Lab Every Day!! Lab Every Day?? *&%#ing Lab Every Day!? Examining Student Attitudes in a Core Engineering Course Using Hands-on Learning Every Day of Class

Erin A. Henslee; Kyle Luthy; William N. Crowe; Lindsey J. Gray

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access
Location: Virtual Conference
Publication Date: July 26, 2021
Start Date: July 26, 2021
End Date: July 19, 2022
Conference Session: Developing Teamwork, Student Attitudes, and Hardware Solutions for Laboratory Courses: Experimentation and Laboratory-oriented Studies Division
Tagged Division: Experimentation and Laboratory-Oriented Studies
Page Count: 23
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--37417
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/37417
Download Count: 253

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Erin A. Henslee Wake Forest University orcid.org/0000-0003-2765-1543

visit author page

Dr. Erin Henslee is a Founding Faculty and Assistant Professor of Engineering at Wake Forest University. Her research spans biomedical engineering, e-sports, and STEM education. Prior to joining Wake Forest she was a Researcher Development Officer at the University of Surrey where she supported Early Career Researchers. She received her BS degrees in Engineering Science and Mechanics and Mathematics from Virginia Tech, her MS degree in Biomedical Engineering from the joint program between Virginia Tech and Wake Forest University, and her PhD in Biomedical Engineering from the University of Surrey.

visit author page

author page

Abstract

Our Control Systems and Instrumentation course is a four credit, core course combining topics traditionally taught across several courses including electrical theory, instrumentation, signal processing, and controls. To meet this challenge, we took a student centered approach to the course design as well as active learning pedagogy. From this approach we structured the course where students work through theory and hands-on labs each class period. This infused basic e-theory and instrumentation with Arduino-based sensors and control algorithms, and has allowed us to align every day of the course with multiple student learning outcomes. In this work we present student outcomes of our approach. These are informed by our methods of formative and summative assessment as well as evidence of achievement through regular informal student feedback, course evaluations, observations and focus groups. Our assessment strategy has included formative assessment of daily concept check points. Every week we adjust the next week’s activities to ensure the material stayed within our cohort’s zone of proximal development, towards mastery of the content. We designed three projects aimed to reiterate learning outcomes achieved at check points throughout the semester. Summative assessment included project deliverables, homework based on theoretical problem solving, as well as a midterm and final that included a take-home portion, a partnered practical lab-based exercise, and a problem solving section. The primary challenges we have faced include how to facilitate better connections students made across the content and how to assist students in the cognitive shifts necessary in a fast-paced and pedagogically very different environment than they are used to. We have worked towards this by creating more connection opportunities through improved theoretical content, alignment of reading quizzes and structured outside of class work. We have conducted mid-term and final course evaluations as well as facilitated focus groups for three semesters. We have also conducted two semesters of classroom observations made through the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS). From these, we have discovered mixed results with regards to student attitudes towards the hands-on nature of the course. While most students have enjoyed the hands-on work, less were convinced of the connections they were making to the theory. Some students went so far as to request more lectures and less lab time. Student attitudes towards working with their partner and peer-to-peer learning were positive across cohorts and semesters. In light of this we also describe our methods of scaffolded opportunities for independent as well as peer-to-peer learning. While student preferences varied, we also present data on student behavior and achievement. Class attendance remained over 90% throughout all three semesters (including our COVID Spring semester). Student feedback has indicated a sense of obligation to their lab partners and perceived value of the in-class activities to be the primary motivators of attendance. Further, we have collected data on student achievement of summative assessments across topics in which students spend varied amounts of hands-on time with. This data suggests that topics students spent more hands-on time with resulted in better performance.

Citation
Format

Henslee, E. A., & Luthy, K., & Crowe, W. N., & Gray, L. J. (2021, July), Lab Every Day!! Lab Every Day?? *&%#ing Lab Every Day!? Examining Student Attitudes in a Core Engineering Course Using Hands-on Learning Every Day of Class Paper presented at 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access, Virtual Conference. 10.18260/1-2--37417

TY - CPAPER
AB - Our Control Systems and Instrumentation course is a four credit, core course combining topics traditionally taught across several courses including electrical theory, instrumentation, signal processing, and controls. To meet this challenge, we took a student centered approach to the course design as well as active learning pedagogy. From this approach we structured the course where students work through theory and hands-on labs each class period. This infused basic e-theory and instrumentation with Arduino-based sensors and control algorithms, and has allowed us to align every day of the course with multiple student learning outcomes. In this work we present student outcomes of our approach. These are informed by our methods of formative and summative assessment as well as evidence of achievement through regular informal student feedback, course evaluations, observations and focus groups.
Our assessment strategy has included formative assessment of daily concept check points. Every week we adjust the next week’s activities to ensure the material stayed within our cohort’s zone of proximal development, towards mastery of the content. We designed three projects aimed to reiterate learning outcomes achieved at check points throughout the semester. Summative assessment included project deliverables, homework based on theoretical problem solving, as well as a midterm and final that included a take-home portion, a partnered practical lab-based exercise, and a problem solving section.
The primary challenges we have faced include how to facilitate better connections students made across the content and how to assist students in the cognitive shifts necessary in a fast-paced and pedagogically very different environment than they are used to. We have worked towards this by creating more connection opportunities through improved theoretical content, alignment of reading quizzes and structured outside of class work. We have conducted mid-term and final course evaluations as well as facilitated focus groups for three semesters. We have also conducted two semesters of classroom observations made through the Classroom Observation Protocol for Undergraduate STEM (COPUS). From these, we have discovered mixed results with regards to student attitudes towards the hands-on nature of the course. While most students have enjoyed the hands-on work, less were convinced of the connections they were making to the theory. Some students went so far as to request more lectures and less lab time. Student attitudes towards working with their partner and peer-to-peer learning were positive across cohorts and semesters. In light of this we also describe our methods of scaffolded opportunities for independent as well as peer-to-peer learning.
While student preferences varied, we also present data on student behavior and achievement. Class attendance remained over 90% throughout all three semesters (including our COVID Spring semester). Student feedback has indicated a sense of obligation to their lab partners and perceived value of the in-class activities to be the primary motivators of attendance. Further, we have collected data on student achievement of summative assessments across topics in which students spend varied amounts of hands-on time with. This data suggests that topics students spent more hands-on time with resulted in better performance.

AU - Erin A. Henslee
AU - Kyle Luthy
AU - William N. Crowe
AU - Lindsey J. Gray
CY - Virtual Conference
DA - 2021/07/26
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Lab Every Day!! Lab Every Day?? *&%#ing Lab Every Day!? Examining Student Attitudes in a Core Engineering Course Using Hands-on Learning Every Day of Class
UR - https://peer.asee.org/37417
DO - 10.18260/1-2--37417
ER -