Design of learning spaces for engineering education

BACKGROUND OR CONTEXT: With the re-imagining of engineering education at Deakin University an opportunity was presented with the ability to design purpose built spaces. With this development a review of leading practice educational spaces was undertaken specifically in a product development unit as well as a materials unit. Whilst both areas have different needs there were some common elements with the location of teaching aids, apparatus and experimental set-up and collaborative teaching spaces.
PURPOSE OR GOAL: This study examined what would a best practice learning environment look like in two different disciplines and what is the connection and similarities in a problem based learning environment. A benchmarking study and literature review on best practice was undertaken; this learning space was intrinsically linked to the educational model. Aspects of the educational model have started to be implemented in this long term project
APPROACH: Student perceptions were measured primarily through standard unit feedback for both units as well as student comments on the units. Engagement of students was the primary focus of the redesign of purpose built spaces as well as curriculum review. By placing students into specifically designed spaces to enhance learning outcomes it is anticipated that the knowledge and skills attainment will be higher for all students.
DISCUSSION: The redevelopment of learning spaces has forced staff to think hard about their units and how space impacts on student educations. With both the materials and product development units, student had the ability to move through spaces depending on what they were doing. This ability to move is a combination of the educational model, the facilities and staff/student interaction.
RECOMMENDATIONS/IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSION: While part of a long term redevelopment of facilities and curriculum, it has been found that when the facilities match the educational model student engagement is higher. This has been support in both the literature and observation through student and staff evaluations of the unit. It is expected that as students adapt to the new educational model further they will make greater use of the purpose built facilities.

Does student engagement improve when 1:1 device technologies are used and adapted to cater for individual learning styles during online delivery of engineering courses?

