Clemson University’s Experimental Engineering In Real Time (Expert) Program: Assessing The Benefit Of Real Time Sensors In The Curriculum

EXPerimental Engineering in Real-Time (EXPERT) is a three-year NSF-sponsored project at Clemson University to study the benefit of using experiments with real-time sensors to improve student understanding of the graphical representation of various physical concepts and auxiliary benefit in understanding the concept itself. The project builds on successes by Physics education researchers (primarily with motion sensors) that combine the use of technology and hands-on engineering experiments to achieve visual analysis of phenomena in real-time in the classroom. The previous work is being expanded in two ways: a broader range of phenomena are being explored and a more controlled assessment of the benefit of real-time sensors is being conducted. A combination of multiple-intervention and switched replication assessment protocols will be used to determine the comparative benefit of curricula developed with and without sensors in either a laboratory or a lecture / demonstration mode. A pre-test / post-test design will be used to account for the effect of differences in the initial preparation of the different study populations. While the primary objective of the project is to understand the benefit of the use of this educational technology, the sensor-based laboratories are designed to be accessible for use as modules by college faculty and by secondary school teachers and students as well so that, if the technology should prove effective, broader implementation will be practical. This paper introduces the methodology of the experiment and reports on the status of the development of laboratories. A variety of laboratory activities have been developed, including two that have been developed in sensor-based and non-sensor-based versions. The use of technology in the classroom Although there are many who assume that the use of classroom technology has significant potential to benefit the education of students, the body of evidence supporting that assumption is still small.1 Even if it is assumed that most lecturers possess the necessary characteristics, research suggests that the exclusive use of the lecture in the classroom constrains students’ learning.2 To be effective, the use of technology in the classroom must balance the utility of technology with the ability of the instructor to incorporate it within a busy schedule. Despite the many innovations of the last several decades, it is evident that the chalk-blackboard-lecture format is still predominant. Various sources discuss the perseverance of this traditional method of instruction.3,4,5,6 Since even many who continue to lecture exclusively admit that it is due largely to their comfort with the approach, we should not be surprised that even undergraduates who have been exposed P ge 898.1 Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Education repeatedly to this approach prefer it. Recently, a team of faculty in Civil Engineering at Clemson University had a series of meetings with small groups of students that included both males and females with a wide range of grade point ratios and backgrounds. Most students favored the traditional chalkboard approach, and clearly preferred it to lectures using overhead transparencies and PowerPoint slides. They had not experienced a sufficient number of instructors who incorporated active learning in the classroom to give an opinion. This is a bit disheartening, since the benefits of active learning experiences in the classroom are well documented, and include better attendance, deeper questioning, improved grades, and a lasting interest in the subject material.7,8,9,10 There are many technological innovations that would seem to have the potential to enhance the classroom experience beyond the chalk and blackboard, including: computer projection systems and videotapes that allow students to watch simulations of phenomena, laptop computers that improve students’ access to information, and the use of real-time data acquisition, which helps students to more easily associate physical behaviors with their graphical representations. As time has passed, these techniques have become easier to use, as one might expect.11 The focus of this work is ultimately to integrate the use of advanced classroom technology—real time sensors in this case—into a sound pedagogical framework. This means using this technology along with cooperative learning and other proven, effective pedagogies.12,13 Pedagogical approaches to be used in these curriculum materials Too often students are given too much direction in the learning process. For best results, students must be coached, but not “directed” to the solution.14 Discovery learning is shown to have clear benefits in regard to deeper understanding and long-term retention,15 but has never gained widespread use because many fear the potential time-inefficiency of discovery learning approaches.16 Our proposed format, however, incorporates structured reflection to achieve some of discovery learning’s benefits without making a major commitment of time. The introduction of discovery methods shifts some control over the learning process to the learner. This approach agrees with Goforth17 who, in a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of learner control in tutorial computer assisted instruction, found that “it is important that the learner have some control rather than none.” If we wish our students to learn and to be creative, they must be given that opportunity. At least some assignments must be open-ended. Students must learn to think about the problem, to ask questions, and to design an experiment to test their hypothesis. This also directly addresses a number of ABET EC 2000 Criterion 3 Outcomes, with special emphasis on (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data and (i) a recognition of the need for, and an ability to engage in life-long learning.18 Lord Kelvin once said, “I am never content until I have constructed a mechanical model of the subject I am studying. If I succeed in making one, I understand; otherwise I do not. The ancient Chinese proverb, “I forget what I hear; I remember what I see; I know what I do.” suggests that the importance of active learning was known for centuries before Lord Kelvin’s testimonial. The recent revival of interest in active approaches shows promise. Active learning methods are P ge 898.2 Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Education frequently paired with cooperative learning, where a group of students shares the responsibility for the education of each of its members.19 Demonstrations also have pedagogical benefit beyond traditional lecture methods because demonstrations engage the observer in seeing as well as listening. Lord Bertrand Russell is quoted as saying, “Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although he was twice married, it never occurred to him to verify this statement by examining his wives’ mouths.” This underscores the importance of observation—both in an experimentally controlled situation and during a demonstration in class.