. The research results showed that generally students in the experimental group outperformed their counterparts in labs especially with more advanced concept understanding and applications, but showed mixed results for the overall class performance based on their course learning outcomes such as quizzes, lab reports, and tests. Further, survey results showed that 72% of students reported open-ended lab learning helped them learn better. According to interviews, the initial stage of working with team members was somewhat challenging from difficulties in finding time to work together for discussion and problem solving. Yet, through many communication tools, such as course LMS and mobile apps they were able to collaborate in lab problems, which also led them to build learning communities that went beyond the courses. 

   more » « less
2. Implementing Collaborative Online Lab Experiences to Facilitate Active Learning

   Tcheslavski, GV; Yoo, J; Sayil, S (June 2024, ASEE)

   Laboratory experience is among the key components in engineering education. It is highly instrumental and plays a significant role in students’ knowledge building, application, and distribution. Learning in laboratories is interactive and often collaborative. On the other hand, students, who learn engineering through online mechanisms, may face challenges with labs, which were frequently documented during the recent pandemic. To address such challenges, innovative online lab learning modules were developed, and learning strategies were implemented in five courses in electrical engineering, Circuits I, Electronics I, Electronics II, Signals and Systems, and Embedded System, through which students gain solid foundation before advancing to senior design projects. The two main incorporated strategies were Open-Ended lab design and Teamwork implementation. Open-Ended lab modules using a lab-in-a-box approach allow students solving lab problems with multiple approaches fostering problem solving both independently and collaboratively. This innovative lab design promotes problem solving at various cognitive levels. It is better suited for concept exploration and collaborative lab learning environments as opposed to the traditional lab works with a prescribed approach leading students to follow certain procedures that may lack the problem exploration stage. Additionally, course instructors formed online lab groups, so that students were sharing the problem-solving process – from ideas formation to solutions – with their peers. To evaluate the effectiveness of the implemented lab strategies, students in the participating courses were randomly divided into experimental and control groups. Both assignment grades and students' feedback via surveys were used to evaluate students' learning. Participants in the control group were learning in labs through the materials that were aligned with core concepts by following predetermined procedures. Students in the experimental group learned through inquiry-based lab materials that required them to work in teams by integrating core concepts together to find a solution and while following one of potentially many approaches. To maximize the online lab learning effect and to replicate the contemporary industry, commerce, and research practices, instructor-structured cooperative learning strategies were applied along with pre-lab simulations and instructional videos. This paper showcases the outcomes of our 2nd year implementation of active learning laboratory strategies on the mixed population of online and face-to-face students. We observed that students in the experimental group generally outperformed their counterparts in labs and showed significantly higher results in the assignments addressing more advanced concept understanding and applications (grand average of 88.3% vs. 66.3%). Surveys also indicated that students saw the benefits of collaboration with Open-Ended lab modules not only for learning concepts, but also for improving their communication skills. Students were able to collaborate on lab problems through various communication tools, such as course Learning Management System (LMS) and mobile apps forming online learning communities. We believe that that the implementation of open-ended collaborative laboratory strategies can assist students in cultivating a deeper comprehension, fostering self-confidence, and refining their critical thinking abilities, all while strengthening their sense of inclusion within the field of engineering. 

   more » « less
3. Investigating the Effect of Engineering Undergraduates’ Writing Transfer Modes on Lab Report Writing in Entry-level Engineering Lab Courses

   Riley, Charles E.; Kim, Dave; Lulay, Ken; Lynch, John D.; St.Clair, Sean (June 2021, 2021 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings)