BACKGROUND OR CONTEXT: A developing international engineering industry is dependent on competition and innovation, creating a market for highly skilled graduates from respected overseas and Australian Engineering universities. The delivery of engineering teaching and learning via blended faceto-face, problem based, research focused and online collaborative learning will continue to be the foundation of future engineering education, however, it will be those institutions who can reshape its learning spaces within a culture of innovation using 1:1 devices that will continue to attract the brightest minds. Investing in educational research that explores the preferred learning styles of learners and matching this to specifically designed 1:1 personalized web applications may be the ‘value add’ to improve student engagement. In this paper, a survey of Australian engineering education is presented and contrasted against a backdrop of internationally recognised educational pedagogy to demonstrate how engineering teaching and learning has changed over time. This paper draws on research and identifies a gap where a necessity to question the validity of 1:1 devices as the next step in the evolution of engineering education needs to be undertaken. How will teaching and learning look using 1:1 devices and will it drive student demand into engineering higher
education courses. Will this lead to improving professional standards within a dynamic engineering education context? How will current and future teaching and learning be influenced by constructivism using 1:1 device technologies? How will the engineering industry benefit from higher education investment in individualised engineering education
using 1:1 devices for teaching and learning?
PURPOSE OR GOAL: To review the current academic thinking around the topic of 1:1 devices within higher education engineering teaching and learning context in Australia. To identify any gaps in the current understandings and use of 1:1 devices within engineering courses in Australia. To generate discussion and better understanding about how the use of 1:1 devices may hinder and/or improve teaching and learning and student engagement.
APPROACH: A review covering the development of engineering education in Australia and a broader international review of engineering teaching methodology. To identify the extent of research into the use and effectiveness of online strategies within engineering education utilising 1:1 devices for teaching and learning. i.e. “Students must feel that they are part of a learning community and derive motivation to engage in the study material from the lecturer.’ (Lloyd et al., 2001) It is proposed to add to the current body of understandings and explore the effectiveness of a constructiveness teaching approach using course material specifically designed to cater for individual learning styles and delivered via the use of 1:1 devices in the classroom. It is anticipated the research will contrast current engineering teaching and learning practices and identify factors that will facilitate a greater understanding about student connectedness and engagement with the teaching and learning experience; where a constructiveness environment is supported with the use of 1:1 devices. Also, it is anticipated that the constructed learning environment will foster a culture of innovation and students will be empowered to take control of their own learning and be encouraged to contribute back to the discussion initiated by the lecture and/or course material with the aid of 1:1 device technologies. A gap has been identified in the academic literature that show there is a need to understand the relationship between engineering teaching, learning, students engagement and the use of 1:1 devices.
DISCUSSION: A review covering the development of engineering education in Australia and a broader international review of engineering teaching methodology. To identify the extent of research into the use and effectiveness of online strategies within engineering education utilising 1:1 devices for teaching and learning. i.e. “Students must feel that they are part of a learning community and derive motivation to engage in the study material from the lecturer.’ (Lloyd et al., 2001) It is proposed to add to the current body of understandings and explore the effectiveness of a constructiveness teaching approach using course material specifically designed to cater for individual learning styles and delivered via the use of 1:1 devices in the classroom.
ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES: It is anticipated the research will contrast current engineering teaching and learning practices and identify factors that will facilitate a greater understanding about student connectedness and engagement with the teaching and learning experience; where a constructiveness environment is supported with the use of 1:1 devices. Also, it is anticipated that the constructed learning environment will foster a culture of innovation and students will be empowered to take control of their own learning and be encouraged to contribute back to the discussion initiated by the lecture and/or course material with the aid of 1:1 device technologies. A gap has been identified in the academic literature that show there is a need to understand the relationship between engineering teaching, learning, students engagement and the use of 1:1 devices.
RECOMMENDATIONS/IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSION: A gap exists in the current research about the effectiveness and use of 1:1 devices in engineering education; therefore, it is necessary to undertake further research in the area. It is proposed to hypothesize and conduct field research to identify any shortcomings and possible benefits for engineering educators and learners within a constructivist-teaching
context that explores the relationship between the use of personalized 1:1 devices for teaching and learning, adapting for individual learning styles, and identification and application of appropriate teaching and learning strategies within a constructiveness engineering course approach. Research is required to clarify the following research questions;
• What education teaching and learning strategies best facilitate the use of 1:1 devices for online teaching and learning?
• Does student engagement improve when 1:1 device technologies are used and adapted to cater for individual learning styles during online delivery of engineering courses?
• What are the factors within a university engineering faculty that may hinder and/or support the use of 1:1 devices for online teaching and learning?
• To what extent do 1:1 devices assist engineering educators and students to foster a culture of innovation? The study results will offer engineering educators and students an opportunity to reflect on
their current teaching and learning practice, and contextualise the use of 1:1 devices as a tool to improve student engagement. It is expected the learning benefits will outweigh the implementation costs and derive a unique learning experience that will empower engineering educators and students to inspire a culture of innovation.

How online learning in an engineering-physics course helped us flip the classroom

Distance education has developed in the past 25 years or so as a way of supplying education to people who would not have access to local college education facilities. This includes students who live in remote regions, students who lack mobility, and students with full-time jobs. More recently this has been renamed to "online learning". Deakin University in Australia has been teaching freshman engineering physics simultaneously to on-campus and online students since the late1990's. The course is part of an online Bachelor of Engineering major that is accredited by the Institution of Engineers Australia.* In this way Deakin answers the call to provide engineering education "anywhere, anytime."**The course has developed and improved with the available educational technology. Starting with printed study guides, a textbook, CD-ROMS, and snail-mail, and telephone/email correspondence with students, the course has seen the rise of websites, online course notes, discussion boards, streamed video lectures, web-conferencing classes and lab sessions, and online submission of student work. Most recently the on-campus version of the course has shifted from a traditional lecture/tutorial/lab format to a flipped-classroom format. The use of lectures has been reduced while the use of tutorials and practical exercises has increased. Primary learning is now accomplished by watching videos prepared by the lecturer and studying the textbook.Offering this course for several years by distance education made this process considerably easier. Most of the educational "infrastructure" was already in place, and the course's delivery to a non-classroom cohort was already established. Thus many elements of the new structure did not have to be produced from scratch. Improvements to the course website and all the course material has benefited all students, both online and on-campus.The new course structure was delivered for the first time in 2014, has run for two semesters, and will continue in 2015. Student learning and performance is being measured by assignment and exam marks for both on-campus and off-campus students. Students are also surveyed to gauge how well they received the new innovations, especially the video presentations on the lab experiments. It was found that student performance in the new structure was no worse than that in the older structure (average on-campus grades increased 10%), and students in general welcomed the changes. Similar transitions are being implemented in other courses in Deakin's engineering degree program.This presentation will show how physics is taught to online students, outline the changes made to support flipping the on-campus classroom, and how that process benefited the off-campus cohort.

