San Antonio, Texas
June 10, 2012
June 10, 2012
June 13, 2012
25.306.1 - 25.306.16
Chocolate Challenge: The Motivational Effects of Optional Projects in an Introductory Engineering ClassIntroductory engineering classes typically aim to challenge the average incoming freshman.However, as a result of superior education, talent or both, some incoming students enterengineering programs prepared for more challenging activities. Introductory courses also delivera particular breadth of material in a fixed format to students with various interests and learningstyles. Unfortunately, either the course’s emphasis or delivery style may differ with students’expectations. The consequences for better prepared students or those with different expectationsmay be dissatisfaction, disengagement, and potentially disillusionment with engineering.Offering a series of optional challenge projects spanning multiple disciplines is proposed as ameans to maintain student engagement and motivation for learning.Specifically, we study the motivational effects of offering optional challenge projects tofreshmen engineering students enrolled in an introductory engineering course. The bi-levelchallenges first invite all students to solve mathematical or applied engineering puzzles with adifficulty level slightly beyond that expected of the average engineering freshman. Winners ofthe first level of each challenge earn recognition, a large chocolate bar (hence the name) and theright to engage in the challenge’s second level. Second level challenges require students toindependently obtain and apply discipline oriented engineering knowledge. Successfulapplication results in a tangible benefit to the student directly related to the type of engineeringactivity undertaken. For instance, one second level challenge requires a student to independentlylearn 3D modeling software and the workings of a rapid prototyping machine to build a partdesigned by the student. The student keeps the fruit of his engineering labors.To assess the impact of these optional challenge projects on student motivation, we used anexperimental design. Students in one lecture section were offered the Chocolate Challengeopportunities while students in the control group were not. All lecture sections were large(100+students each), and although different instructors taught the experimental and control groups, thecommon syllabus and lecture materials used in the courses provided continuity over sections.We implemented a pre/post survey design using the Motivated Strategies for LearningQuestionnaire (MSLQ), a reliable and valid survey instrument designed to assess motivation incollege courses. The MSLQ contains sub-scales for a variety of motivation constructs includinggoal orientations, task values, and self-efficacy. The survey was given on-line at the start of thesemester and again at the end of the semester. Approximately 244 students in the ChocolateChallenge group and 331 students in the comparison group received invitations to participate inan on-line survey with 105 usable responses. The response rate was approximately 18%.Although low, this meets typical response rates for on-line surveys. The post survey includedthe same questions as the pre-survey with additional open-ended questions designed to furtherexplicate impacts of the Chocolate Challenge. Comparing pre and post survey results, findingssuggest that student motivation changes during the semester. Moreover, students specificallymentioned the Chocolate Challenge in their responses.
Reap, J., & Matusovich, H. M., & Louis, R. A. (2012, June), Chocolate Challenge: The Motivational Effects of Optional Projects in an Introductory Engineering Class Paper presented at 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, Texas. https://peer.asee.org/21064
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2012 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015