Low-Ee Huei Wuan, SP

Wong Khoon Yoong, NIE

STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF WAYS TO LEARN ENGINEERING MATHEMATICS: ARE THESE WAYS CDIO-RELATED?

Introduction

• There had been many research studies on learning experiences of students in higher education (Biggs, 2003; Entwistle, 1997)

• Surface or deep approaches to learning depending on workload and teaching (Marton & Saljo, 1976)

• Relevant to CDIO Standard 8 (active learning)

This presentation

• Learning experiences of SP students

• Data collected before SP adopted CDIO Initiative

• Will suggest several areas of implementing active learning, based on students’ perspective, rather than those of faculty or standards-setters

Literature review 1/2

• Active learning possible even with lecture as teaching method (Struyven, Dochy & Janssens, 2008)

• Key is in prompt, and quality feedback on student work (ibid.)

• Requirement of feedback for student is found in CDIO Standard 8

Literature review 2/2

• Students may not recognise objectives of tasks as planned by lecturers (Bell, Crust, Shannon & Swan, 1993)

• Students’ perceptions may differ amongst themselves, and with lecturer (Shimizu, 2002, Low-Ee & Wong, 2008)

Participants

• 235 Year 2 Engineering Mathematics students

• Pre-SSQ (Student Study Questionnaire) administered in May 2007

• Post-SSQ at end Oct 2007

Instrument 1/2

• 57 6-point Likert-type items

• Conscientious Effort: 13 items

• Metacognition: 15 items

• Involving others: 15 items

• Resources for learning: 10 items

• Miscellaneous: 4 items

Instrument 2/2

• Frequency of use: “How often did you learn in this way?” (1 = Not at all; 2 = Occasionally; 3 = Sometimes; 4 = Quite often; 5 = Often; 6 = Always);

• Helpfulness: “How helpful it was towards learning Maths 1/2?” (1= Waste of time; 2 = Of little help; 3 = Some help; 4 = Quite helpful; 5 = Helpful; 6 = Very helpful).

Findings: Frequency of use

• Mean of 1.64 to 4.24: occasional to quite often

• None of the study behaviour were used very often, or always

• SD of 1.11 to 1.67: variation in use of study behaviour

Findings: Helpfulness

• Mean of 2.01 to 4.27: little help to quite often

• None of the study behaviour were helpful or very helpful

• SD of 1.28 to 1.66: study behaviours more helpful to some students and less so for others

Table 1Top four items in terms of frequency of use

Cat Q Ways of learning Maths 2Frequency HelpfulnessMean SD Mean SD

CE 2Paid attention to lecturer’s explanations.

4.14 1.47 4.27 1.44

MC 26Recognised when to use the appropriate mathematical formula.

3.90 1.40 4.07 1.44

RE 44Took note of lecturer’s hints for tests and examination.

3.91 1.54 3.80 1.55

RE 46Worked through past year tests and examination papers in Maths.

4.24 1.67 4.27 1.65

Table 2 Top four metacognitive items

Cat Q Ways of learning Maths 2Frequency HelpfulnessMean SD Mean SD

MC 26Recognised when to use the appropriate mathematical formula.

3.90 1.40 4.07 1.44

MC 19Checked my work while doing it. 3.76 1.44 3.70 1.44

MC 23Analysed mistakes made in solving tutorial problems.

3.71 1.44 3.89 1.43

MC 47Identified important concepts learnt in Maths. 3.62 1.43 3.80 1.53

Table 3Bottom four items in terms of frequency of use

Cat Q Ways of learning Maths 2Frequency HelpfulnessMean SD Mean SD

RE 8Referred to mathematics books from the library.

1.64 1.11 2.01 1.40

RE 11

Used computer-based programs e.g., Graphmatica and online applets.

1.93 1.26 2.07 1.28

IO 1Copied my friends’ Maths tutorials. 2.04 1.18 2.88 1.61

RE 22Searched for mathematics resources on the internet. 2.15 1.39 2.31 1.40

Table 4Four items Maths 1 means higher than Maths 2

Table 5Four items Maths 1 means lower than Maths 2

Cat QWays of learning Maths 1 or Maths 2

Maths 1 Maths 2Mean SD Mean SD

CE 29 Read through Maths lecture notes before the next lecture.

2.29 1.25 2.59 1.34

MC 57 Planned my own schedule for Maths revision.

3.18 1.58 3.35 1.64

IO 7 Approached Maths lecturers even after class.

1.96 1.10 2.19 1.24

IO 28 Presented solutions of tutorials to the class.

2.38 1.31 2.55 1.28

Figure 1: Bar charts of frequency and helpfulness

Concluding Remarks 1/4

• Study provided empirical data about learning experience at SP

• Students generally made use of traditional study behaviours – typical of students who focus on getting good grades

• Objective of doing well in traditional assessment

Concluding Remarks 2/4

• Slightly lower means in traditional study behaviour for Maths 2

• Slightly higher mean for metacognitive behaviour in Maths 2, although not significant

• Interactions with others during learning not common

• Use of technology resources and library books was quire rare

Concluding Remarks 3/4

• Enriching curriculum with more experiential, industry-related tasks

• Students to solve real problems

• Include modelling using technology

• Include learning activities involving others

• New activities to be infused explicitly but slowly

Concluding Remarks 4/4

• For staff development in Standard 10 of CDIO Initiative, teaching staff to be encouraged to conduct action research

• One feasible area is to gather data on student learning in order to better match the planned learning experiences to student preferences of learning

Feedback

• Appreciate input from audience

• Observations that I might have missed?

• Comments?

Thank you

Huei Wuan: lowhw@sp.edu.sg