June 20, 2010
June 20, 2010
June 23, 2010
15.838.1 - 15.838.7
Learning through Reverse Engineering
Engineering students have always practiced the skill of problem solving by repetition. Professors would assign problem after problem for students to attempt, struggle, and hopefully learn. Although practice through repetition is a viable method to improve student ability, many still have difficulty.
Cognitive psychologists have identified several traits of “expert” problem solvers. First, experts are known to be skilled in recognizing familiar patterns. Second, they mentally represent problems largely in terms of underlying principles. Finally, experts plan solution strategies, and detect constraints given in the problem statement. To incorporate these ideas into engineering education, a project called “Reverse Engineering” was created, and employed in a sophomore fluids mechanics class. No different than taking a piece of equipment apart to better understand its operation, students can apply the same approach to chemical engineering problems. Briefly, students were asked to generate their own problems related to a concept discussed during class, and present the solution by breaking it down into its fundamental parts. We hypothesize that students would improve their problem solving ability by dissecting problems in this manner, through cognition of underlying principles and patterns used in working towards a solution.
To this end, two student populations with similar GPAs were assessed over consecutive years. The first group (Group 1) participated in the standard curriculum, while the second group (Group 2) participated in the standard curriculum with the addition of the Reverse Engineering assignment. This assignment was executed between the second and third exams of the semester. To establish the “pretreatment” condition, scores from the second exam were compared between both groups. Statistical hypothesis testing indicate that there is no significant difference between them (i.e. Group #1 mean = 78.32, while Group #2 mean = 81.94). In contrast, comparison of the third and final exams between the two groups reveals a statistically significant difference (i.e. Group #1 mean = 73.8 and Group #2 mean = 83.02 for the third exam and Group #1 mean = 74.15 and Group #2 mean = 83.05 for the final exam) translating to an increase of 12.5% and 14.7% respectively. It is noteworthy to mention that the exams used in this study typically did not produce significantly different scores when administered in previous years, thus allowing us to conclude that they have a similar level of difficulty. The results imply that students who supplemented their learning with the Reverse Engineering technique performed better in a problem based exam compared to those who solely practiced by repetition. Taken together, assignments such as Reverse Engineering can easily be incorporated into any course to help students improve their problem solving skills.
In the most basic sense, professors teaching a fundamental engineering course will introduce a topic, demonstrate its application, and assign problems which require its utilization. Through the repetition of these problems, students become familiar with and begin to recognize patterns that indicate when to apply particular concepts. In this way, students are confined to the lower levels
O'Brien, S., & Abulencia, J. (2010, June), Learning Through Reverse Engineering Paper presented at 2010 Annual Conference & Exposition, Louisville, Kentucky. 10.18260/1-2--15958
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: © 2010 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