Long term stability of learning outcomes in undergraduates after an open-inquiry instruction on thermal science

Abstract

This paper investigates the efficacy of an open-inquiry approach to achieve a long term stability of physics instruction. This study represents the natural continuation of a research project started four years ago when a sample of thirty engineering undergraduates, having already attended traditional university physics instruction, were involved in a six-week long learning experience of open-inquiry research activities within the highly motivating context of developing a thermodynamically efficient space base on Mars. Four years later, we explore the effectiveness of that learning experience by analyzing the outcomes that the students achieved by answering again the same questionnaire that was administered them both prior to and immediately after those activities. As we did in the first work, students' answers were classified within three epistemological profiles. Now, a comparison among students' outcomes during the three phases, namely, preinstruction, postinstruction, and after four years has been carried out. Immediately after the open-inquiry experience, the students obtained significant benefits in terms of the strengthening of their practical and reasoning abilities, by proficiently applying the learned concepts to face and solve real-world problem situations. In this study, the students' answers do not highlight any significant regress towards their preinstruction profiles. The global robustness of the teaching strategy adopted four years ago is confirmed by a statistically significant comparison with a control group of students who experienced the same curricular instruction except for the open inquiry-based workshop. Nevertheless, some changes have been observed and discussed in the light of the answers the students provided to a short interview regarding their studying or working experiences across the four-year temporal window.

Inquiry-based environments for bio-signal processing training in engineering education

“…10 Inquiry is a form of active learning: students are engaged in several combined activities of identifying questions, analysing a problem, developing a plan for study and exploration activities, collecting data in a laboratory or in a real life environment, constructing suppositions - by making a distinction among possible options -, building explication models, discussing and comparing them in a context of “peer to peer”. 8,9,11–13 The teacher takes the difficult role of planning a scientific inquiry plan for his/her students by selecting tactics able to improve the understanding in learners, selecting content and contexts that create interest and curiosity. The educator, as a coach, facilitates the learning, focusing on the scientific inquiry, organizing working groups, challenging the students to accept and share responsibilities related to their learning, identifying the differences among learners.…”

“…Discovery-based teaching strategies, fostering an engagement in activities similar to those carried out by scientists, can provide learners with opportunities to strengthen their understanding on how scientific knowledge is produced in real research contexts. 5–9 This paper describes the effectiveness and weakness of two inquiry-based environments experienced in recent years by Engineering students at the University of Palermo (Italy). We present and discuss these learning workshops, with the objective of improving current instruction and training in Engineering courses, via an active engagement, at the Ph.D or graduate level, which oftentimes do not have a laboratory component.…”

Design of an open-lab activity for engineering students: A case study

“…Results of research in science and engineering education strongly encourage the involvement of graduate/undergraduate students in laboratory activities based on inquiry-based strategies 2–7 of student-centered active learning. 8–11 In this work, the research-like workshop is designed to improve student comprehension and retention of theoretical concepts; develop critical thinking skills and reasoning abilities; encourage communication, sharing, and discussion among students; and enhance student satisfaction, curiosity, and desire to gain effective learning.…”

“…Providing a concrete contextualization of laboratory practice generally improves student motivation and learning outcomes. 3,6,12…”

Active learning in a real‐world bioengineering problem: A pilot‐study on ophthalmologic data processing

“…This methodology is based on the idea that knowledge is acquired by the students through active learning accomplishments rather than by being directly transmitted by the teacher or thrusting on it . Discovery‐based teaching strategies, which promote an involvement in activities similar to those carried out by scientists, can provide the students with opportunities to deepen their understanding on how scientific knowledge is produced in real research contexts . Recent reports remark that University curricula should include “integrative laboratory experiences that promote inquiry, relevance, and hands‐on experience” .…”