Engineering education anywhere, anytime: from distance education to blended learning at Deakin University Australia

In 2005 the Sloan Consortium called for engineering education to be available "anywhere, anytime."* Increasing numbers of engineering departments are interesting in offering their programs by means of online learning. These schools grapple with several difficulties and issues associated with wholly online learning: course structure, communication with students, delivery of course material, delivery of exams, accreditation, equity between on-campus and off-campusstudents, and especially the delivery of practical training. Deakin University faced these same challenges when it commenced teaching undergraduate engineering via distance education in the early 1990's. It now offers a fully accredited Bachelor of Engineering degree in both on-campus and off-campus modes, with majors that include civil,mechanical, electrical/electronics, and mechatronics/robotics.This presentation describes Deakin's unique off-campus delivery, students, curricula, approaches to practical work, and solutions to the problems mentioned above. Attendees will experience how Deakin Engineering delivers course materials, communicates with off-campus students, runs off-campus classes, and even delivers lab experience to students living thousands of miles away from the home campus. On display will be experimental lab kits, video presentations, student projects, and online broadcasts of freshman lab experiments. Participants will have the opportunity to see some of these resources hands-on. I will also discuss recent innovations in off-campus delivery ofcourses, including how flipping the classroom has led to blended learning with the on-campus students.Many universities have placed engineering distance education into the too-hard basket. Deakin Engineering demonstrates that it is possible to deliver a full undergraduate degree by means of distance education and online learning, and modern technology makes the job easier than everbefore. The benefits to the professor are many, not the least of which is helping a student living in a remote area or with a full-time job become fully trained and qualified in engineering.

Good practice guidelines for curriculum, supervision and assessment of final year engineering projects and AQF8 learning outcomes

Undergraduate engineering programs require final year students to complete capstone final year projects and demonstrate that they can integrate knowledge, skills and professional graduate attributes developed during the program at Australian Qualification Framework, level 8 (AQF8) outcomes. Literature shows that currently there is no guarantee of consistency for curriculum, supervision and assessment practices of FYEPs. Practices differ greatly between universities and littlework has been initiated that seeks to identify good practice, highlighting the need for the development of guidelines for curriculum, supervision and assessment of FYEPs. This workshop is designed to share and disseminate the good practice guidelines that have been developed on curriculum, supervision and assessment of Final Year Engineering Projects as a part of phase 2 of the project ‘Assessing Final Year Engineering Projects (FYEPs): Ensuring Learning and Teaching Standards and AQF8 Outcomes’ funded by the Australian Office for Learning and Teaching (OLT) with people working in the area of FYEPs. The guidelines typically apply to four year undergraduate engineering degrees with embedded Honours and support achievement of AQF8learning outcomes. The project team has 7 partner Universities – Central Queensland University (the lead), University of Technology Sydney, University of Adelaide, Curtin University, Deakin University, University of Tasmania and RMIT University.Participants will be invited to reflect on and evaluate guidelines and findings derived from FYEP coordinators, supervisors and the wider literature and to consider the ways in which these findings might lead to improvements in their practice.

A text analytics evaluation of a first-year engineering project-based unit

In the undergraduate engineering program at Griffith University in Australia, the unit 1006ENG Design and Professional Skills aims to provide an introduction to engineering design and professional practice through a project-based learning (PBL) approach to problem solving. It provides students with an experience of PBL in the first-year of their programme. The unit comprises an underpinning lecture series, design work including group project activities, an individual computer-aided drawing exercise/s and an oral presentation. Griffith University employs a ‘Student Experience of Course’ (SEC) online survey as part of its student evaluation of teaching, quality improvement and staff performance management processes. As well as numerical response scale items, it includes the following two questions inviting open-ended text responses from students: i) What did you find particularly good about this course? and ii) How could this course be improved? The collection of textual data in in student surveys is commonplace, due to the rich descriptions of respondent experiences they can provide at relatively low cost. However, historically these data have been underutilised because they are time consuming to analyse manually, and there has been a lack of automated tools to exploit such data efficiently. Text analytics approaches offer analysis methods that result in visual representations of comment data that highlight key individual themes in these data and the relationships between those themes. We present a text analytics-based evaluation of the SEC open-ended comments received in the first two years of offer of the PBL unit 1006ENG. We discuss the results obtained in detail. The method developed and documented here is a practical and useful approach to analysing/visualising open-ended comment data that could be applied by others with similar comment data sets.

Characterising the Australian engineering workforce and engineering graduate occupational outcomes using national census data

The purpose of undergraduate engineering education is to develop graduates who are capable of commencing professional engineering practice. Professional education should equip graduates with the skills, knowledge and attitudes required for their initial professional practice. It should also enable the capacity to continue the professional development required to refresh knowledge and skills as the graduates mature and the nature of professional engineering work develops. However, it is true that many graduates from professional engineering programs, either immediately or at some later time, pursue a career outside of professional engineering. The reasons for this are widely speculated upon, and are no doubt complex. In this regard, the professional engineering workforce, the undergraduate engineering education system, the links between them, and the occupational outcomes for engineering graduates in Australia are similar to many other developed nations. Using the latest Australian national census data we present a detailed analysis of the makeup of the professional engineering workforce and the occupational outcomes for graduates of undergraduate engineering programs in Australia. The data show that the Australian professional engineering workforce is comprised of people with a wide range of educational qualifications, and, even immediately post-graduation, many Australian engineering graduates pursue non-engineering occupations. This analysis presents important findings for those designing undergraduate engineering curricula that seek to equip students for the best employment outcomes, given the nature of the professional engineering work environment, and the short- and long-term occupations that engineering graduates actually pursue in Australia.

The representation of engineering education as a social media topic on Twitter

Online social media systems have created new ways for individuals to communicate, share information and interact with a wide audience. For organisations, social media provide new avenues for communication and collaboration with their stakeholders. The potential value of social media tools to assist in the successful communication and marketing inside and outside of engineering organisations has been identified. In the context of engineering education, the potential of social media to open new modes of communication, interaction and experimentation between students and teachers has also been identified, and a limited number of examples can be found documented in the literature. One of the most widely-used social media tools is the ‘microblogging’ service Twitter. This research presents an analysis of nearly 19,000 tweets relating to ‘engineering education’ collected over a period of almost a year. Social network analysis is used to visualise the Twitter data. The Twitter social media communication is examined to identify who is active on this topic, who is influential, and what is the structure of the online conversations relating to engineering education. This work provides insights regarding how engineering education is currently represented in social media internationally, and offers a methodology to those interested in related future research.

