Alternate learning/ teaching/ delivery models

4 downloads 246 Views 148KB Size Report
Engineering specializing in MEMS and NEMS devices from the University of Alberta. He ... David G. Michelson is with the
The Future of Engineering and Technology Education

Alternate learning / teaching / delivery models Instructor insights Michael Lau EDUCATIONAL DEMANDS OF the 21st century require educational institutes to re-examine accepted academic models and pedagogy. Traditional lecture formats are becoming increasingly ineffective; expanding class sizes, diverse educational backgrounds, and the breadth of knowledge required at graduation are just some of the current challenges faced today. Traditional assignments are also failing to connect a student to lesson outcomes and objectives, while laboratory exercises are a verification of lecture material rather than hands-on experience. Guidance/mentorship learning models may be more effective than standard lecture models. Imagine a classroom doing group or project-based activities such as research or design. Simply moving to a more active style of learning promotes student engagement; the student is then an active learner who devotes more time to learning instead of being passive. Given room for creativity within an engaging topic, students are also driven to succeed because of the sense of ownership over their own work. As well, assessments done in this format become more authentic in that they become direct gauges of knowledge or performance within a specific outcome. Anecdotally, I teach a course in Systems Packaging and one particular activity was a group presentation for flip-chip packaging. Aside from a standard marking rubric, the students were given absolute freedom within that topic. Engineering databases, industry websites, and technical references were all valid sources of information. In the end, the students produced engaging presentations ranging from flip chip’s process flow, design considerations, and even a history of the technology. A “living” document or course is one possible way to implement guidance-based learning. Generally using eLearning systems, a living course is continuously updated with contributions from past, present, and future iterations. A course may evolve depending on the feedback from previAbout the Author Michael Lau has a B.Sc in Electrical Engineering and M.Sc in Electrical and Computer Engineering specializing in MEMS and NEMS devices from the University of Alberta. He currently teaches in the Nanotechnology Systems and Electronics Engineering Technology departments at NAIT located in Edmonton, Alberta. Courses currently taught include digital systems, programming, control systems, and electronics systems packaging. Aside from teaching, Michael also conducts applied research in areas such as FEA simulation and particle detection systems.

ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION N

SPECIA

ous iterations, or even during its delivery within a semester. While many traditional courses do use eLearning systems, it is important to note that its use does not necessarily make a course “alive.” Rather, eLearning systems enhance the structure of guidance-based learning by providing interaction and evolution that would have been impractical to implement otherwise. For example, contrast a standard course website, with a syllabus, lecture documents, and announcements, to a living guidance-based course using a typical eLearning system that includes: discussion forums for students to ask questions; student instant access to feedback, instructors, and course material; student examination of previous projects or material to gain insight into possible successes and failures; and instructor revision of course material. The former is relatively static with one-way communication; the latter teems with activity and interaction, constantly refreshed with new material. This online interaction would then connect with offline classroom activities, forming a positive feedback loop between them.

… eLearning systems enhance the structure of guidance-based learning by providing interaction and evolution that would have been impractical to implement otherwise

In light of all these advantages, there are significant challenges. The first is the most universal: technological illiteracy. William Gibson’s popular quote “The future is already here — it’s just not very evenly distributed” is very apt. People from a wide variety of socio-economic backgrounds enter post-secondary education, including ones who may have had limited access to computers and internet in their past. For others, technological illiteracy may be as subtle as knowing how to use a search engine, but not knowing how to navigate discussion forums or submit assignments online. Training and support structures are necessary to eliminate this barrier to success. The second challenge is the mode of learning for both the student and instructor. Moving to a new learning model may be jarring at first; L FOCU S

Summer / Été 2013

1

The Future of Engineering and Technology Education

O P I N I O N

O P I N I O N

by Doug Houseman

by David G. Michelson

THE KEY TO NEXT generation education includes a complete environment, use of real tools and real problems to be solved. This means not only material from prior classes and students but a strong input of industry issues and problems along with the solution sets for each. Moving away from canned problem sets to real world problems not only helps accelerate the learning but prepares students for tackling problems in the real world. It also helps keep them interested - because these are not academic issues, but rather the real situations that they will walk into in the real world.

EVERY STUDENT ENTERS a degree program or an engineering course with his or her own unique set of experiences, expectations and abilities. No single mode of delivery will satisfy every student. Group application exercises and exposure to industry practice are extremely motivating but their impact is diminished if the students are lacking in the fundamental knowledge and problem solving skills that are associated with the subject matter.

nearly every secondary school – and many post-secondary courses– still use the standard lecture format. Adapting to a new style of learning may be very detrimental to a student’s success. For the instructor, making a course “live” through day to day maintenance of course material and feedback is just one of the many challenges he or she faces. In the classroom, there is increased pressure on an instructor’s teaching performance, breadth of knowledge, and even time in and out of the classroom. Support structures may reduce pressures on both students and instructors in the short term, but the real long-term solution may lie in an institutional change to accommodate these learning models. The last challenge, and perhaps the most important, is that of time management. Guidance-based courses, focused on open-ended activities, will naturally take up more class time for both the student and instructor. Therefore, the quality of these activities will be impacted if time allocations do not allow for meaningful work to occur. Activities outside the classroom are also a factor: how much time is expected for research,

2

Summer / Été 2013

SPECIA

Student time is limited so efficiency must be considered when selecting the mechanisms for imparting fundamental knowledge and problem solving skills. The nature of the material must also be assessed. In some disciplines, reading assignments are sufficient to impart the basic knowledge required. In engineering, the students themselves are requesting that adequate lecture time be allocated to rapidly and efficiently explain concepts and share problem solving strategies. When this is followed up with group application exercises and exposure to industry practice, success is inevitable.

David G. Michelson is with the University of British Columbia, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering in Vancouver.

forum discussions, and so forth when a typical student has other commitments outside of their academic careers? Guidance-based educational models offer many benefits over traditional models. However, there are significant challenges to overcome before they can be effectively put into practice. Further consultation into structural changes within educational institutions must be explored in order to avoid serious implementation issues in the future. ■

S L FOCU

ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION E