University of New Haven
Digital Commons @ New Haven
Engineering and Applied Science Education FacultyPublications Engineering and Applied Science Education
6-26-2016
Integrating e-Learning Modules into Engineering
Courses to Develop an Entrepreneurial Mindset in
Students
Nadiye O. Erdil
University of New Haven, [email protected] Ronald S. Harichandran
University of New Haven, [email protected] Jean Nocito-Gobel
University of New Haven, [email protected] Maria-Isabel Carnasciali
University of New Haven, [email protected] Cheryl Q. Li
University of New Haven, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at:https://digitalcommons.newhaven.edu/sgiengineering-facpubs
Part of theCivil and Environmental Engineering Commons,Engineering Education Commons,
Mechanical Engineering Commons, and theOperations Research, Systems Engineering and
Industrial Engineering Commons
Comments
Learn more about the e-learning modulesat this link.
See the related article "Entrepreneurial E-Learning" by the authors in theDec. 2018 issue of ASEE Prism.
© 2016 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference.
Publisher Citation
Erdil, N. O., & Harichandran, R. S., & Nocito-Gobel, J., & Carnasciali, M., & Li, C. Q. (2016, June), Integrating e-Learning Modules into Engineering Courses to Develop an Entrepreneurial Mindset in Students. Paper presented at 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana. 10.18260/p.25800
PaperID #14885
Integrat
ing
e-Learn
ing Modu
les
into Eng
ineer
ing Courses
to Deve
lop an
En-trepreneur
ia
l M
indset
in Students
Dr. Nadiye O. Erdil, University of New Haven
Nadiye O. Erdil is an assistant professor of industrial engineering and engineering and operations man-agement atthe University of New Haven. Herresearchinterestsinclude use ofstatistical methods andlean toolsfor quality and processimprovement, and use ofinformationtechnologyin operations management. Her workis primarilyin manufacturing and healthcare delivery operations.
Dr. Ronald S. Harichandran, University of New Haven
Ron Harichandranis Dean ofthe Tagliatela College of Engineering andisthe PI ofthetwo grants entitled ”ProjecttoIntegrate Technical Communication Skills” and ”Developing entrepreneurialthinkingin eng i-neering students by utilizingintegrated online modules and experientiallearning opportunities.” Through these grantstechnical communication and entrepreneurialthinkingskills are beingintegratedinto courses spanning allfour yearsin seven ABET accredited engineering and computer science BS programs. Dr. Jean Nocito-Gobel, University of New Haven
Jean Nocito-Gobel, Professor of Civil & Environmental Engineering at the University of New Haven, received her Ph.D. from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. She has been actively involved in a number of educational initiatives in the Tagliatela College of Engineering including KEEN and PITCH, PI ofthe ASPIRE grant, andisthe coordinator forthe first-year Introto Engineering course. Her profes-sionalinterestsinclude modelingthetransport andfate of contaminantsin groundwater and surface water systems, as well as engineering educationreform.
Dr. Maria-Isabel Carnasciali, University of New Haven
Maria-Isabel Carnasciali is an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the Tagliatela College of Engineering, University of New Haven, CT. She obtained her Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Georgia Techin 2008. Shereceived her Bachelors of Engineeringfrom MITin 2000. Herresearchfocuses on the nontraditional engineering student – understanding their motivations, identity development, and impact of prior engineering-related experiences. Her work dwellsintolearningininformal settings such as summer camps, military experiences, and extra-curricular activities. Other research interests involve validation of CFD models for aerospace applications as well as optimizing efficiency of thermal-fluid systems.
Dr. Cheryl Q. Li, University of New Haven
Cheryl Qing Li joined University of New Haven in the fall of 2011, where she is a Senior Lecturer of the Industrial, System & Multidisciplinary Engineering Department. Li earned her first Ph.D. in me-chanical engineering from National University of Singapore in 1997. She served as Assistant Professor and subsequently Associate Professor in mechatronics engineering at University of Adelaide, Australia, and Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, respectively. In 2006, she resigned from her faculty job and came to Connecticut for family reunion. Throughout her academic career in Australia and S in-gapore, she had developed a very strong interest in learning psychology and educational measurement. Shethen optedfor a second Ph.D.in educational psychology, specializedin measurement, evaluation and assessment at University of Connecticut. She earned her second Ph.D. in 2010. Li has a unique cross-disciplinary educational andresearch backgroundin mechatronics engineering, specializedin control and robotics, and educational psychology, specializedin statistical analysis and program evaluation.
Integrat
ing
e-Learn
ing
Modu
les
into
Eng
ineer
ing
Courses
to
Deve
lop
an
Entrepreneur
ia
l
M
indset
in
Students
Abstract
Engineering graduates who will beleadersintoday’s rapidly changing environment must possess an entrepreneurial mindset and a variety of professional skillsin additiontotechnical knowledge and skills. An entrepreneurial mindset appliesto all aspects oflife, beginning with curiosity about our changing world,integratinginformation from various resourcesto gaininsight, and identifying unexpected opportunitiesto create value.The Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN) defines curiosity,connections and creating value asthree core components of an entrepreneurial mindset. These 3Cs coupled with associated engineering skills forms KEEN’s entrepreneurial mindset framework.An entrepreneurial mindset enables engineersto develop soundtechnical solutionsthat address customer needs, are feasible from a business perspective, and have societal benefit.
The Tagliatela College of Engineering atthe University of New Haven is workingto develop an entrepreneurial mindsetinits engineering students through a four-faceted framework based on KEEN’s constructs thatincludes: 1) developing an entrepreneurial mindset amongst faculty; 2) providing curricular componentsthat develop specific student knowledge and skills; 3)
structuringthe physical environmentto promote entrepreneurial mindedlearning; and 4) providing opportunities for studentsto engagein meaningful extra-curricular activities. This paper focuses onthe curricular component ofthis framework.
As part ofthese curricular activities, 18 short, self-paced, e-learning modules will be developed andintegratedinto courses spanning all four years across all engineering and computer science disciplines. Each module contains readings, short videos and self-assessment exercises. Five of these e-learning modules were developedin fall 2014, four ofthese five were pilotedinthe Spring 2015 semester, and all five modules were broadly deployedinthe Fall 2015 semester. A flipped classroominstructional modelis usedtointegratethe modulesinto courses. Contentis delivered via a short online module outsidethe class, and studentlearningisimproved by
reinforcingthe content coveredinthe modulethrough class discussions and contextual activities. Direct andindirect assessmentis performedthrough formative and summative class assessments and module specific pre and post surveys, respectively.
The fiveintegrated e-learning modules presentedinthis paper are: 1) Developing customer awareness and quicklytesting conceptsthrough customer engagement, 2) Learning from failure, 3) Cost of production and market conditions, 4) Building, sustaining andleading effectiveteams and establishing performance goals, and 5) Applying systemsthinkingto solve complex
problems. The firsttwo modules wereintegratedinto freshman classes,thethirdinto a
sophomore class,the fourthintothird yearlaboratory courses, andthe fifthinto senior design courses. This paper describesthelearning outcomes and the reinforcement activities conducted inthe coursesinto whichthey wereintegratedfortwo ofthese modules. The findingsofthe module specific surveys and the assessment results are alsopresented.
Introduction
Having good technical skillsis necessary butinsufficient byitself for an engineering graduateto develop as aleader andinnovator.1Intoday’s environment, engineering graduates must also
possess an entrepreneurial mindset and a variety of professional skills tobe leaders.The Kern Entrepreneurial Engineering Network (KEEN) definesthree core components of an
entrepreneurial mindset:(1) having curiosity toinvestigate a rapidly changing world;(2)
showingthe abilitytoinnovate by making connections between different streams ofinformation; and (3) striving tocreating value for others. These 3Cs coupled with associated engineering skills form KEEN’s entrepreneurial mindset framework.
