Engineers, figuring it out: Collaborative learning in cultural worlds

IF 3.9 2区 工程技术 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Engineering Education Pub Date : 2023-12-23 DOI:10.1002/jee.20576
Susan Bobbitt Nolen, Edward L. Michor, Milo D. Koretsky
{"title":"Engineers, figuring it out: Collaborative learning in cultural worlds","authors":"Susan Bobbitt Nolen,&nbsp;Edward L. Michor,&nbsp;Milo D. Koretsky","doi":"10.1002/jee.20576","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Although open-ended projects are common in the first and final years of US engineering programs, middle-year courses tend to utilize simpler highly constrained problems. Such problems can elicit knowledge and social practices typical of school activity (“School World”), with limited applicability in real engineering work (“Engineering World”). They can also result in inequitable participation in groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>We investigate whether a single-session, complex studio task can promote equitable disciplinary engagement in the middle years, where time is limited and students' engineering knowledge needs to be developed. We ask whether and how the task is taken up by teams “thinking and acting like students” versus “thinking and acting like engineers.”</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design/Method</h3>\n \n <p>This microgenetic laboratory study analyzes video data of three student teams completing a realistic complex task.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Teams initially used “School World” strategies and social arrangements, but eventually the task demands and facilitator framing shifted activity to “Engineering World.” We found within-team, between-world differences in reasoning, tool use, and social practices. Examination of shifts from School World to Engineering World pointed to the importance of task framing, material tools, peer interaction, and facilitator support.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Activity can shift to the disciplinary social and knowledge practices of engineering in a single task, expanding opportunities to learn those practices and promoting more equitable interactions. Instructors should seek to support disciplinary practices while preserving students' authority to make decisions. Future research should explore the impact of a steady diet of these kinds of studios in the middle years.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"113 1","pages":"164-194"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering Education","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jee.20576","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Although open-ended projects are common in the first and final years of US engineering programs, middle-year courses tend to utilize simpler highly constrained problems. Such problems can elicit knowledge and social practices typical of school activity (“School World”), with limited applicability in real engineering work (“Engineering World”). They can also result in inequitable participation in groups.

Purpose

We investigate whether a single-session, complex studio task can promote equitable disciplinary engagement in the middle years, where time is limited and students' engineering knowledge needs to be developed. We ask whether and how the task is taken up by teams “thinking and acting like students” versus “thinking and acting like engineers.”

Design/Method

This microgenetic laboratory study analyzes video data of three student teams completing a realistic complex task.

Results

Teams initially used “School World” strategies and social arrangements, but eventually the task demands and facilitator framing shifted activity to “Engineering World.” We found within-team, between-world differences in reasoning, tool use, and social practices. Examination of shifts from School World to Engineering World pointed to the importance of task framing, material tools, peer interaction, and facilitator support.

Conclusions

Activity can shift to the disciplinary social and knowledge practices of engineering in a single task, expanding opportunities to learn those practices and promoting more equitable interactions. Instructors should seek to support disciplinary practices while preserving students' authority to make decisions. Future research should explore the impact of a steady diet of these kinds of studios in the middle years.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
工程师们,想办法文化世界中的协作学习
尽管开放式项目在美国工程学课程的第一年和最后一年很常见,但中年级的课程往往 采用较为简单的高度受限的问题。这些问题可以激发典型的学校活动("学校世界")中的知识和社会实践,但在实际工程工作("工程世界")中的适用性有限。我们研究的是,在时间有限且学生的工程知识需要发展的初中阶段,一个单一的、复杂的工作室任务能否促进公平的学科参与。这项微遗传实验室研究分析了三个学生团队完成一项现实的复杂任务的视频数据。团队最初使用 "学校世界 "的策略和社会安排,但最终任务要求和主持人的框架将活动转移到了 "工程世界"。我们发现了团队内部和世界之间在推理、工具使用和社会实践方面的差异。对从 "学校世界 "向 "工程世界 "转变的研究表明,任务框架、材料工具、同伴互动和指导者的支持非常重要。指导者应努力支持学科实践,同时维护学生的决策权。未来的研究应探索在初中阶段持续开展此类工作室活动的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Engineering Education
Journal of Engineering Education 工程技术-工程:综合
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
11.80%
发文量
47
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Engineering Education (JEE) serves to cultivate, disseminate, and archive scholarly research in engineering education.
期刊最新文献
Engineering students' interests in nonprofit and public policy careers: Applying a data-driven approach to identifying contributing factors Issue Information Issue Information The Undergraduate Engineering Mental Health Help-Seeking Instrument (UE-MH-HSI): Development and validity evidence How can I help move my manuscript smoothly through the review process?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1