Berg, D., & Schmitz, A. (2022, August), Work-in-Progress: Polytechnic Perceptions of the Engineering Classroom Experience  Paper presented at 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN. 10.18260/1-2--40536

\bibitem{asee_peer_40536}
  Berg, D., \& Schmitz, A. (2022, August), \emph{Work-in-Progress: Polytechnic Perceptions of the Engineering Classroom Experience}
  Paper presented at 2022 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Minneapolis, MN.
  10.18260/1-2--40536

Devin Berg and Anne Schmitz.  "Work-in-Progress: Polytechnic Perceptions of the Engineering Classroom Experience".  2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN, 2022, August.  ASEE Conferences, 2022.  https://peer.asee.org/40536 Internet.  03 May, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_40536}
  Devin Berg and Anne Schmitz.
  "Work-in-Progress: Polytechnic Perceptions of the Engineering Classroom Experience".
  \emph{2022 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Minneapolis, MN, 2022, August}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2022.
  https://peer.asee.org/40536 Internet.  03 May, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_40536
author = "Devin Berg and Anne Schmitz"
title = "Work-in-Progress: Polytechnic Perceptions of the Engineering Classroom Experience"
booktitle = "2022 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2022"
month = "August"
address = "Minneapolis, MN"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/40536}
number = {10.18260/1-2--40536}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  - In this paper, we examine student perceptions of different delivery modalities used in two sections of a course in machine component design. This is an undergraduate course required for mechanical engineering and engineering technology students. The goal of this study is to investigate how an instructor’s chosen pedagogy relates to a student’s perception of a course, within the context of a polytechnic institution. Students in two sections of the course, taught by two different instructors, were surveyed using both qualitative and quantitative questions to compare between two pedagogical approaches. One approach utilized open-ended problem solving and another focused more on structured lecture and laboratory activities. The results suggest that student perceptions of the polytechnic nature of a class did not significantly differ between the two pedagogical approaches. Students found each class to be representative of a polytechnic nature because hands-on, physical labs were utilized. It did not matter if the lab activities were open-ended or structured. This aligned with the students’ definition of what polytechnic education means: “hands-on”.
AU  - Devin Berg
AU  - Anne Schmitz
CY  - Minneapolis, MN
DA  - 2022/08/23
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Work-in-Progress: Polytechnic Perceptions of the Engineering Classroom Experience
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/40536
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--40536
ER  -