Engineering education quality assurance within the school of engineering: a holistic approach

BACKGROUND Quality assurance is a key element of engineering education at Deakin University and is monitored through various mechanisms which also include the process of collecting students’ feedback within the Schools and faculties. The information received are then looked at holistically and action plan is developed to implement. This has proven to be very effective to ensure feedback received from the students has been properly addressed.
PURPOSE The School of Engineering at Deakin University, has initiated the formation of Engineering Educational Quality Working Group (QWG). The aim of QWG is to provide a focal point for learning and teaching quality and its assurance in undergraduate and postgraduate Engineering courses. The school approach complements Deakin University processes of collecting and analysing student feedback on unit curricula design, delivery and facilitator delivery performance; feedback regarding individual facilitator, unit evaluations and graduate course experiences.
DESIGN/METHOD The data are collected through face to face feedback from both on and off campus students. Feedback received from the end of trimester student evaluation process was also analysed.
RESULTS The motivation behind the practise is to close the loop for the feedback received from the students and take appropriate action against the feedback. This is to enhance overall delivery of engineering education at Deakin University.
CONCLUSIONS This paper outlines the activities planned by the QWG and elaborates on quality assurance approaches and key strategies to be implemented by the working group to achieve the desired quality as well as efficacy of those recommendations/actions undertaken at the school level.

Collaborative learning experience of students in distance education

Educational institutions recognised that the distance education mode is a preferred way to combine study with life, family and work commitments for distance learners. Distance education has played an important role in the provision of educational equity for distance learners who live in remote Australian communities. Engaging students and academic staff will always enhance student-learning outcomes to ensure a positive experience in distance education. It can be effectively achieved through collaborative learning. In distance education, academic staff and students face a number of challenges such as lack of student motivation, high student attrition rates, and a sense of isolation from a university community. Collaborative learning experience will enhance learner-staff and learner-learner interactions in distance learning, which can be achieved through developing a learning process. The learning process for distance learners involves student-learning strategy, Staff interactive sessions, peer-to-peer support, e-assessment, and self-realization of graduate learning outcomes. This distance learning process is confined for Deakin University learning environment, however the expectations is that the distance learning will be more mainstream in future of learning and teaching in Australian institutions. The focus of this research is to analyse and share collaborative learning experience of distance learners (off-campus) students in project management unit. It helps to analyse the barriers in distance education and finding ways to initiate collaborative programs in future. It also helps to fulfil the distance learners’ expectations on program delivery.

Australasian partnership in a first-year engineering course: Deakin University and Wuhan University of Science and Technology

This paper presents the results of domestic Chinese undergraduate engineering course taught by international Australasian teaching staff. The project is a part of a teaching collaboration between Deakin University and Wuhan University of Science and Technology. The cohort of students from Wuhan was a freshman undergraduate engineering course in mechanical engineering. The particular subject was a freshman engineering-materials course taught in English. The course covered an introduction to material-science principles and practices. A survey was used for evaluating student perceptions. It is aimed that this study will help academics from Deakin University to better understand student experiences, and to identify the current challenges and barriers faced in student learning. Analysis of the survey has shown that 90% of students agreed that they were motivated to learn and achieve the learning goals through this collaborative program. Around 90% of students found that group-based practical activities were helpful in achieving learning goals. Overall, 90% of students strongly agreed they were satisfied with the method of teaching.

Participation of women in engineering: challenges and productive interventions

Building science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) skills in students at all school levels is essential to building the next generation of engineering workers and engineering skills. Despite more than two decades of initiatives, the under-representation of women in engineering has been a longstanding concern in Australia. This is related to concerns about levels of participation in engineering overall, and to current concerns about attitudes to and participation in STEM subjects and career pathways generally, and for women in the natural and physical sciences and higher level mathematics at school, university and the workplace. This review analyses factors affecting the participation of women in engineering, covering the full extent of the STEM pipeline across the schooling years but focusing particularly on girls’ exposure to and engagement with engineering across those years.