An entrepreneurial mindset enables engineersto develop soundtechnical solutionsthat address customer needs, are feasible from a business perspective, and have societal benefit. However, expanding existing engineering curricula toinclude newtopics, such asthe development of an entrepreneurial mindset and skills,is difficult without exceedingtypical creditlimits of
engineering programs.2The Tagliatela College of Engineering atthe University of New Havenis
workingto develop an entrepreneurial mindsetinits engineering students based on KEEN’s 3Cs throughshort e-learning modules thatare integratedinto existing courses. Enriching curriculum inthis mannercan be done without additional credit allocations. Inthis effort,we take advantage of the e-learning environment.Although the effectiveness of e-learninghas been questioned by some,3theliterature revealsthat e-learningcourses are equally effective astraditionallecture
coursesin meeting student outcomes.4,5, 6
Most research regarding e-learning has focused on understandingthe perception ofe-learning methods by faculty and students.7,8,9,10Forinstance, Tanner et al.9highlightedthat student and
faculty attitudetoward e-learning were directlylinkedtotheir own comfortlevel withthe e-learning environment. Davis emphasizedthat perceived usefulness of atechnology as well asthe ease of use ofthattechnology werethetwo primary factors confirmingthe intentionto use and deploy it.7
Disciplines such as healthcare andlaw havelong been using distancelearningtotrain and certify large numbers ofindividuals without geographical restrictions or schedulinglogistics.Entire engineering programs may now be pursued online11and MOOC offerings continue toexplode.12
However, adoption of online methodsto supplement or supporttraditional classroomteaching has been more limited.6The recent popularity of flipped classroom methodologies to enhance
studentlearning hasincreasedthe use of resources such as videos13, 14and online resources.15,16
To enable all engineering and computer science studentstolearnthe many concepts associated with entrepreneurialthinking,the Tagliatela College of Engineering atthe University of New Haven isadopting online methodsthat develop specific student knowledge and skills.
Specifically, 18 e-learning modules will be developed andintegratedinto regular engineering courses.Thetitles ofthe e-learning modules andthe courses intowhichthey will beintegrated are specifiedin Table 1. Modules 2-5, 12, 14 and 16 have been developed and modules 2, 4, 5, 12, 14 and 16 wereintegratedinto courses at the University of New Havenin 2015 andinto courses at Lafayette College, Ohio Northern University, Santa Clara University,the University of Dayton and Villanova University in spring 2016.
Table 1.E-learning modules andtarget coursesinto whichthey will beintegrated
Process of Developing e-Learning Modules
An open solicitation process was usedto seek content experts familiar withthetopicslistedin Table 1to develop each e-learning module. Each module was designedtotake 5-9 hours of work for a studentto complete. Requests for proposals wereissuedto faculty atthe University of New Haven,those at otherinstitutions andindustry consultants. Reviewteams of 2-3 faculty fromthe University of New Haven and otherinstitutions who are familiar with KEEN goals were
e-Learning Modules Target Courses for Integration of Modules 1. Generating newideas based on societal needs and business
opportunities Introductionto Engineering (Freshman) 2. Developing customer awareness and quicklytesting
conceptsthrough customer engagement* 3. Thinking creativelyto drive innovation†
Project Planning and Development (Freshman)
4. Learning from failure*
5. Establishingthe cost of production or delivery of a service,
including scaling strategies* EconomProject Managemenics (Sophomore) t and Engineering 6. Determining market risks Applied Engineering Statistics (Junior)
7. Designinginnovatively under constraints
(Junior Courses) Transport Operations II Mechanics and Structures Lab Software Project Analysis and Design Junior Design Laboratory
Fundamentals of Mechanical Design System Engineering Concepts and Design 8. Financing a business
Engineering Entrepreneurship (Juniorlevel course being developed)
9. Developing a business planthat addresses stakeholder interests, economics, market potential and regulatoryissues 10. Marketing a product or service
11. Adapting a businessto a changing climate 12. Delivering an elevator pitch†
13. Resolving difficult ethicalissues
(Junior Courses)
Professional Engineering Seminar
Social & Professional Issuesin Computing Professional and Ethical Practice
14. Building, sustaining andleading effectiveteams and establishing performance goals*
(Junior Courses)
Chemical Engineering Laboratory Soil Mechanics Laboratory Junior Design Laboratory Mechanics Laboratory
System Engineering Design Process 15. Building relationships with corporations and communities Mandatoryinternships
16. Applying systemsthinkingto complex problems*
Disciplinary Senior Design Courses 17. Recruiting and servicing clients
18. Defining and protectingintellectual property
establishedto suggest detailedtopics for each module and review modulesthroughthe development process. Potential developers submittedtheir proposals using a concise form providedtothem. The authors and a program director ofthe granting agency reviewedthe proposals receivedto select a developer for each module. The developers completed a one-week long online course prepared bythe Office of eLearning atthe University of New Haventolearn howto develop effective andinteractive e-learning modules. The developers also participatedin a webinarto familiarizethemselves with entrepreneurialthinking, KEEN’s goals andthe
elementsthey shouldincludeinthe modules. Subsequently,the developers worked with a course designerto finalize an outline, detailed storyboards, and content. At critical pointsthe review teams reviewedthe submissions from developers and providedthem feedback. After all ofthe content was developed,the course designer formattedthemintothe Blackboardlearning management system (LMS).
