Use of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning for Introduction to Materials
- Conference
- Location
-
Indianapolis, Indiana
- Publication Date
-
June 15, 2014
- Start Date
-
June 15, 2014
- End Date
-
June 18, 2014
- ISSN
-
2153-5965
- Conference Session
- Tagged Division
-
Materials
- Page Count
-
8
- Page Numbers
-
24.1313.1 - 24.1313.8
- DOI
-
10.18260/1-2--23246
- Permanent URL
-
https://peer.asee.org/23246
- Download Count
-
364
Paper Authors
Elliot P. Douglas University of Florida
Elliot P. Douglas is Associate Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, Dean's Fellow for Engineering Education, and Distinguished Teaching Scholar at the University of Florida. He conducts research in the areas of engineering problem-solving, critical thinking, active learning, and qualitative methodologies.
Timothy M Raymond Bucknell University
Cindy Waters North Carolina A&T State University
Cindy K. Waters is an Assistant Professor in the Mechanical Engineering at NCA&T State University. She is a B.S. and M.S graduate from Virginia Tech in Materials Science and Engineering Department and a 2004 PhD graduate in Mechanical Engineering, from NCA&T. Her research is in the development and characterization of novel syntactic foams and various porous metals via powder metallurgy and foam casting. She is also significantly involved in engineering education research in the areas of assessment studies of classroom material science pedagogical implementations; case studies in various engineering disciplines and; engineering faculty barriers to adopt evidence-based (or nontraditional) teaching methods . She serves as the College of Engineering liaison to ASEE and advises the Society of Women Engineers student chapter and leads the students in developing and implementing yearly outreach events for the K-8 female community. She is author of many peer-reviewed conference proceeding for the ASEE Annual Meetings and the FIE meetings.
William L. Hughes Boise State University
Dr. William L. Hughes, Associate Professor of Materials Science & Engineering, joined Boise State University in August, 2008. In 2010, he also joined St. Luke’s Regional Medical Center in Boise, Idaho as an affiliate faculty and research council member. He is a member of the university’s interdisciplinary Nanoscale Materials and Device Research Group, where his team engineers biomolecular tools made from DNA. Dr. Hughes has received recognition and funding for science, teaching, and civic engagement.
Mirka Koro-Ljungberg University of Florida
Mirka Koro-Ljungberg (Ph.D., University of Helsinki) is a Professor of qualitative research methodology at the University of Florida. Prior her tenure at the University of Florida, she conducted research as a visiting scholar at the University of Georgia. Her research and publications focus on various conceptual and theoretical aspects of qualitative inquiry and participant-driven methodologies.
M David Miller University of Florida
M. David Miller is a Professor in Educational Research and Evaluation Methods. He is also the Director of the Collaborative Assessment and Program Evaluation Services. He teaches evaluation and test theory. He is the author of two books and more than 80 refereed publications on research methods.
Abstract
Use of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning for Introduction to MaterialsActive learning techniques are being increasingly used within engineering because of the improvedstudent outcomes that result (Prince & Felder, 2006). One such approach is Process Oriented GuidedInquiry Learning (POGIL). In a POGIL class the students work in teams to complete a series of questionsthat take them through the learning cycle (Abraham & Renner, 1986; Lawson, 1995; Renner, 1985) todevelop concepts on their own (Farrell, Moog, & Spencer, 1999; Hanson & Wolfskill, 2000). WhilePOGIL has been used extensively within chemistry, its first use in engineering has occurred withinmaterials engineering (self-citations removed for blind review). Research is needed to understand howPOGIL is used within engineering and its effectiveness compared to traditional lectures. The researchquestions addressed by this study are: 1) Does POGIL lead to increased understanding of materialsengineering concepts compared to a lecture class; 2) How is POGIL implemented across diverse types ofuniversities?POGIL was used for the Introduction to Materials class in four universities in the USA with distinctlydifferent characteristics. Class materials such as the syllabus, homework and exam questions, readingassignments, and student goals and goal reflections were collected for each class, and were analyzedusing content analysis. At each university a lecture class was used as a control, and quantitativemeasurements of student learning and perceived learning gains were collected through the MaterialsConcept Inventory and the Student Assessment of Learning Gains.Quantitative results from one academic year show that the POGIL classes led to increased gains on theMCI compared to lecture classes. For three of the four schools the gain is not statistically significant, butstill exhibits this trend. Content analysis of course materials and student reflections shows that theemphasis the students see in the class reflects differences in the populations at each institution. Resultsfrom the use of POGIL within chemistry (Farrell, et al., 1999; Hanson & Wolfskill, 2000), and from theuse of other active learning techniques in engineering (Prince & Felder, 2006), show that students learnmore when these techniques are used. Our preliminary results suggest that this finding holds for the use ofPOGIL in engineering. More broadly, the results show how the use and effectiveness of POGIL isaffected by the type of university. The results will provide guidance for other educators seeking to useactive learning techniques in their own classrooms.Abraham, M. R., & Renner, J. W. (1986). The sequence of learning cycle activities in high school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(2), 121-143.Farrell, J. J., Moog, R. S., & Spencer, J. N. (1999). A guided inquiry general chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 570-574.Hanson, D., & Wolfskill, T. (2000). Process workshops - a new model for instruction. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(1), 120-130.Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.Prince, M. J., & Felder, R. M. (2006). Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 123-138.Renner, J. W. (1985). The importance of the form of student acquisition of data in physics learning cycles. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(4), 303-325.
Douglas, E. P., & Raymond, T. M., & Waters, C., & Hughes, W. L., & Koro-Ljungberg, M., & Miller, M. D. (2014, June), Use of Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning for Introduction to Materials Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10.18260/1-2--23246
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: © 2014 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