   Engineering undergraduates are exposed to a variety of writing curricula, such as first-year-composition courses, in their early program of study; however, they have difficulties meeting the expectations of writing in early engineering courses. On the other hand, instructors in entry-level engineering lab courses struggle to instruct lab report writing due to a wide range of student writing backgrounds and pressure to focus on technical content. When using the lens of learning transfer theories, which describe the processes and the effective extent to which past experiences affect learning and performance in a new situation, we can classify engineering students in three writing transfer modes: 1) concurrent transfer, which occurs when a rhetorically-focused technical writing class is taken concurrently or prior to engineering labs in the major; 2) vertical transfer, which occurs when a rhetorically-focused general education writing class is taken prior to engineering labs in the major; and 3) absent transfer, which occurs when no rhetorically-focused writing class exists (rather literature-focused) or writing-intensive courses are not required in the general education curriculum. This study aims to investigate how the engineering sophomore’s past writing experience, specifically in collegiate writing or writing-across-the-curriculum courses, affects their engineering lab report writing. Lab reports from four sophomore engineering courses (1 civil, 2 electrical, 1 general engineering) across three institutions collected for analysis consisted of two sets: the sample sets in early labs (for example, Lab 1) and in later labs (for example, the last lab) of the courses. A total of 46 reports (22 early and 24 later) were collected from 22 engineering sophomores during AY2019-2020. Four engineering faculty (1 civil, 1 electrical, and 2 mechanical engineering) developed a rubric based on lab report writing student outcomes, which are aligned with the existing outcomes such as ABET outcomes and the student outcomes from the Council of Writing Program Administrators (WPA). The data suggest that the greatest writing gains in a first lab course are made by vertical transfer students, while concurrent transfer students enter with skills developed in prior writing coursework. The largest improvements among the three transfer modes were found in the student outcomes related to lab data presentation, analysis, and interpretation. In these outcomes, the concurrent transfer students had relatively high scores for both early and later reports, while the vertical transfer students improved their scores from relatively low in early reports to meet expectations in later reports. Absent transfer students demonstrated inconsistent outcomes and deserve greater study with more data than was available for this study. 

   more » « less
4. The Effect of a Paired Lab on Course Completion and Grades in Nonmajors Introductory Biology

   https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-03-0041  

   DeFeo, Dayna Jean; Bibler, Andrew; Gerken, Sarah; Schussler, Elisabeth (September 2020, CBE—Life Sciences Education)

   This paper explores the effect of a paired lab course on students’ course outcomes in nonmajors introductory biology at the University of Alaska Anchorage. We compare course completion and final grades for 10,793 students (3736 who simultaneously enrolled in the lab and 7057 who did not). Unconditionally, students who self-select into the lab are more likely to complete the course and to earn a higher grade than students who do not. However, when we condition on observable course, academic, and demographic characteristics, we find much of this difference in student performance outcomes is attributable to selection bias, rather than an effect of the lab itself. The data and discussion challenge the misconception that labs serve as recitations for lecture content, noting that the learning objectives of science labs should be more clearly articulated and assessed independent of lecture course outcomes. 

   more » « less
5. Implementing Integrated Project-Based Learning Outcomes in a 21st-Century Environmental Engineering Curriculum

   Gallagher, S.; Phillips, A.; Lauchnor, E.; Hohner, A.; Stein, O. R.; Woolard, C. R.; Kirkland, C. M.; Plymesser, K (June 2022, 2023 ASEE annual conference exposition)

   Engineering education research and accreditation criteria have for some time emphasized that to adequately prepare engineers to meet 21st century challenges, programs need to move toward an approach that integrates professional knowledge, skills, and real-world experiences throughout the curriculum [1], [2], [3]. An integrated approach allows students to draw connections between different disciplinary content, develop professional skills through practice, and relate their emerging engineering competencies to the problems and communities they care about [4], [5]. Despite the known benefits, the challenges to implementing such major programmatic changes are myriad, including faculty’s limited expertise outside their own disciplinary area of specialization and lack of perspective of professional learning outcomes across the curriculum. In 2020, Montana State University initiated a five-year NSF-funded Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (RED) project to transform its environmental engineering program by replacing traditional topic-focused courses with a newly developed integrated and project-based curriculum (IPBC). The project engages all tenure-track faculty in the environmental engineering program as well as faculty from five external departments in a collaborative, iterative process to define what students should be expected to know and do at the completion of the undergraduate program. In the process, sustainability, professionalism, and systems thinking arose as foundational pillars of the successful environmental engineer and are proposed as three knowledge threads that can be woven throughout environmental engineering curricula. The paper explores the two-year programmatic redesign process and examines how lessons learned through the process can be applied to course development as the team transitions into the implementation phase of the project. Two new integrated project-based learning courses targeting the 1st- and 2nd-year levels will be taught in academic year 2023-2024. The approach described in this work can be utilized by similar programs as a model for bottom-up curriculum development and integration of non-technical content, which will be necessary for educating engineers of the future. 

   more » « less