7 YEAR ITERATIVE IMPROVEMENTS IN LABORATORY WORK - CONSTRUCTIVE ALIGNMENT

Home » 7 YEAR ITERATIVE IMPRO ...

7 YEAR ITERATIVE IMPROVEMENTS IN LABORATORY WORK - CONSTRUCTIVE ALIGNMENT

2022 18th International CDIO Conference, Reykjavik University, Iceland
PDF icon 58.pdf

Most agree that laboratory work is essential for engineering learning. The purpose of laboratory work is usually to the deepen understanding of the material and/or to prepare students for the workforce. However, having well thought out experiments certainly does not guarantee that those goals are met. In order to meet those goals constructive alignment is of utmost importance. Having appropriate learning outcomes, appropriate assignments corresponding to the laboratory work and having it aligned to coverage in lectures is crucial to reach constructive alignment. Having an appropriate group size in the laboratory work is also vital. The group size needs to fit the number of tasks in each experiment but also to fit the assignment format to ensure active engagement of all members. This paper presents an experiment on improving laboratory work component of an undergraduate Fluid Mechanics course in Mechanical and Chemical Engineering at University of Iceland. The experiment spans the years from 2015 to 2021, where several adjustments in the laboratory were tested. The measurements tools include i) midterm and ii) end of term student teaching quality surveys with Likert scale questions and open-ended replies, iii) a survey specially made by the author to target the laboratory work (with Likert scale questions and open-ended replies) and iv) a focus group interview on the same subject. The experiment sparked because a large portion of students complained that the workload of the laboratory work was immense and in no correlation to the ECTS units given for the course. This turned out to be a valid point. More seriously students also complained that they did not see the purpose of the laboratory work and that they learned nothing from it. By making adjustments to the alignment of material coverage and laboratory work, by reducing idle time in the laboratory, by adjusting the laboratory work assignment, by making sure the group size was manageable and more significant improvements were seen in reduced student workload perception, student perceived learning, student enjoyment of the laboratory and students saw the purpose of the laboratory. Since workload perception may differ from actual workload it may be assumed that with better structure and learning, workload perception was reduced with the same learning objectives. Some of those results have been published in two papers in the journal International Journal of Engineering Education but this paper emphasizes the newest developments since their publications and more detailed cumulative analysis.

