time. The developed web-based exercises are for a one-week segment on freebody diagrams and include video clips with opportunities for students to apply concepts boththrough multiple choice questions and interactive exercises. Class time during this week isdevoted to additional hands-on exercises with some supplemental lecture content. Pilot datahave been collected and results are reported on both the quantitative and qualitative information.Quantitative data include measures of performance on concept inventory questions and exams, aswell as self-efficacy data. Qualitative information includes individual homework and in-classwork as well as in-class pair work. In addition to presenting initial findings from our research,we will discuss how
theonline activities of Homework 3, 4, and 6). These three during-the-quarter surveysincluded pre and post measures. While some questions varied with online activity, totrack students’ progress of self-efficacy from beginning to end, there were two questions,which were asked consistently throughout the quarter that we refer to herein as Case 1 inthis study. These questions were:1) “How confident are you in drawing a free-body diagram?” This question was asked in the beginning of quarter survey, Homework 3-pre survey, Homework 3-post survey, Homework 4-pre survey, Homework 4-post survey, and end of quarter survey. Page 26.1672.92) “How confident
engineeringprofessionals all had a generally positive attitude towards the inclusion of project-based learningin curriculum. Furthermore, the inclusion of project-based learning has been found to have severalpositive impacts. Even though these projects generally take away from the amount of timededicated to lectures, these tradeoffs do not detract from the understanding of course content, andstudents even gain a better ability to adapt their knowledge to new situations [4]. These types ofcourses have also been found to improve performance and retention at all levels of education [5–7]. Working on these types of projects has been shown to boost self-efficacy and careeraspirations [8]. Self-efficacy (or a person’s belief in their ability to complete a task
studies to validatetheir results due to the short length of their research or small classroom size. In addition, many ofthese studies do not measure student attitudes, such as self-efficacy, or the difference in timespent out of class on coursework.The objective of this research is to determine the effectiveness of the flipped classroom system incomparison to the traditional classroom system (TC) in a large mechanics of materials course.Specifically, it aims to measure student performance, student self-efficacy, student attitudes onlecture quality, motivation, attendance, hours spent out of class, practice, and support, anddifference in impact between high, middle, and low achieving students. In order to accomplishthis, three undergraduate
driven device,in conjunction with a load cell, to test the mechanical properties of a material.For analysis, an experimental section of this class was compared to a control section, using anengineering self-efficacy survey. While the two showed similar result on concepts learned, therewere a few concepts where the experimental section was behind the control section. However, themain goal of this survey was to show that the project in the experimental section didn’t cause thosestudents to fall too far behind their counterparts.Introduction and BackgroundIn higher education, especially in the STEM fields, there is an ever-growing pool of knowledge tobe learned in a relatively short amount of time. Until recently, the method of teaching
of pre-CI scores. Interestingly,looking at the concept inventory scores for the top and bottom 20% of students measured byparticipation as presented in Table 2, the top 20% students for each cohort showed greaterimprovement when compared with the bottom 20%. For the small cohort, the percentageimprovements in CI scores were 64.9% and 72.9% for the bottom and top 20%, respectively. Forthe large cohort, the percentage improvements in CI scores were 9.1% and 47.3% for the bottomand top 20%, respectively. Thus the small cohort displayed greater performance gains overallregardless of participation level, while the gains for the large cohort showed greater difference onthe basis of participation level.Results from the qualitative self-efficacy
; Clauss, 2010). Some correlation would seem to be prerequisitefor application of the survey response data to other teaching goals such as formative assessment,learner self-efficacy development, and course design evaluation. Another potentially interestingapproach would be to compare survey response data to an alternative assessment measure suchas the Statics Concept Inventory (Steif, 2005). This potential correlation could be interesting toexplore in the future.It is important to note that in this study, students were encouraged to use the survey as a tool toidentify focus areas for their exam preparation efforts. If students successfully followed thisadvice, then their exam scores should be generally higher than their survey scores
