The wheel has already been invented: Facilitating students’ use of existing mechanics resources

We’ve been teaching engineering mechanics to first year engineering students for a long time, yet at many engineering faculties around the world there are still significant failure rates… Educators have tried many different approaches to address persistent high failure rates in first year engineering mechanics courses. These approaches often involve the development of new mechanics learning resources in a variety of styles depending on the perceived learning obstacle. As part of a project funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council on addressing student learning diversity in engineering mechanics we have developed a framework for reviewing these existing learning resources. This framework has been used to create a database of references to resources, categorising them by attributes such as topics covered and depth of coverage, suitable student learning styles, appropriate learner levels, copyright and accessibility issues. While it is anticipated that academics will use the database to complement their normal subject delivery, it has been developed with student users as the main target audience. Student focus groups have shown that independent study can be ineffective, particularly after hours when assistance is unavailable. The aim of this database is to encourage students to be proactive in improving the quality of their learning by assisting them to select learning resources best suited to their needs, in both content and style of delivery. In this paper we describe the elements of the framework used to review engineering mechanics resources, the resultant database of resources, and the planned evaluation of its effectiveness in improving learning outcomes. The authors intend to demonstrate use of the database at the conference. Introduction Introductory engineering mechanics is a subject area studied by students from many engineering disciplines in the first year of their degree program in Australia and elsewhere. In short, these courses consist of an introduction to the basic methods used by engineers to analyse the action of forces on and within rigid bodies, in both static and dynamic frames of reference. It seems that in Australia and around the world many students are struggling with these courses, with failure rates ranging up to 50% (Rezaei, Jawaharlal, Kim, & Shih, 2007). In response to this issue, a team of engineering educators (the EngMech team), funded by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council, have set out to determine what can be done to improve learning by addressing diversity in introductory engineering mechanics students within the constraints familiar to many engineering educators. This paper presents a resource for use by both students and academics that is intended to make locating and accessing alternative mechanics learning resources simple, relevant and effective, and avoids ‘reinventing the wheel’. Inspiring the next generation of engineers EE2010 The Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre 2 Background Many different causes of high failure rates in mechanics subjects have been cited, along with a plethora of attempts to solve the problem, some more successful than others (Goldfinch, Carew, & McCarthy, 2008). As Goldfinch et al (2008) point out, many of these efforts focus on addressing one or two areas. These can include the academic’s pet topic(s), student motivation and engagement, learning and cognitive styles, prior learning, curriculum structure, or approaches to teaching and assessment. However, a common theme that emerged from the literature is the limited success that appears possible with efforts to address a limited number of problem areas. The EngMech team’s own research into potential causes of poor student performance in engineering mechanics has also demonstrated the complexity of the problem. With many potential contributors to students’ difficulties in mechanics, none have clearly arisen as dominant factors likely to produce substantial improvements if addressed (Goldfinch, Carew, & Thomas, 2009; Thomas, Henderson, & Goldfinch, 2009). With a key objective of this research project being to improve pass rates in mechanics courses; it is clear that a narrowly focused approach, while useful for some students, would be unlikely to achieve more widespread benefits and, hence, overall improvements in pass rates. The EngMech team decided that an approach that utilises the wide variety of previous work that exists has the potential to combine some benefits of each. Many efforts to improve learning in engineering mechanics incorporate the development of new learning resources to support existing teaching practices. The development of such learning resources has continued to such an extent that there are numerous mechanics learning resources already available for access online by students free of charge (Hadgraft, 2007). This is indicative of the increasing availability of open courseware in the higher education sector (Carson, 2008). With such a variety of learning resources available for students online, the question is raised, how do we encourage students and educators to make use of these? A simple list of links and references to resources is unlikely to engage the kind of interest from students and academics needed to benefit the learning of many, particularly those already disengaged with the learning environment. What is needed is a more structured approach to finding and utilising these resources. Student Perspectives In a recent qualitative study by Goldfinch et al (2009), it became evident that some students were not aware of the alternative learning resources that were available, even text books. When asked to describe what changes they would like to see in the first year engineering mechanics course, students appeared to be selecting a ‘best of’ the educational methods and resources they had already seen. Moreover, when asked about their approaches to study, their study habits seemed to be an ill fit with the help that was available (ie. solitary, out of hours study when tutor assistance is unavailable), leading to hours of ineffective study. A recent study by Steif and Dollár (2009), indicated that students who demonstrate self-regulation of learning are more likely to perform better in engineering mechanics. However, Steif and Dollár also note that it is necessary to reward and encourage this self regulation with appropriate educational resources. Alpay et al (2008) studied engineering students’ motivation as they progressed through their degree and found that self reported motivation decreased substantially over the four years. Many students reported this to be due to, among other factors, a lack of interest in their studies and a perception from academics that teaching is not a priority. This issue of staff interest in education is one that many engineering educators will be familiar with. Chen et al (2008) argue that the actions of staff have substantial impact on the behaviour and engagement of students, positively and negatively. Felder and Silverman (1988) also suggest that teaching approaches can be misaligned with many students’ preferred learning styles, limiting the efficiency of the teaching/learning process. Inspiring the next generation of engineers EE2010 The Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre 3 Here can be seen a few broad issues: students are often unaware of alternative options for learning and may be persevering with resources they are already familiar, or have been presented with; disinterested lecturers and tutors may be limiting learning by demotivating students; any given approach to teaching is unlikely to be effective for every student, and; students should be encouraged to take responsibility for their own learning. Considering these issues, the authors hypothesise that making a variety of existing alternative learning resources accessible to students will be of great benefit to them. In particular, the authors would like to investigate if this approach will:  Assist students in becoming familiar with other learning options  Encourage students to utilise resources that better suit their preferred approach to study  Effectively circumvent disinterested educators  Reward students who do self-regulate their learning and make the effort to seek additional help The approach to encouraging students to be pro-active in their education also aligns with the graduate competencies of our professional accreditation body, Engineers Australia, particularly that graduates should be able to: “Take charge of own learning and development…” (Bradley, 2006). Resource Evaluation Framework With all of this in mind, the EngMech team set out to locate as many existing and freely accessible online learning resources as possible. Upon finding resources, the researchers looked for key attributes of each resource that define what type of learner they would be suitable for. This developed into the Resource evaluation framework. Resources were evaluated according to criteria which included the following:  Depth of coverage  Learning styles catered for  Type of knowledge emphasised  Suitable Study Patterns  Appropriate learner level More pragmatic issues such as copyright or licensing, the file format, ease of use and topics covered were also recorded for each resource. The appropriate learner level recognises that students can access resources for different purposes depending on their existing knowledge of the material and what stage they are at in their studies. The student wrestling with understanding basic concepts will be looking for different material to the student who thinks they understand the concept and is looking for problems to test their understanding, and the student looking to revise before an examination will be looking for a different type of material again.