COMBINED STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE ACTIVE LEARNING AND RETENTION

COMBINED STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE ACTIVE LEARNING AND RETENTION

D. Tanner, D. Canty, J. Power (2019).  COMBINED STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE ACTIVE LEARNING AND RETENTION. 11.

Retention rates in engineering courses in Ireland and worldwide are an increasing problem. There are numerous reasons for students not progressing to the second year of their STEM courses, which can include everything from issues related to the transition from a school setting to University and living away from home. The volume of theoretical work undertaken in large lecture theatres can be off-putting to new students, who can feel isolated and can struggle with the new content and learning environments. In the first year, students often cannot visualize how the individual subjects covered are going to lead them to their engineering degree. This paper aims to analyze the introduction of an active learning component through the repurposing of a first-year spring semester module while maintaining the existing learning outcomes. A Design-Build-Compete (DBC) project requires students to work in teams to design and build a vehicle to transport a payload up a 15m slope. It requires students to use mechanics calculations along with engineering design and drawing principles to design this vehicle. Students are encouraged to employ related prior learning such as computer coding and mechanics equations learned in the previous semester to optimize their designs. To support students at the developmental stage of their designing, the module assessment approach utilizes Adaptive Comparative Judgment (ACJ) as a medium to engage students in peer assessment. This process is based on the students making multiple holistic comparative judgments on peers’ work, presented in an e-portfolio, generating a rank order of perceived quality by the group. Students also generate formative feedback through the ACJ platform, which contributes to the knowledge-building process. This has an added meta-cognitive benefit where the student is encouraged to reflect on their own design based on their judgement activity prior to receiving feedback on their individual submission. This process is repeated later in the module when the final team report/portfolios are submitted. Students work on different sections of this report and submit it as a team and then build the vehicle in the workshop using basic workshop tools. At the end of the module, all teams take part in a timed race, sponsored by local industry (Modular Automation and J&J Automation Centre of Excellence). At this event, each team is interviewed by practicing engineers who provide feedback on the project and ultimately award a number of prizes related to performance, design and teamwork

Authors (New): 
David Tanner
Donal Canty
Jason Power
Pages: 
11
Affiliations: 
University of Limerick, Ireland
Keywords: 
Design-Build-Compete
Adaptive Comparative Judgement
Integrated curriculum
student retention
Active learning
team-based approach
CDIO Standard 3
CDIO standard 4
CDIO Standard 5
CDIO Standard 7
CDIO Standard 8
CDIO Standard 11
Year: 
2019
Reference: 
Beddoes, K. P. (2018). Training and Resources for Gender Inclusive Teamwork. : 
10.15394/2018.1791
Bennedsen, J. (2011). Active Student Care - Lowering Student Dropout. 7th International CDIO Conference, (p. 8). Copenhagen.: 
Boud, D. C. (1999). Peer learning and assessment. Assessment and evaluation in higher education, 413-426.: 
Chong, K. Y. (2017). An integrated curriculum approach to develop industry-ready bimeical engineering graduates. 13th CDIO International Conference, (p. 7). Calgary, Canada.: 
Cosgrove, T. P. (2010). Educating engineers as if they were human: PBL in Civil Engineering at the University of Limerick. 3rd International Symposium for Engineering Education, (p. 8). Cork, Ireland.: 
Diggins, Y. R. (2013). Supporting First Year Students in their Academic and Social Adjustment to Higher Education. A Case study of the First Seven Weeks Programme at the University of Limerick. In C. F. : 
O'Farrell, & C. F. O'Farrell (Ed.), EDIN Emerging Issues III (pp. 178-192). Belfast, Ireland: Educational Developers in Ireland Network (EDIN). Retrieved from http://www.edin.ie/?page_id=112: 
Dym, C. L. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 103-120.: 
Edelbro C, H. E. (2017). European Initiative on CDIO in Raw Material Programmes. 13th CDIO International Conference. Calgary, Canada.: 
Edelbro, C. E. (2017). Engaging with industry stakeholders to support program development. 13th International CDIO Conference. Calgary, Canada.: 
Enelund, M. L. (2011). Integration of a computational mathematics education in the mechanical engineering curriculum. 7th International CDIO Conference, (p. 17). Copenhagen.: 
Gibbons, S. S. (2017). Making the leap: Supporting first year student transition at the University of Limerick. What Works? Student retention and success. Higher Education Academy (HEA) UK. Retrieved from https://edit.elte.hu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10831/33732/Presentation%20for%20Budapest_.pdf;jsessio nid=AAD31AB64927BE7092528EDDB2D632E8?sequence=1: 
Godfrey, E. A. (2010). Who leaves and who stays? Retention and attrition in Engineering Education. Engineering Education (EE2010) conference proceedings: inspiring the next generation of engineers, (p. 13). Birmingham.: 
Godfrey, E. K. (2010). Scoping the opportunities to aid recruitment and retention of indigenous students in engineering. 21st Australasian Association for Engineering Education (AaeE) Conference, (p. 8). Sydney.: 
Green, P. (2010). Six-Week introductory programme of Activity Led Learning to improve student engagement and retention. Engineering Education (EE2010) conference proceedings: inspiring the next generation of engineers, (p. 8). Birmingham, UK.: 
Gregory, R. &. (2013). Using group-based learning in higher education. Routledge.: 
Hallenga-Brink, S. S. (2017). Designing a flexible, choice-based, integrated, professionally challenging, multidisciplinary curriculum. 13th International CDIO Conference, (p. 17). Calgary, Canada.: 
Hermon, J. (2016). Creating new design build test experiences as outputs of undergraduate design build test projects. 12th International CDIO Conference, (p. 10). Turku, Finland.: 
Hyland, T. B. (2018). Assessing design activity in engineering education: A proposed synthesis of apaptive comparive judgement and the CDIO framework. ASEE Engineering Design Graphics Division 72nd Mid-year conference, (p. 5).: 
Joyce, T. R.-F. (2010). Evaluation of initiatives related to engagement and retention of first year mechanical engineering students at two Russell Group Universities. Engineering Education (EE2010) conference proceedings: inspiring the next generation of engineers, (p. 7). Birmingham.: 
Knight, D. C. (2007). Improving Engineering Student Retention through Hands-On, Team Based, FirstYear Design Projects. 31st International Conference on Research in Engineering Education, (p. 13). Honolulu, HI.: 
Male, S. R. (2016). Drivers and barriers to industry engaging in engineering education. 12th International CDIO Conference, (p. 10). Turku, Finland.: 
McCartan, C. H. (2010). A model to sustain engineering mathematics learning in a CDIO environment. 6th International CDIO Conference, (p. 11). Montreal.: 
Nicol, D. T. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective. Assessment and evaluation in higher education, 102-122.: 
Prince, M. J. (2006). Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 125-138.: 
Ryan, A. (2013). Industrial Automation: Providing Students with Relevant Problem Solving and Analytic Skills. 9th International CDIO Conference, (p. 10). Boston.: 
Ryan, A. G. (2017). Integrating CDIO philosophy into manufacturing engineering capstone projects. 13th International CDIO conference, (p. 11). Calgary, Canada.: 
Sadler, D. (2009). Transforming holistic assessment and grading into a vehicle for complex learning. Assessment, learning and judgement in higher education, 45-63.: 
Seery N., C. D. (2017). Assessment and Learning: The Proximal and Distal Effects of Comparative Judgment. In d. V. M., Handbook of Technology Education (p. 14). Springer.: 
Seery, N. C. (2012). The validity and value of peer assessment using adaptive comparative judgement in design driven practical education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 205- 226.: 
Tanner DA, P. J. (2017). A Review of CDIO Implementation in a First-Year Multi-Programme Module. 13th International CDIO Conference. Calgary, Canada.: 
Tio, F. (2016). Industry inspired experiential learning and assessment of teamwork. 12th International CDIO Conference, (p. 9). Turku, Finland.: 
Young, T. M. (2007). Aircraft Design Innovation: Creating an Environment for Creativity. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 165–174.: 
Go to top