Assessing students’ experiences in a virtual learning environment

CONTEXTTechnology has played an important role in the provision of educational equity for learners inAustralian communities. Engaging off-campus students through technology resources is vital for avirtual learning environment in engineering education. To ensure a positive experience for thestudents in off-campus (virtual) learning, the use of modern technology is crucial for collaborative andactive learning.PURPOSEDesign based education is a combination of project based and problem based approaches. Throughsmall or big projects, students work in teams with combinations of off-campus and on-campusstudents. Integration of technology resources takes place within these groups through collaborativelearning and active learning. Even though the facilities and technology support are provided for offcampusstudents, there is always a gap in fulfilling the off-campus students’ learning expectations in avirtual learning environment. Technology plays an important role in providing student engagement insolving design problems, which is a need for the distance learner community in future. The purpose ofthis study is to evaluate students’ experiences on the use of technology in learning and teaching,which is delivered in off-campus mode.APPROACHThe cohorts of students involved in this online survey are from first year undergraduate engineering inTrimester 2, 2016. The online survey analysis of students’ perceptions will help teaching staff to betterunderstand and assess off-campus students’ experiences, challenges and barriers in a virtual learningenvironment.RESULTSThe distance learners’ experiences are analysed from an online survey. This online survey analysesthe students’ experiences on use of technology and how it supports and enhances students learning indistance mode. It also analyses the student learning experiences on project/design-based learningapproach in engineering. In this particular unit (Electrical Systems), students work in teams of 2-3 onlab work and other assignments. The analysed results also discuss the students’ perceptions onteamwork, communication, interaction and assessment.CONCLUSIONSThe aim of the engineering curriculum is to provide learning and teaching support equally for both oncampusand off-campus students. From the analysed survey results, this study reveals that the use oftechnology plays a vital role in students learning from availability and accessibility of materials toassessment methods, lab tutorials, and online seminars. In a project/design based learningcurriculum, the distance learners have an equal opportunity to enhance the learning skills as the oncampusstudents experience in a study environment.

Engineering fundamentals in a new undergraduate curriculum

CONTEXTIn recent years there has been a push in Engineering education to change the basic model fromstudents learning discrete subjects, followed by design projects in third and fourth year, to learningand practicing the design process from the first year. At the same time, there has also been a pushtowards “active learning” (Prince, 2004) as opposed to the more traditional lecture/tutorial/practicalapproach. This year, Deakin University has launched a new design-centred curriculum inundergraduate engineering. Named “Project-Oriented Design-Based Learning” (PODBL), the newcourse structure is running in first and second years. In semester one of first year in the new course,students enrol in one double-unit of design, one unit of maths, and one unit of fundamental science.PURPOSEThis work seeks to determine whether a new fundamental-science unit called “EngineeringFundamentals” fulfils the educational needs of first-year students in the PODBL curriculum. It alsoseeks to determine student perceptions of the new unit.APPROACHThe unit was first offered in semester-one, 2016 to two separate on-campus cohorts and an offcampuscohort. Innovations in this unit include using the CADET model for teaching combinedpractical-tutorial seminars, a shift in lectures from delivering conceptual content to teaching problemsolving and applications (flipping the classroom), and extensive use of online videos and study guidesfor delivering primary content (Cloud Learning). Student learning was assessed by means of problembasedonline quizzes, practical reports, and a final exam. Student perceptions were queried by astandard unit-evaluation system and by a more focussed set of surveys given to students in threeseparate cohorts.RESULTSThe academic results in this unit were compared with those in the previous unit. No substantialdifferences were observed in the marks of this unit in 2016 compared with the 2015 marks of thecorresponding previous physics unit. On-campus students showed more general satisfaction with theunit than did off-campus students. However, not all on-campus students were happy with the flippedclassroommodel.CONCLUSIONSAs the course changes from a traditional approach to a design and project-based approach, it is best ifall units in the course adapt in some way to the new teaching style. Not all units need be completelyproject or design based. In the case of “Engineering Fundamentals,” we believe that due to the widevariety of topics covered, making the entire unit design-based is inappropriate. However, some designand project components can be built into the unit via the practicals. Semester one 2016 was asuccessful first offering of the unit. We recommend that in future years a design/project component beconsidered for the unit’s practicals.