Authors (New): 
Ásdís Helgadóttir
Pages: 
859-868
Affiliations: 
University of Iceland, Iceland
Keywords: 
laboratory work
Formative Assessment
Assignments
group work
Constructive alignment
CDIO Standard 1
CDIO Standard 2
CDIO Standard 3
CDIO Standard 6
CDIO Standard 7
CDIO Standard 8
CDIO Standard 10
CDIO Standard 11
CDIO Standard 12
Year: 
2022
Reference: 
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32, 347-364.: 
Bloom, S. W. (1989). The medical school as a social organization: the sources of resistance to change. Medical Education, 23(3), 228-241.: 
Buntine, M. A., Read, J. R., Barrie, S. C., Bucat, R. B., Crisp, G. T., George, A. V., Jamie, I. M. & Kable, S. H. (2007). Advancing Chemistry by Enhancing Learning in the Laboratory (ACELL): a model for providing professional and personal development and facilitating improved student laboratory learning outcomes. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8, 232-254.: 
Chamber, E. (1992). Work-load and the quality of student learning. Studies in Higher Education, 17, 141-153.: 
Chen, B., DeMara, R. F., Salehi, S., & Hartshorne, R. (2018). Elevating Learner Achievement Using Formative Electronic Lab Assessments in the Engineering Laboratory: A Viable Alternative to Weekly Lab Reports. IEEE Transactions on Education, 61, 1-10.: 
Chew, B.-S., Seow, B.-C., Tan, C.-S., Leck, H.-K., Chia, C.-L., & Toh, S.-K. (2021, June 21-23). Implementation of e-practical lessons during pandemic. Paper presented at the The 17th International CDIO conference, hosted online by Chulalongkorn University & Rajamangala University of Technology Thanyaburi, Bangkok, Thailand.: 
Cranston, G., & Lock, G. (2012). Techniques to encourage interactive student learning in a laboratory setting. Engineering Education - a Journal of the Higher Education Academy, 7, 2-10.: 
Derrick, B., Toher, D., & White, P. (2016). Why Welch’s test is Type I error robust. The Quantitative Methods in Psychology, 12(1), 30-38.: 
Entwistle, N. (2009). Chapter 3. How students learn and study. In Teaching for Understanding at University: Deep Approaches and Distinctive Ways of Thinking (pp. 25-89): Palgrave Macmillan.: 
Feisel, L. D., & Rose, A. J. (2005). The Role of the Laboratory in Undergraduate Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 94, 121-130.: 
Grant, A. D. (1995). The Effective Use of Laboratories in Undergraduate Courses. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 23, 95-101.: 
Helgadottir, A., Palsson, H., & Geirsdottir, G. (2020). Balancing Student Workload with Learning Outcome – The Search for Suitable Assignment Format for a Fluid Mechanics Lab International Journal of Engineering Education, 36(6), 1924-1937.: 
Helgadottir, A., Palsson, H., & Geirsdottir, G. (2022). Improving Student Learning Experience in Fluid Mechanics with Lecture/Lab Alignment and Post-Lab Discussion. International of Engineering Education, 38(1), 264-282.: 
Heslop, M. J. (2017). Developmental laboratory report-writing programme based on progression throughout the year: how to make better use of staff/student time and increase student satisfaction. Education for Chemical Engineers, 2, 62-71.: 
Hicks, T., Bruner, J., & Kaya, T. (2017). Implementation of Blogging as an Alternative to the Lab Report. International Journal of Engineering Education, 33, 1257-1270.: 
Hoffa, D. W., & Freeman, S. A. (2007). The Impact of Laboratory Report Format on Student Learning. International Journal of Engineering Education, 23, 105-113.: 
Hunsu, N. J., Abdul, B., van Wie, B. J., Adesope, O., & Brown, G. R. (2015). Exploring Students' Perceptions of an Innovative Active Learning Paradigm in a Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer Course. International Journal of Engineering Education, 31, 1200-1212.: 
Hunsu, N. J., Abdul, B., Wie, B. J. V., O. Adesope, & Brown, G. R. (2015). Exploring Students' Perceptions of an Innovative Active Learning Paradigm in a Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer Course. International Journal of Engineering Education, 31, 1200-1212.: 
Kember, D. (2004). Interpreting student workload and the factors that shape students' perceptions of their workload. Studies in Higher Education, 29, 166-184.: 
Kresta, S. (1998). Hands-on Demonstrations: An Alternative to Full Scale Lab Experiments. Journal of Engineering Education, 87, 7-9.: 
Lal, S., Lucey, A. D., Lindsay, E. D., Treagust, D. F., Long, J. M., Mocerino, M., & Zadnik, M. G. (2020). Student perceptions of instruction sheets in face-to-face and remotely-operated engineering laboratory learning. European Journal of Engineering Education, 45(4), 491-515.: 
McKeachie, W., & Svinicki, M. (2014). McKeachie's Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research and Theory for College and University Teachers (14th ed.): Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.: 
Nikolic, S., Ritz, C., Vial, P. J., Ros, M., & Stirling, D. (2014). Decoding Student Satisfaction: How to Manage and Improve the Laboratory Experience. IEEE Transactions on Education, 58(3), 151-158.: 
Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education: Society for Research into Higher Education.: 
Rodgers, T. L., Cheema, N., Vasanth, S., Jamshed, A., Alfutimie, A., & Scully, P. J. (2020). Developing pre-laboratory videos for enhancing student preparedness. European Journal of Engineering Education, 45(2), 292-304.: 
Shibl, A., Anwar, M. N., Wegdan Wagdi, W., & Ali, M. G. A. (2020, June 8-10). CDIO Implementation for mechanical courses ap Pharos University in Alexandria. Paper presented at the The 16th International CDIO conference, hosted on-line by Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.: 
Sigurdsson, B. (2011). Mæling náms í ektum - undirstaða gæðastarfs? Vefritið Netla, 1-12.: 
Whittle, S. R., & Bickerdike, S. R. (2015). Online Preparation Resources Help First Year Students to Benefit from Practical Classes. Journal of Biological Education, 49(2).: 
on October 14, 2022 - 03:38   Maria Siiskonen
  • Printer-friendly version
Go to top