Implementation Framework
Atthe Tagliatela College of Engineering, modules areintegratedinto courses using a flipped classroom model. In each course, contentis delivered via a short e-learning module outsidethe class, and studentlearningisimproved by reinforcingthe content coveredinthe modulethrough class discussions and contextual activities. The overallintegration hasthe four main components shownin Figure 1. Students completethe e-learning module outsidethe class withintwo weeks. Duringthe second week, students are askedto participatein an online orin class discussion. The discussion questions enable studentstolearnthrough peer and/orinstructorinteraction. After completion ofthe module, students are requiredto work on a class project relatedtothe module topic. A final assessmentis done eitherthrough questionsincludedinthe final exam orthrough mini-assignments. The class projectistypically an existing projectthatis modifiedtoinclude material coveredinthe e-learning module. However,they can also be assignmentsthat are specifically designedtotargetlearning outcomesthat arelinkedtothe module content.
Figure 1. Integration components of e-Learning modules Integrated
e-Learning Module Deliver content
via short Online Module Engage students through (Blackboard) Discussion Reinforce learning through a Class Project Assessthrough
Project & Final Exam
Instructors are askedto perform thefollowing tointegratee-learningmodulesintotheir classes: 1. Completethe e-learning module;
2. Attendtraining designed for faculty deployingthe modules;
3. Revise course syllabito reflectintegration of e-learning moduleinto thecourse;
4. Plan how toreinforce contentinthe online module with a contextual activity inthecourse; 5. Revise course syllabitoincludethe contextual activity andthelearning outcomes;
6. Administer a module-specific surveyinthe second week of class; 7. Deploythe e-learning module;
8. Implementthe contextual activityin thecourse;
9. Administerthe module specific survey again duringthelast week of class;
10. Conduct summative assessment by evaluating performance onthe contextual activity and/or final exam questions;
11. Communicate module-specific activities tothose coordinatingthe program; 12. Complete a short reflection survey;
The five modules marked with an asterisk (*) in Table 1 werebroadly deployed in fall 2015in multiple sections of targetcourses. Specifically, module 2 was deployedin eight sections of the Introductionto Engineering course, module 4 in five sections oftheProject Planning and
Development course, module 5in threesections of theProject Management and Engineering Economics course, module 14in twodisciplinarylaboratory courses,and module 16 in five disciplinary senior design courses. The main criterion usedto assign a moduleto a specific course wasthelevel of benefit students would receive from the content ofthe moduleinthe course. The benefit was assessed based onthe relevance ofthe material coveredinthe moduleto the course content andthecourse learning outcomes.Table 2 provides an explanation of the specific contributions from each ofthe modules tothetargeted course.
Table 2 also shows whenin a four-year program the five e-learning modulesare completed by students. The overall design of the e-learning modules programwas donein such a waythat when all 18 modules areintegratedintothe curriculum, all engineering and computer science students will complete atleast 12 ofthe 18 modules and atleast one module at each classlevel; and some will complete all 18 modules.
Implementation of Selected Modules
Inthis section, we presentthe implementationdetails for two ofthe moduleslistedin Table 2: (1) Learning from Failure, and (2) Building, Sustaining and Leading Effective Teams and Establishing Performance Goals.
Learning from Failure: Online Module Summary
The e-learning module Learningfrom Failure provides students knowledgeto explain the potential risks of failure,i.e.,identify what can go wrong, propose solutionsthatidentify howto plan or react quicklyto avoidissuesthat can cause a projectto fail, andin case of failure develop strategiesto deal with the outcomes. The module aimsto show studentsthat failureis sometimes inevitable andcan be a valuable experience eventhough engineers are oftentaught they should avoid failure. The module provides several case studiesthat demonstrate how knowledge gained from failures can be used toimprove designs, products, and processes. Thelearning outcomes of the e-learning module are to:
Table 2.Contribution of e-learning modulestothe coursesinto whichthey areintegrated
Class
Level Course: Module Skills TargetedModule in the Relevance
Freshman
Introductionto Engineering: Developing customer awareness and quickly testing conceptsthrough customer engagement
Investigate market, and test concepts quickly via customer engagement
Thisis an activelearning, project-based course. Itincludes four class projectsthat introduce studentsto basic engineering conceptsin product design. The module enrichesthe content ofthe course by providing students an overview of methods used for bringing designto market rapidly through customer engagement.
Freshman ProDevejeclopment Plannt:ing and Learning from Failure
Acceptthe possibility of failure, persistinthe face of failure, andlearn fromthe experiencesto achieve objectives
Thisis a project-based course thatdevelops skillsto successfully plan andimplement selected projects within budgetary andtime constraints. The module provides students knowledgeto explain potential risks of failure,i.e.,identify what can go wrong, and propose solutionsthatidentify howto plan or react quicklyto avoidissuesthat can cause a projectto fail.
Sophomore
Project Management and Engineering Economics: Establishingthe cost of production or delivery of a service,including scaling strategies
Identify an opportunity, investigatea market, create a preliminary business model, and evaluatetechnical feasibility, customer value, societal benefits, and economic viability
Inthis course students areintroducedto economic analysis with an emphasis on those concepts directly relatedtoproject management, as well as totheanalysis of alternatives under risk and uncertainty. The module enhances learning byinforming students howto apply various coststo evaluate theeconomic viability of a product or service with respectto various market conditions.
Junior
Third Year Lab Courses: Building, sustaining and leading effectiveteams and establishing performance goals
Recognizetheteam life cycle,identify success factorsthatinfluence productivity, recognize factorsthatinfluence decision-makingtiedto personality, andidentify theimportance of both team andindividual performanceto achieve overallteam objectives.
These courses haveteam-based projects, and the module provides studentsthe necessary guidanceto assessteam dynamics and performance, and have a better understanding oftheir rolein an effectiveteam. Furthermore,integration at thislevel provides an earlyinterventionto help prepare students beforetheir senior design projects, which are alsoteam-based.
Senior SenAppiorlying Des sysigntems Courses:thinking to complex problems
Learnto use sometools such as function mapping and
decompositionto apply systemsthinkingto complex problems
Senior design projectsinvolve design of a part, subcomponent or a system. To effectively perform designtasks, understanding of form and function as individual elements and as part of a whole is critical. Systemsthinkingenables looking at parts of a system asindividual components as well as a whole, and systems engineering providestools and methodsto bring a system’s architecture by formulating problemsinterms of
1. List common mistakesinthe product development cycle for real world projects. 2. Develop alist of practical optionsto correct or avoid potential mistakesthat may occurin
specific projects.
3. Explainthe potential risks of failure and propose solutionsinterms familiarto various stakeholders.
4. Provide recommendations for deciding whento stop a project and whento continueit. 5. Extract practicallessonslearned by reviewing case histories of failures.
Collectively,the content presentedinthe module aimsto help engineers recognize situations where failure could happen, notto be averse to failure buttake risks, persistinthe face of failure andlearntoturn failureinto a positivelearning experience. Example content fromthe moduleis shownin Figure 2.
Figure 2.Learningfrom Failure: Leadsto better decisionsthrough problem solving
This moduleisintegratedinto a project-based freshman coursethat aimsto develop basictime management,leadership and project management skills,to highlightthe application of
engineeringtopicsin several different areas of engineering, andtointroduce measurement and control of simple processes. Students gain proficiencyinthese areas asthey complete a series of projects spanningthe course. The module Learningfrom Failure is a perfect fit forthis class because in most ofthe class projects students are likelytoface failures andthey are then expectedto seek alternative solutions.
As describedinthe previous section,the deployment of an e-learning module consists of delivering content via an online module, conducting online discussions, reinforcinglearning through a contextual activity, and performing a final assessmentby evaluatingthe contextual activity and/or final exam questions. The deploymenttimetable ofthe Learningfrom Failure e-learning modulein theProject Planning and Development courseis shownin Table 3.
Table 3.Learningfrom Failure – Deployment timetable
Activity Week Pre-survey 6 Online module completion 7-8 Blackboard discussion questions 8 Contextual activity (classproject) 8-12
Post survey 14 Final assessment 16
Learning from Failure: Discussion Questions
The online discussion assignmentlinkedtothe module content aimedto provide students a platformto help formulate a strategyin case of failure and assessits effectivenessthrough peer discussion. The discussion questions withteaching notes are shown inAppendix A.
Learning from Failure: Contextual Activity
The e-learningmodule content waslinkedto an existing design project thatwas revisedto bring an emphasis on failuresthat students gothrough duringtheimplementation ofthe project. Inthis design project students are askedto work as ateam and with alltheteamsin classto create a work-cell plantlayoutthat will allowtheir robotto deliver parts fromtheir platformtothe next group’s platform. Theteams controlthe movement oftheir robot using a computer programthey write. The overview forthismanufacturing and robotics design projectis givenin Appendix B. The contextual activitytargetedtwo ofthelearning outcomes ofthe module:(1) to develop alist of practical optionsto correct or avoid potential mistakesthat may occurin specific projects;and (2) to explainthe potential risks of failure and propose solutionsinterms familiarto various stakeholders. The students were askedto complete reflections ontheirlearning experiences from failureintheir written report by addressingthe following questions:
• Fromthelessonslearnedinthe Learning fromFailure online module,list what could have been done differentlyto avoidthe mistakesthat occurredimplementingthis project. • Discuss what thepotential risks of failure are for a projectlikethisif doneinindustry, and
propose solutions forthese risksin terms familiarto various stakeholders.
Learning from Failure: Final Exam and Overall Assessment
The final component of deployingthemodule inthecourse was an assessment using final exam questions. Studentswere askedto consider several scenarios, some hypothetical and some real, and answer questionsthat getthem tothink aboutthe case from a perspective of failure. The online module also has a final challenge and students must achieve 80% or greaterto successfully completethe module. The proportion ofthe final grade assignedtothe various assessment activities were as follows: successful completion ofthe module:5%; discussion questions:1%; component of classproject related tothe module:2.7%; final examquestions relatedtothe module:3%.Thus,the proportion ofthetotal grade allocated to components relatedto thee-learningmodule was closeto 12%.
Building, Sustaining & Leading Effective Teams: Online Module Summary
The e-learning module Building, Sustaining & Leading Effective Teams provides students knowledge onthe formation and functioning of effectiveteamsincluding:the stages ofteam development;strategies for reaching consensus when making decisions;relationship between individual preferences for decision-making andteam performance;andtoolsto enhanceteam effectiveness. Studentslearnthat effectiveteamsjust don’toccur accidentally, butthere are specific strategies andtoolsthat can be usedtoincreaseteam productivity. Students exploretheir ownindividual approachesto problem solving usingthe Myers-Briggs Type Indicatorinstrument before examiningtheimpactthattheirindividual personalities can have ontheteam. The
learning outcomes ofthemodule are: 1. Define ateam.
2. Recognizetheteam life-cycle model.
3. Identify success factors at each stage oftheteam development processthatinfluence productivity.
4. Differentiate between consensus and compromise.
5. Examineindividual preferences’ dichotomies foundin a personality comparisoninstrument. 6. Identify factorsthatinfluence actions and decision-making.
7. Recognize four different viewpoints usedto reach consensus.
8. Relatetheimportance ofteam andindividual performanceto reaching overall objectives. 9. Design a performance plan.
The e-learningmodule uses personal experiences and case scenariosto explore howthesetools and strategiesimpact decision-making onteams. Example content fromthe moduleis shownin Figure 3.
