The Status of Laboratory Education Focusing on Laboratory Report Assignment and Assessment in the Engineering Programs of a 4-Year Institution

Dave Kim; John Lynch; Pavel Pisarchuk; Allegra Bryant; Danielle Gedlick; Terry Sjolander

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Publication Date: August 23, 2022
Start Date: June 26, 2022
End Date: June 29, 2022
Conference Session: Experimentation and Laboratory-Oriented Studies Division Technical Session 3: Best of ELOS
Page Count: 19
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--41148
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/41148
Download Count: 254

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Dave Kim Washington State University-Vancouver

visit author page

Dr. Dave Kim is Professor and Mechanical Engineering Program Coordinator in the School of Engineering and Computer Science at Washington State University Vancouver. His teaching and research have been in the areas of engineering materials, fracture mechanics, and manufacturing processes. In particular, he has been very active in pedagogical research in the area of writing pedagogy of engineering laboratory courses. Dr. Kim and his collaborators attracted close to $1M research grants to study writing transfer of engineering undergraduates. For the technical research, he has a long-standing involvement in research concerned with manufacturing of advanced composite materials (CFRP/titanium stack, GFRP, nanocomposites, etc.) for automotive, marine, and aerospace applications. His recent research efforts have also included the fatigue behavior of manufactured products, with the focus of fatigue strength improvement of aerospace, automotive, and rail structures. He has been the author or co-author of over 200 peer-reviewed papers in these areas.

visit author page

biography

John Lynch Washington State University

visit author page

John Lynch received the BSEE degree from the University of Utah in 1979. He worked in the aerospace and computer industries in California and Oregon from 1979 to 2002. He was an instructor at the OGI School of Engineering at Oregon Health and Science University, where he received a Ph.D. in 2009. Since 2009 he has been a professor of electrical engineering and Washington State University Vancouver.

visit author page

biography

Pavel Pisarchuk Washington State University

visit author page

I’m a junior electrical engineering student at WSUV who hopes to use his skills in the industry to help make the world a better place!

visit author page

author page

Abstract

Engineering undergraduate programs offer a variety of laboratory courses that aim to give students hands-on experience with engineering practices while also assigning lab report writing that builds communication skills within their major. This study aims to investigate how engineering programs of a branch campus in a land-grant research university offer writing education in undergraduate lab courses. Among numerous electrical engineering and mechanical engineering course offerings at the university, nine undergraduate engineering lab courses were chosen for this study. To begin, the purpose, content, environment, and grading contribution of the chosen labs were surveyed. Then, the materials provided to students in relation to lab report assignment were investigated using nine lab report writing outcomes defined in earlier studies. Finally, the provided evaluation criteria of the lab reports were studied using the same nine outcomes. The lab report writing outcomes used in the study include 1) address technical audience expectations, 2) present experimental processes, 3) illustrate lab data using appropriate graphic/table forms, 4) analyze lab data, 5) interpret lab data, 6) provide an effective conclusion, 7) develop ideas using effective reasoning and productive patterns, 8) demonstrate appropriate genre conventions, and 9) establish control of conventions for a technical audience. We concluded that, regardless of major or program level, the primary purpose and contents of the course materials were usually categorized as educational and experimental, respectively. The secondary purpose and contents were predominantly developmental and analytical. Additionally, we found that most courses explicitly addressed outcomes related to report organization, data presentation/analysis/interpretation, and writing conventions. However, the outcome related to developing ideas using effective reasoning and productive patterns was not proven to have been explicitly covered in any of the courses studied. Finally, we found that though many of the courses studied had explicitly addressed these outcomes, fewer courses directly assessed the nine outcomes. It can be interpreted that engineering students might struggle with the inconsistency between the assignment and the assessment in lab report writing.

Citation
Format

Kim, D., & Lynch, J., & Pisarchuk, P., & Bryant, A., & Gedlick, D., & Sjolander, T. (2022, August), The Status of Laboratory Education Focusing on Laboratory Report Assignment and Assessment in the Engineering Programs of a 4-Year Institution Paper presented at 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN. 10.18260/1-2--41148

TY  - CPAPER
AB  - Engineering undergraduate programs offer a variety of laboratory courses that aim to give students hands-on experience with engineering practices while also assigning lab report writing that builds communication skills within their major. This study aims to investigate how engineering programs of a branch campus in a land-grant research university offer writing education in undergraduate lab courses. Among numerous electrical engineering and mechanical engineering course offerings at the university, nine undergraduate engineering lab courses were chosen for this study. To begin, the purpose, content, environment, and grading contribution of the chosen labs were surveyed. Then, the materials provided to students in relation to lab report assignment were investigated using nine lab report writing outcomes defined in earlier studies. Finally, the provided evaluation criteria of the lab reports were studied using the same nine outcomes. The lab report writing outcomes used in the study include 1) address technical audience expectations, 2) present experimental processes, 3) illustrate lab data using appropriate graphic/table forms, 4) analyze lab data, 5) interpret lab data, 6) provide an effective conclusion, 7) develop ideas using effective reasoning and productive patterns, 8) demonstrate appropriate genre conventions, and 9) establish control of conventions for a technical audience. We concluded that, regardless of major or program level, the primary purpose and contents of the course materials were usually categorized as educational and experimental, respectively. The secondary purpose and contents were predominantly developmental and analytical. Additionally, we found that most courses explicitly addressed outcomes related to report organization, data presentation/analysis/interpretation, and writing conventions. However, the outcome related to developing ideas using effective reasoning and productive patterns was not proven to have been explicitly covered in any of the courses studied. Finally, we found that though many of the courses studied had explicitly addressed these outcomes, fewer courses directly assessed the nine outcomes. It can be interpreted that engineering students might struggle with the inconsistency between the assignment and the assessment in lab report writing. 
AU  - Dave Kim
AU  - John Lynch
AU  - Pavel Pisarchuk
AU  - Allegra Bryant
AU  - Danielle Gedlick
AU  - Terry Sjolander
CY  - Minneapolis, MN
DA  - 2022/08/23
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - The Status of Laboratory Education Focusing on Laboratory Report Assignment and Assessment in the Engineering Programs of a 4-Year Institution
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/41148
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--41148
ER  -