Engineering Students’ Engagement in a Hybrid Learning Mode: Comparative Study

Engineering Students’ Engagement in a Hybrid Learning Mode: Comparative Study

S. Asaad, H. Salti, M. Farhat (2022).  Engineering Students’ Engagement in a Hybrid Learning Mode: Comparative Study. 465-473.

After almost two years since the COVID-19 pandemic hit the world, higher education institutions are adopting transitional strategies towards returning to normal campus life while respecting the health and safety regulations. An example of such strategies is the hybrid teaching model where only half of the students attend their classes physically on campus while the other half attend their classes simultaneously but online, and their attendance alternates every week. A major challenge imposed by this strategy is the complexity of students’ engagement as instructors are exposed simultaneously to two different teaching styles. In this paper, the effectiveness of an Audience Response System in terms of boosting the students’ engagement in a hybrid learning environment is investigated. The collected data is analyzed at various stages and comparative conclusions are drawn about the Audience Response System’s effectiveness over the interaction of online and on-campus students. Furthermore, an anonymous detailed survey is conducted to verify the students’ satisfaction level and to link its results with the conclusions obtained from analyzing the data of the Audience Response System.

Authors (New): 
Sami Asaad
Hassan Salti
Mohammad Farhat
Pages: 
465-473
Affiliations: 
Australian College of Kuwait, Kuwait
Keywords: 
Audience response system
Active learning
Student-centered approach
Hybrid learning
CDIO Standard 8
Year: 
2022
Reference: 
Bergtrom, G. (2006). Clicker Sets as Learning Objects. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Skills and Lifelong Learning, 2, 105–110.: 
https://doi.org/10.28945/404
Brent, R., & Felder, R. (2012). Learning by solving solved problems. 46, 29–30.: 
Farhat, M., Nahas, M., Ghareeb, N., & Khoury, R. E. (2021). Enhancement of Student Learning and Interaction in Engineering Programmes Using an Audience Response System. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 209–214.: 
Harris, S. T., & Zeng, X. (2010). Using an audience response system (ARS) in a face-to-face and distance education CPT/HCPCS coding course. Perspectives in Health Information Management, 7, 1f.: 
Hinde, K., & Hunt, A. (2006). Using the Personal Response Systems to Enhance Student Learning: Some Evidence from Teaching Economics [Chapter]. Audience Response Systems in Higher Education: Applications and Cases; IGI Global.: 
https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59140- 947-2.ch010
Kennedy, G. E., & Cutts, Q. I. (2005). The association between students’ use of an electronic voting system and their learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4), 260–268.: 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00133.x
Liguori, E., & Winkler, C. (2020). From offline to online: Challenges and opportunities for entrepreneurship education following the COVID-19 pandemic. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy, 3(4), 346-351: 
Mayer, R. E., Stull, A., DeLeeuw, K., Almeroth, K., Bimber, B., Chun, D., Bulger, M., Campbell, J., Knight, A., & Zhang, H. (2009). Clickers in college classrooms: Fostering learning with questioning methods in large lecture classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 51–57.: 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.04.002
Niyadurupola, G. (2016). The use of electronic voting systems to engage students in outreach activities. New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, 27–29.: 
https://doi.org/10.29311/ndtps.v0i4.380
Go to top
randomness