, allowing education researchers andpractitioners to “see” how the predicted results are generated, and thus the predicted results canbe interpreted in a reasonable and meaningful way 11. For example, Green 12 developed a set oflinear regression models for three mechanical engineering courses to predict a student’s finalexam score from the student’s scores in mid-term quizzes. A modest correlation was foundbetween a student’s final exam score and mid-term exam scores. Yousuf 13 developed amultivariate linear regression model to predict student academic performance in ComputerScience and Engineering Technology programs. The predictor/independent variables ofYousuf’s model 13 included a student’s career self-efficacy belief, math-SAT scores, high
, NY, 2016.[8] M. K. Ponton, J. H. Edmister, L. S. Ukeiley, and J. M. Seiner. Understanding the role of self- efficacy in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(2):247–251, 2001.[9] N. E. Betz and R. S. Schifano. Evaluation of an intervention to increase realistic self- efficacy and interests in college women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56(1):35–52, 2000.[10] J.J. Froh and G. Bono. Gratitude in youth: A review of gratitude interventions and some ideas for applications. Communique, 39(5):26–28, 2011.[11] J. Kabat-Zinn. Mindfulness-based interventions in context: Past, present, and future. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 10(2):144–156, 2003.[12] M. Hoffman, J. Richmond, J. Morrow, and K
simplicity of the modeland the potential for learning. Some of the participants indicated the benefit of “having thephysical experience” and “looking at if it was stretching or compressing.” Other participantsexpressed what they observed while working with the physical manipulative such as “I can takemy work from paper to real life,” “I can see the effects of forces at different points,” and “I canlook for deformation and I can feel confident assuming directions using the model.” The latterhas large potential impacts upon self-efficacy for those who crave a visual confirmation of whatthey analytically prove. One of the participants mentioned that “it took me going throughmultiple homework problems to figure out what I could figure out here in just a
better than those receiving face-to-face instruction” [5]. A study of college algebra students at a community college producedsimilar findings, showing that online homework was “just as effective as textbook homework inhelping students learn college algebra and in improving students’ self-efficacy” [6]. It was alsoobserved that “online homework may be even more effective for helping the large population ofcollege algebra students who enroll in the course with inadequate prerequisite math skills.” Someuniversities have found that the use of WeBWorK correlated with small, yet statisticallysignificant improvement in performance on exams relative to classes that did not use it [7, 2].Diverse groups of students seem to react positively to using
face of adversity and significantstress [8]. It is often described in terms of “bouncing back” from difficult experiences [e.g., 9,10, 11]. Resilience is a multidimensional construct [12] that is defined differently depending onthe context in which it is investigated. For example, in a study of how children developresilience, Maclean [13] discussed a wide range of factors including self-esteem, self-efficacy,locus of control, initiative, faith and morality, trust, affection, safe environment, autonomy,identity, and more. In an educational context, resilience has been defined as the “the heightenedlikelihood of success in school and in other life accomplishments, despite environmentaladversities” [14]. Similarly, Novotný and Kreménková [12
was designed to assess improvements in studentlearning and self-efficacy for those participating in the redesigned Introduction to Statics course.Of the 90 students enrolled in the course, 61% (n=55) participated in with complete pre- andpost-course survey responses. Of participating students, 60% are underrepresented minoritystudents (with one or more of the following identities: women, non-binary gender, Black,Latinx). The remaining 40% are white men. At the time of taking the course, 78% ofparticipating students were in their second year of college, 14% were in their third year, and 8%were in their fourth year.Data were collected using a retrospective survey. The Student Assessment of their LearningGains (SALG) was administered at the end
is likelyhighly dependent on the foundation they have brought to the course. More general academicskills and attributes such as motivation, self-regulation, self-efficacy, sense of belonging andmindset also influence how students engage with the course.Existing research demonstrates the importance of math and physics preparation to studentsuccess in mechanics [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. Problem solving skill is also clearly an importantcomponent to success [5]. The correlation of spatial abilities to broader measures of success andretention for engineering majors in general is well-established [6]. However, existing studiesexploring the importance of spatial abilities to success in mechanics courses find mixed results.Many fundamental concepts
semester that ratedconfidence to determine self efficacy improvement. A similar method could be of use in thefuture to build upon the current survey questions that aimed to gauge student understandingthrough rating their level of knowledge. Self efficacy would be a similar, but perhaps moremeaningful measurement, as students would be able to more accurately self-report this on asurvey. It would also provide a great deal more insight to have numbers that can be compared,and thus provide a more accurate sense of video influence on student learning.In addition to the more qualitative, opinion based data provided by the survey, it may be helpfulto incorporate assessments that more directly illustrate how the videos improve understanding ofconcepts
learning andconcludes that even brief activities introduced into the lecture can increase learning. The entirecourse need not be project-based. Simply adding discussions can have a positive impact onstudents’ intrinsic motivation [19]. If we use Bonwell and Eison’s [20] definition of activelearning as “anything that involves students doing things and thinking about the things they aredoing,” the possibilities are vast. Nie and Lau [1] found adding small activities that encouragestudents to explore in-depth, analyze, discuss, write, apply, or question increased students’ deepprocessing strategies and increased self-efficacy. Felder and Silverman [21] also conclude that asmall number of techniques such as alternating lecture with pauses for
-copying-texas-tech-2/. [Accessed 30 Jan 2018].[9] A. Williams, "Online homework vs. traditional homework: Statistics anxiety and self- efficacy in an educational statistics course.," Technology Innovations in Statistics Education, vol. 6, no. 1, 2012.[10] V. Berandi, "The impact of using randomized homework values on student learning. The Journal of Effective Teaching. 2011; 11(2): 4-7.," The Journal of Effective Teaching, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 4-7, 2011.[11] S. Condoor and S. Jayaram, "Learning Statics- A Foundational Approach," in Annual Conference of the American Society of Engineering Education AC 2008-2105, 2008.[12] T. Ji and A. J. Bell, "Seeing and touching structural concepts in class teaching," in The Proceedings of
to cement the notation and approach whilethey are working on problems familiar to them from Physics I).The good performance in Objectives F.1 and F.2 demonstrate that if you focus on thedevelopment of math skills, the students can get to mastery. We employ a full array ofmathematical tools (from algebra through calculus and differential equations) throughout thesemester. In the beginning, the students struggle with vector notation (both how to do it and whatit means physically) and they have little confidence in their calculus skills. Regular practicemoves them toward better self-efficacy. Students can generally do much more than we initiallyexpect, but they need the support and encouragement to get there. They are also in a period
, “Effects of process-oriented worked examples on troubleshooting transfer performance,” Learn. Instr., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 154–164, Apr. 2006.[6] M. Ward and J. Sweller, “Structuring effective worked examples,” Cogn. Instr., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–39, 1990.[7] K. J. Crippen and B. L. Earl, “The impact of web-based worked examples and self-explanation on performance, problem solving, and self-efficacy,” Comput. Educ., vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 809–821, Nov. 2007.[8] A. Renkl, R. Stark, H. Gruber, and H. Mandl, “Learning from worked-out examples: The effects of example variability and elicited self-explanations,” Contemp. Educ. Psychol., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 90–108, Jan. 1998.[9] B. M. Mclaren, S. Lim, and K. R. Koedinger
offered additional proof that developing and delivering at a distance a Dynamicscourse, using instructional design best practices, is equivalent to a F2Fcourse as reflected by thestudent outcomes and perceptions.Reference[1] J. Bourne, D. Harris and F. Mayadas, "On-Line engineering education: Learning anywhere, anytime," Journal of Engineering Education, 2005.[2] S. Huang and J. Mativo, "Impact of interventions on students’ conceptual understanding of dynamics, principles and self-efficacy.," in ASEE, Paper #12469, Seattle, WA, 2015.[3] L. G. Gary, F. Constanzo, D. Evans, P. Cornwell, B. Self and J. L. Lane, "The Dynamics Concept Inventory Assessment Test: A Progress Report and Some Results," in ASEE, Portland, OR, 2005