Students’ Metacognitive Regulation Strategies in Written Reflections within    Third-Year Introductory Environmental Engineering Course

Anu Singh; Heidi A. Diefes-Dux; Grace Panther; Logan Andrew Perry

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Portland, Oregon
Publication Date: June 23, 2024
Start Date: June 23, 2024
End Date: July 12, 2024
Conference Session: Environmental Engineering Division (ENVIRON) Technical Session 3 - Innovative Pedagogy
Tagged Division: Environmental Engineering Division (ENVIRON)
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/48029

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Anu Singh University of Nebraska, Lincoln

visit author page

Anu Singh is a Ph.D. student in Engineering Education Research at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. She completed her M.Tech in Digital Communication and her B.Tech in Electronics and Communication Engineering in India. Her research interests include self-regulation, metacognition, reflection, and argumentative writing in engineering.

visit author page

biography

Heidi A. Diefes-Dux University of Nebraska, Lincoln orcid.org/0000-0003-3635-1825

visit author page

Heidi A. Diefes-Dux is a Professor in Biological Systems Engineering at the University of Nebraska - Lincoln. She received her B.S. and M.S. in Food Science from Cornell University and her Ph.D. in Food Process Engineering from the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering at Purdue University. She was an inaugural faculty member of the School of Engineering Education at Purdue University. She is currently a Professor in Biological Systems Engineering at the University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Her role in the College of Engineering at UNL is to lead the disciplinary-based education research initiative, establishing a cadre of engineering education research faculty in the engineering departments and creating a graduate program. Her research focuses on the development, implementation, and assessment of modeling and design activities with authentic engineering contexts; the design and implementation of learning objective-based grading for transparent and fair assessment; and the integration of reflection to develop self-directed learners.

visit author page

biography

Grace Panther University of Nebraska, Lincoln

visit author page

Dr. Grace Panther is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Nebraska – Lincoln where she conducts discipline-based education research. Her research interests include faculty change, 3D spatial visualization, gender inclusive teamwork, and studying authentic engineering practice. Dr. Panther was awarded an NSF CAREER award in 2024. Dr. Panther has experience conducting workshops at engineering education conferences both nationally and internationally, has been a guest editor for a special issue of European Journal of Engineering Education on inclusive learning environments, and serves on the Australasian Journal of Engineering Education advisory committee. Dr. Panther received both her Ph.D. and M.S. in Environmental Engineering from Oregon State University.

visit author page

biography

Logan Andrew Perry University of Nebraska, Lincoln orcid.org/0000-0003-1558-2579

visit author page

Dr. Perry is an Assistant Professor of Engineering Education in the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. His work contains a unique blend of engineering education and civil engineering projects. Dr. Perry's current work centers on understandin

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Increasing emphasis on higher-order thinking skills in the engineering workplace has shifted instructors' focus toward the integration of activities in their courses that promote students' learning and thinking skills. Reflection is one such tool that assists students’ learning through metacognitive engagement, where students regulate their cognition with the use of three strategies: Planning, Monitoring, and Evaluating. Therefore, reflection has been widely accepted in professional courses such as medicine and is currently finding its place in engineering classrooms. As reflection is a complex process, instructors provide prompts to guide students' engagement in reflection. But questions arise: Do engineering students understand the characteristics of reflection? Do students need more instructional support their engaging with reflection? In-depth exploration of students’ metacognitive engagement can shed light on students' understanding of reflection. The purpose of this work was to examine students' use of metacognitive strategies while responding to their weekly reflection assignments The study aimed to address the research question: What were the students’ levels of engagement with the three metacognitive strategies while reflecting on their weekly assignments of the course? The study was set in principles of environmental engineering course offered by civil engineering department in Spring 2023 at research-intensive US Midwestern University. The total number of students enrolled in the course was N=22, there were 20 study participants. Students self-evaluated their weekly assignment using a standard solution key and responded to three reflection prompts. Data from assignments in the third and tenth week were qualitatively analyzed using a modified a priori coding scheme consisting of three dimensions: Planning, Monitoring, and Evaluating. Each metacognitive dimension consists of three or four elements. Monitoring consists of four elements: Difficulty, Experience, Identification, and Standard. Evaluation consists of three elements: Action, Assessment, and Change in thinking, and Planning consists of four elements: Goal, Action, Justification, or Transfer. Each element was assessed for level of detail (i.e., none, vague, and sufficiently). Bar graphs were plotted to present the students' level of engagement in each element of three metacognitive strategies on each reflection. Overall, when comparing the third- and tenth-week reflections, results showed that a majority of students remained at the vague level for all three metacognitive strategies. These results imply that students were engaged at a superficial level during reflection, primarily due to a lack of detail in the form of evidence for claims they are making about their learning. Recommendations for how instructors can provide support that aims to improve students’ level of engagement with metacognitive strategies are provided.

Citation
Format

Singh, A., & Diefes-Dux, H. A., & Panther, G., & Perry, L. A. (2024, June), Students’ Metacognitive Regulation Strategies in Written Reflections within Third-Year Introductory Environmental Engineering Course Paper presented at 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, Oregon. https://peer.asee.org/48029

TY - CPAPER
AB - Increasing emphasis on higher-order thinking skills in the engineering workplace has shifted instructors&#39; focus toward the integration of activities in their courses that promote students&#39; learning and thinking skills. Reflection is one such tool that assists students’ learning through metacognitive engagement, where students regulate their cognition with the use of three strategies: Planning, Monitoring, and Evaluating. Therefore, reflection has been widely accepted in professional courses such as medicine and is currently finding its place in engineering classrooms. As reflection is a complex process, instructors provide prompts to guide students&#39; engagement in reflection. But questions arise: Do engineering students understand the characteristics of reflection? Do students need more instructional support their engaging with reflection? In-depth exploration of students’ metacognitive engagement can shed light on students&#39; understanding of reflection.
The purpose of this work was to examine students&#39; use of metacognitive strategies while responding to their weekly reflection assignments The study aimed to address the research question: What were the students’ levels of engagement with the three metacognitive strategies while reflecting on their weekly assignments of the course?
The study was set in principles of environmental engineering course offered by civil engineering department in Spring 2023 at research-intensive US Midwestern University. The total number of students enrolled in the course was N=22, there were 20 study participants. Students self-evaluated their weekly assignment using a standard solution key and responded to three reflection prompts. Data from assignments in the third and tenth week were qualitatively analyzed using a modified a priori coding scheme consisting of three dimensions: Planning, Monitoring, and Evaluating. Each metacognitive dimension consists of three or four elements. Monitoring consists of four elements: Difficulty, Experience, Identification, and Standard. Evaluation consists of three elements: Action, Assessment, and Change in thinking, and Planning consists of four elements: Goal, Action, Justification, or Transfer. Each element was assessed for level of detail (i.e., none, vague, and sufficiently). Bar graphs were plotted to present the students&#39; level of engagement in each element of three metacognitive strategies on each reflection.
Overall, when comparing the third- and tenth-week reflections, results showed that a majority of students remained at the vague level for all three metacognitive strategies. These results imply that students were engaged at a superficial level during reflection, primarily due to a lack of detail in the form of evidence for claims they are making about their learning. Recommendations for how instructors can provide support that aims to improve students’ level of engagement with metacognitive strategies are provided.

AU - Anu Singh
AU - Heidi A. Diefes-Dux
AU - Grace Panther
AU - Logan Andrew Perry
CY - Portland, Oregon
DA - 2024/06/23
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Students’ Metacognitive Regulation Strategies in Written Reflections within Third-Year Introductory Environmental Engineering Course
UR - https://peer.asee.org/48029
ER -