“A Guide to Student-active Online Learning in Engineering”

Authors: Erik Kyrkjebø,
Affiliation: Western Norway University of Applied Sciences
Reference: 2020, Vol 41, No 2, pp. 91-107.

Keywords: Online learning, Engineering, Social processes, Student-active, Mobile Robotics

Abstract: Online learning in higher education is becoming increasingly common as the possibilities of the available digital infrastructure expand. A recent emergent driver for online learning is the closing of universities to limit the spread of the coronavirus (COVID-19). Many educators are now faced with the need to make their teaching digital, though they have little or no experience with online teaching methods. In such a situation, learning outcomes may come second to what can be readily implemented by available digital resources. In this paper, a design for student-active online learning in engineering is proposed as a guide to help take account of learning objectives first, and the digital tools and resources necessary to achieve those objectives second. % in when choosing online learning strategies. In addition, the paper emphasises the social dimension of online learning, and recommends that explicit actions should be taken to increase positive social relations between students in an online course to be able to succeed with student-active learning methods. In the paper, a clear path is followed from objectives to learning activities, and then to assessments and evaluations, and appropriate digital tools and resources are suggested to support activities and evaluations in an online course. Online courses in engineering are targeted in particular, and challenges that arise from common activities such as problem solving and practical work in an online engineering course are addressed. The proposed guide emphasises usability to ensure that it can be used even by inexperienced digital educators, and an example on how the guide can be applied to design an online course in mobile robotics is given. The proposed guide aims to help shift online learning in engineering from traditionally teacher-active lectures to more student-active learning activities.

PDF PDF (899 Kb)        DOI: 10.4173/mic.2020.2.5

References:
[1] Biggs, J. (1999). Biggs, J, What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development. 18(1):57--75. doi:10.1080/0729436990180105
[2] Corke, P. (2017). Corke, P, Robotics, Vision and Control: Fundamental Algorithms in Matlab. Springer International Publishing, 2 edition. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-54413-7
[3] Dale, E. (1954). Dale, E, Audio-visual methods in teaching. The Dryden Press, 2 edition. .
[4] Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., and Wenderoth, M.P. (2014). Freeman, S, , Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., and Wenderoth, M.P. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 111(23):8410--8415. doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111
[5] Goodhew, P. (2014). Goodhew, P, Teaching Engineering. UKCME. .
[6] Goodyear, P. (2002). Goodyear, P, Teaching Online, pages 79--101. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht. doi:10.1007/978-94-010-0593-7_5
[7] Hampel, R. (2006). Hampel, R, Rethinking task design for the digital age: A framework for language teaching and learning in a synchronous online environment. ReCALL. 18(1):105–121. doi:10.1017/S0958344006000711
[8] Hannay, M. and Newvine, T. (2006). Hannay, M, and Newvine, T. Perceptions of distance learning: A comparison of online and traditional learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 2(1):1--11. .
[9] Johnson, D.W. and Johnson, R.T. (2009). Johnson, D, W. and Johnson, R.T. An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher. 38(5):365--379. doi:10.3102/0013189x09339057
[10] Keengwe, J. and Kidd, T.T. (2010). Keengwe, J, and Kidd, T.T. Towards best practices in online learning and teaching in higher education. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 6(2):533--541. .
[11] Lalley, J.P. and Miller, R.H. (2007). Lalley, J, P. and Miller, R.H. The learning pyramid: Does it point teachers in the right direction? Education. 128(1):64 -- 79. .
[12] Letrud, K. (2012). Letrud, K, A rebuttal of ntl institute's learning pyramid. Education. 133(1). .
[13] Ludvigsen, K., Ness, I.J., and Timmis, S. (2019). Ludvigsen, K, , Ness, I.J., and Timmis, S. Writing on the wall: How the use of technology can open dialogical spaces in lectures. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 34:100559. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2019.02.007
[14] Marton, F. and Saljoe, R. (1976). Marton, F, and Saljoe, R. On qualitative differences in learning: I --- outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 46(1):4--11. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x
[15] National Academy of Engineering. (2008). National Academy of Engineering, Changing the Conversation: Messages for Improving Public Understanding of Engineering. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. doi:10.17226/12187
[16] Olapiriyakul, K. and Scher, J.M. (2006). Olapiriyakul, K, and Scher, J.M. A guide to establishing hybrid learning courses: Employing information technology to create a new learning experience, and a case study. The Internet and Higher Education. 9(4):287 -- 301. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.08.001
[17] Pawley, A.L. (2009). Pawley, A, L. Universalized narratives: Patterns in how faculty members define “engineering”. Journal of Engineering Education. 98(4):309--319. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01029.x
[18] Pigford, V.D. (1974). Pigford, V, D. A comparison of an individual laboratory method with a group teacher -demonstration method in teaching measurement and estimation in metric units to preservice elementary teachers. Technical report, Florida State University, ERIC Document Service (ED108928). .
[19] Salmon, G. (2002). Salmon, G, E-tivities: The Key to Active Online Learning. Kogan Page, London. .
[20] Wieman, C.E. (2014). Wieman, C, E. Large-scale comparison of science teaching methods sends clear message. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 111(23):8319--8320. doi:10.1073/pnas.1407304111


BibTeX:
@article{MIC-2020-2-5,
  title={{A Guide to Student-active Online Learning in Engineering}},
  author={Kyrkjebø, Erik},
  journal={Modeling, Identification and Control},
  volume={41},
  number={2},
  pages={91--107},
  year={2020},
  doi={10.4173/mic.2020.2.5},
  publisher={Norwegian Society of Automatic Control}
};