How engineering instructors supported students during emergency remote instruction: A case comparison

Abstract

The rapid move to emergency remote teaching (ERT) during spring 2020 revealed many challenges for instructors, especially for the team and projectbased courses that previously relied on informal, in-person interactions and laboratory equipment. The purpose of this case comparison study is to learn from this transition to identify ways that instructors can support the success of students in online, project-based courses during times of crisis. We use data from student surveys, student and instructor interviews, and course documents to examine ways that student-student and student-instructor relationships changed during the move to ERT and how instructor decisions affected these relationships. We frame our work with social capital theory and social constructivism, specifically the community of inquiry framework. We examine two case studies: a first-year engineering course and a junior-/seniorlevel engineering technology capstone course, both with large class sizes at a large research university. In both cases, students indicated that the shift to online learning decreased their access to relationships and supports from people who influenced their success and persistence. Although the instructors approached the transition differently, the data and analysis support recommendations for future moves to ERT in project-based design courses.Recommendations include: Establishing mechanisms for informal conversations between students and between students and instructors; establishing a weekly routine that includes some level of real-time, verbal communication; instructors being available for just-in-time feedback and questions as they arise; and establish a backup plan for ERT learning objectives, should the physical facilities no longer be accessible.

Considering the Community of Inquiry Framework in Online Engineering Education – A Literature Review

“…Six articles using CoI as an evaluation tool have developed other ways of evaluating than the abovementioned standardized CoI survey. Douglas et al (2022) employ a case study protocol to examine how different relationships change during the move to emergency remote teaching and how instructor decisions affect those relationships. Guo et al (2022) designed a survey to measure students' perceptions of online learning and interprets the results from a CoI perspective concerning not only the three main elements but also the dynamic relationship among them.…”

“…The articles that approach the CoI framework from an evaluation point of view mainly use it as a conceptual framework. It is used for two different purposes: to evaluate learning environments and learning experiences (Baytiyeh, 2018;Eteokleous & Ktoridou, 2012;Guo et al, 2022;Jansson et al, 2021;Kovanović et al, 2015;Lau et al, 2021;Nihlawi et al, 2018;Purwandari et al, 2022) including five comparative case studies (Douglas et al, 2022;Lim & Richardson, 2022;Rachmawati et al, 2020;Rutz & Ehrlich, 2016;Williams-Dobosz et al, 2021) and, to analyze the relationships between the different presences (social, teaching and cognitive) in the CoI framework (Nihlawi et al, 2018;Purwandari et al, 2022). An evaluation of learning environments and experiences includes questions about student satisfaction, performance, and learning.…”

“…The comparative case studies include examining differences between different levels of engineering courses (Douglas et al, 2022), traditionally underrepresented students in the field of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, and students who are nonunderrepresented (Williams-Dobosz et al, 2021), group discussion and class discussion as two types of online discussions (Rachmawati et al, 2020), different disciplines (Lim & Richardson, 2022), as well as text-based and audio feedback (Rutz & Ehrlich, 2016). Through targeting the differences, Douglas et al (2022) aim at identifying the challenges of online learning and ways to support a successful online learning experience. How online learning behaviors affect learning outcomes is examined in three articles (Lim & Richardson, 2022;Rachmawati et al, 2020;Williams-Dobosz et al, 2021).…”

“…Other important factors are self-directedness, self-actualization, interaction, and instructional guidance, where the latter is found to highly correlate with self-directedness and self-actualization. Similarly, Douglas et al (2022) recognize the importance of access to relationships and support from people, which learners believe influences their success and persistence. Therefore, it recommends the establishment of informal conversations among students as well as between students and instructors.…”

“…While recognizing the value of creating and sustaining a purposeful online learning community, it is noted that when students determine the value of the perceived cognitive, social, and teaching presence, the network speed is more significant than gender and academic discipline (Lau et al, 2021). Douglas et al (2022) focus on cognitive presence and indicate that the availability of different tools in a learning environment is not enough for their successful use. Students also need to have adequate metacognitive capabilities, skills, and motivation to use the available tools.…”