Amal AbdelSattar
ABSTRACT
Traditional teaching practices have long been criticised as inadequate and inappropriate for engineering student learning, as they create a passive learning environment. Engineering students learn better using a modern method of teaching that is based on participating, acting, reacting, and reflecting, rather than by watching and listening to lectures. Active learning is one of the methods that develops professional knowledge and understanding of concept application and organisational, management, and communication skills. This paper discusses the advantages of implementing an active learning approach as an integral part of engineering education. It presents the challenges encountered in applying the active learning approach and the proposed method to adjust them in detail. The paper also describes the main teaching strategies of the active learning approach that could be implemented in engineering education.
- National Commission on Education (NCE). 1983. A nation at risk, U.S. Dept. of Education, NCE, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- Johnson, P.A. 1999. Problem-based, cooperative learning in the engineering classroom. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 125(1), 8--11.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Montgomery, S. and Fogler, H.S. 1996. Selecting computer-aided instructional software. Journal of Engineering Education, 85(1), 53--60.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Olinger, D.J. and Hermanson, J.C. 2002. Integrated thermal-fluid experiments in WPI's discovery classroom. Journal of Engineering Education, 91(2), 239--243.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Felder, R.M. and Brent, R. 2016. Teaching and learning STEM. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Savage, R.N., Chen, K.C., and Vanasupa, L. 2007. Integrating project-based learning throughout the undergraduate engineering curriculum. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 8(3/4), 15--27.Google Scholar
- Freeman, S., Eddy S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., and Wenderoth, M.P. 2014. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceeding of National Academy of Sciences USA, 111(23), 8410--8415.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Prince, M. 2004. Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223--231.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Petersen, C. and Gorman, K. 2014. Strategies to address common challenges when teaching in an active learning classroom. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, (137), 63--70. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/doi/10.1002/tl.20086/fullGoogle Scholar
- Michael, J. 2007. Faculty perceptions about barriers to active learning. College Teaching, 55, 42--47.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Aksit, F., Niemi, H., and Nevgi, A. 2016. Why is active learning so difficult to implement? The Turkish case. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(4).Google Scholar
- Bitzer, D. 1986. The PLATO project at the University of Illinois. Journal of Engineering Education, 77(4), 175--180.Google Scholar
- Nirmalakhandan, N. and Speece, R.E. 1989. Developing computer-based tutoring and simulation programs using Hypercard. ASCE National Conference on Environmental Engineering, Austin, Tex.Google Scholar
- Hotchkiss, R.H. 1994. Teaching with multimedia: Example and issues. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 120(3), 279--289.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mourtos, N.J. 1997. The Nuts and Bolts of Cooperative Learning in Engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 86, 35--37.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kresta, S.M. 1998. Hands-on demonstrations: An alternative to full scale lab experiments. Journal of Engineering Education., 87(1), 7--9.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Egeman, E., Edwards, F., and Nirmalakhandan, N. 1998. Computer simulation models in environmental engineering education. Water Science and Technology, 38(1), 295--302.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Maskel, D. 1999. Student-based assessment in a multidisciplinary problem-based learning environment. Journal of Engineering Education, 88(2), 237--241.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Paterson, K.G. 1999. Student perceptions of Internet-based learning tools in environmental engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 88(3), 295--304.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wettstein, S.G. 2018. Self-paced, active problem-solving using immediate feedback (IF-AT; scratch-off) forms in Large Classes, ASEE Journal of Advances in Engineering Education (AEE), 6(3), 1--18.Google Scholar
- Hake, R.R. 1998. Interactive-engagement vs. traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64--74.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Douglas, E.P. and Chiu C-C. 2013. Implementation of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) in Engineering. ASEE Journal of Advances in Engineering Education (AEE), 3(3), n3Google Scholar
- Felder, R.M. 1995. A longitudinal study of engineering student performance and retention. IV. Instructional methods. Journal of Engineering Education no. 84, 361--367.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Demetry, C. and Groccia, J.E. 1997. A comparative assessment of students' experiences in two instruc-tional formats of an introductory materials science course. Journal of Engineering Education no. 86, 203--210.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Terenzini, P.T., Cabrera, A.F., Colbeck, C.L., Parente, J.M., and Bjorklund, S.A. 2001. Collaborative learning vs. lecture/discussion: Students' reported learning gains. Journal of Engineering Education no. 90, 123--130.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Polanco, R., Calderón, P., and Delgado, F. 2004. Effects of a problem-based learning program on engineering students' academic achievements in a Mexican university, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41(2), 145--155.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Laws, P., Sokoloff, D., and Thornton, R. 1999. Promoting Active Learning Using the Results of Physics Education Research, UniServe Science News, Vol. 13.Google Scholar
- Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., and Wenderoth, M.P. 2014. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 111, 8410--8415.Google ScholarCross Ref
- El-adaway, I., Pierrakos, O., and Truax, D. 2015. Sustainable construction education using problem-based learning and service learning pedagogies. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 141, 1.Google Scholar
- Justo, E. and Delgado Trujillo, A. 2014. Change to competence-based education in structural engineering. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice. Online first. 05014005.Google Scholar
- Biech, E. 2015. Experiential learning. In 101 More Ways to Make Training Active, E. Biech (Ed.).Google Scholar
- Davis, K.A. and Cline, R.C. 2009. Improving course comprehension through experiential learning. Building a Sustainable Future.Google Scholar
- Kolb, A.Y. and Kolb, D.A. 2009. The learning way meta-cognitive aspects of experiential learning. Simul. Gaming, 40(3), 297--327. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dancz, C.L.A., Bilec, M.M., and Landis, A.E. 2018. Active experiential sustainable engineering module for engineering education. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 144(1), 04017011.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cantor, J.A. 1997. Experiential learning in higher education: Linking classroom and community. ERIC Digest No. ED404948, George Washington Univ., Washington, DC.Google Scholar
- Abdel-Sattar, A. 2017. Implementation of student-centered learning approach in building surveying course. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Science Index 126, International Journal of Social, Behavioral, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial Engineering, 11(6), 1628--1631.Google Scholar
- MacRobert, C. 2018. Introducing engineering judgment through active learning. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice. 144.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hsieh, S. and Hsieh, P.Y. 2004. Integrating virtual learning system for programmable logic controller. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(2), 169--178.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nahvi, M. 1996. Dynamics of student-computer interaction in a simulation environment: Reflections on Curricular Issues. Proceedings of Frontiers in Education '96, IEEE, 1383--1386.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Khandan, N., Ricketts, C., McShannon, J., and Barrett, S. 2007. Teaching tools to promote active learning: case study. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice. 133.Google Scholar
- Lee, V.S. 2012. What is inquiry-guided learning? New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 5--14.Google Scholar
- Koretsky, M., Keeler, J., Ivanovitch, J., and Cao, Y. 2018. The role of pedagogical tools in active learning: a case for sense-making. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(18), 2--20.Google Scholar
- Young, J.R. 1995. Classes on the web. The Chronicle of Higher Education, November 3, 1995, A27, A32--A33.Google Scholar
- Labib, W. 2016. An implementation of multi-media applications in teaching structural design to architectural students. International Journal of Social, Educational, Economic, Business and Industrial Engineering, 10(1), 112--116.Google Scholar
- Tang, S., Hanneghan, M., and El-Rhalibi, A. 2009. Introduction to games-based learning. In games-based learning advancement for multisensory human computer interfaces: Techniques and effective practices (pp. 1--17) IGI Global.Google Scholar
- García, I. and Cano, E. 2018. A computer game for teaching and learning algebra topics at undergraduate level. Computer Applications in Engineering Educcation, 26, 326--340.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Millis, B. and Cottell, P. Jr. 1998. Cooperative learning for higher education faculty. American Council on Education, ORYX Press.Google Scholar
- Yang, W., Yuan, N., Chinthammit, W., and Kang, B. 2019. A distributed case- and project-based learning to design 3D lab on electronic engineering education. Computer Applications in Engineering Educcation. 1--22.Google Scholar
- Hall, S.R., Waitz, I., Brodeur, D.R., Soderholm, D.H., and Nasr, R. 2002. Adoption of active learning in a lecture-based engineering class. 32nd Annual Frontiers in Education, Boston, MA, USA, T2A-T2A.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Active Learning in Engineering Education: Teaching Strategies and Methods of Overcoming Challenges
Recommendations
Awareness of and receptiveness to active learning strategies among STEM faculty
FIE '12: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)Despite strong evidence of the positive impact of active learning strategies, STEM faculty demonstrate a spectrum of receptiveness to incorporating active learning into their classrooms, and for a variety of reasons, engineering classes continue to be ...
Special session - from active learning to liberative pedagogies: alternative teaching philosophies in CSET education
FIE'09: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE international conference on Frontiers in education conferenceFrontiers in Education has a history of special sessions focused on alternative and/or feminist pedagogies, and they have tended to attract a wide range of participants with varying levels of experience with such pedagogies. This special session is ...
A novel engineering outreach to high school education
FIE'09: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE international conference on Frontiers in education conferenceThe demand for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) students consistently outpaces supply. One of the recognized means for improving the readiness of high school students for STEM-related careers is outreach to high school programs. ...
Comments