First Steps in Understanding Engineering Students' Growth of Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in an Interactive Learning Context

Abstract

The development of procedural knowledge in students, i.e., the ability to effectively solve domain problems, is the goal of many instructional initiatives in engineering education. The present study examined learning in a rich learning environment in which students read text, listened to narrations, interacted with simulations, and solved problems using instructional software for thermodynamics. Twenty‐three engineering and science majors who had not taken a thermodynamics course provided verbal protocol data as they used this software. The data were analyzed for cognitive processes. There were three major findings: (1) students expressed significantly more cognitive activity on computer screens requiring interaction compared to text‐based screens; (2) there were striking individual differences in the extent to which students employed the materials; and (3) verbalizations revealed that students applied predominantly lower‐level cognitive processes when engaging these materials, and they failed to connect the conceptual and procedural knowledge in ways that would lead to deeper understanding. The results provide a baseline for additional studies of more advanced students in order to gain insight into how students develop skill in engineering.

Is the Answer Reasonable or Ridiculous? Common Factors among Students Who Display High Engineering Intuition on Technology-aided Solutions

“…8 While some shallow learning is necessary, for example to learn discipline-specific terminology, most educators strive to achieve deep learning in their classrooms. Study results are mixed learning gains associated with use of technology, with some reporting shallow learning gains 9 and others resulting in deeper learning. [10][11][12][13] Technology implementation through simulations or virtual experiments give students experiences at little cost (other than computing facilities), increased flexibility (can be completed outside of class), and greater breadth (some experiences are not feasible unless simulated).…”

Reasonable or Ridiculous? Engineering Intuition in Simulations

“…First described by Marton and Säljö, 8 deep learning occurs when students try to understand the material while shallow learning occurs when students simply memorize the material. Some studies have found that including instructional software emphasized lower-level cognitive processes, 9 but a larger number report learning gains when implementing technology in the classroom through virtual experiments or online instruction. [10][11][12][13] Additionally, incorporating simulations into the classroom can increase visualization and problem-solving processes, 14,15 as well as show positive gains in student selfefficacy with respect to engineering skills.…”

Unpacking Latent Diversity

“…Understanding how to actualize these alternative ways of thinking and innovative mindsets in students' engineering identity development is key to creating engineers that fit with the National Academy of Engineering's vision for the Engineer of 2020 4 and developing diversity in thoughts and innovation. A recent focus in engineering education on cognitive diversity has highlighted some aspects of latent diversity [24][25][26][27][28][29] (e.g., ways of thinking and problem solving) but not others (e.g., motivation or epistemology).…”

“…Understanding how to actualize these alternative ways of thinking and innovative mindsets in students' engineering identity development is key to creating engineers that fit with the National Academy of Engineering's vision for the Engineer of 2020 4 and developing diversity in thoughts and innovation. A recent focus in engineering education on cognitive diversity has highlighted some aspects of latent diversity [24][25][26][27][28][29] (e.g., ways of thinking and problem solving) but not others (e.g., motivation or epistemology).In the following sections, I explore the some of the current engineering education literature around particular theoretical constructs commonly used to understand how students navigate their engineering pathways. I focus on a starting set of attitudes, mindsets, and beliefs that are widely researched and often used in understanding diverse students' pathways from a demographic standpoint.…”