Figure 3.Building, Sustaining & Leading Effective Teams: Example module content
The e-learning module was deployedintwo disciplinarylaboratory courses during thefall 2015 semester. Process Dynamics and Control with Labisthe first oftwolaboratory coursestaken by chemical engineering majors. Students gain experience with pilot scale process equipment through experimentsthat focus on fundamental principles of chemical process dynamics usedin the measurement and control of process variables. Mechanics Laboratoryis ajunior-level
mechanical engineering course. Students perform experimentsin mechanics of materials and vibrational analysis using computer-aided data acquisition systems. Both laboratory courses require studentsto workinteamsto perform experiments, analyze data and writelaboratory reports, andthusthese courses align well withthe outcomes ofthe e-learning module onteam building.
Deployment consisted of delivering content viathe online module and reinforcinglearning through a contextual activity. Although students completedtheonline module ontheir own,the laboratory environment allowed forin-class discussions. Table 4 outlines the deployment timetableinthetwocourses.
Table 4.Building, Sustaining & Leading Effective Teams – Deployment timetable
Activity ChemicaWeek l Engr. Lab MechanicaWeek l Engr. Lab
Pre-Survey 3 7
Online module completion 4-5 9 In-class discussions on e-learning module 5 10
Contextual Activity 4 Team6-11 Charters Experimenta10l Des -13 ign Project
Post Survey 14 14
Building, Sustaining & Leading Effective Teams: Contextual Activity
Bothlaboratory courses enhanced team performanceby linkingtheonline module content with team-based experiments. Studentsin thechemical engineering laboratory course preparedteam chartersincluded as an appendixtothe planning reports for threeofthe experiments andthe final project. Ateam charteris a written documentthat helps determine what theteamwantsto
achieve, and howitis goingto be successful. Priortodeploying thee-learning module, students formedteamsto conducttheinitial experimentin thelab. After completingthee-learning module, newteams were established following anin-class discussion focused on formingteams usingthe stages ofteam development. Students returnedtotheir originalteams forthe final design project.
During onelaboratory class,theinstructorled a discussion onindividual perceptions following completion of thee-learningmodule. Students were askedto create questionsthat would be specificto one ofthe assignedlabsthat could be asked usingthe ORID (Objective, Reflective, Interpretive, and Decisional) process. This process uses question promptsto explore problems from four different viewpoints withtheintent of helpingteams cometo a consensus.
Upon completion ofthe final project, students wrote a final reflection on howtheir group used theteam charter,howthey overcame challenges, and how wellthey worked as ateam fortheir final project. This reflection was usedto evaluate group performance using feedback from student peers. Questionsincludedinthe group work reflection arelisted below.
1. How well did your group worktogether onthe final project? You should comment on how well work was distributed and completed among group members as well as how well group members communicated and got along.
3. Wasit helpfulto create ateam charter for your projects and would you dothisinthe future? (This questionis about other projects you did duringthe year)
In addition, students were askedto complete a surveyidentifying the contributions oftheir teammates. This survey,along withthe reflection,allowedtheinstructorto evaluate how well students workedintheirteams.
The mechanical engineering laboratory course integratedthe six-elementteam performance modelto enhanceteam effectiveness in a four-week final design project. Students were required to complete ateam-based experimental design project on any approvedtopical area relatedto mechanical systems. Teams wereinstructedto assign specific roles for eachteam member. Students appliedthe six-element approachto managetheir ownteam activity as a group. Each team submitted a document describingthe six elements of studentteams and howtheirteam intendedtoimplementthem as part oftheir final project.
Building, Sustaining & Leading Effective Teams: Overall Assessment
The overall assessment oflearningin thechemical engineering laboratory course included completingthe online module and assessing how well each student workedintheirteams based on peer evaluations. The online module had a final challenge, for whichthe students must achieve 80% or greaterto successfully completethe module. Successful completion ofthe module constituted 5% ofthe overall course grade. Planning reports contributedto 20%,and effectiveness of working onteams was 5% ofthe final grade. Sinceteam charters were 10% of the planning reports,they contributedto 2% ofthe overall course grade. Theproportion ofthe total gradeallocated to activities relatedtothe e-learningmodule was closeto 12%.
Overall assessment oflearningin themechanical engineering laboratory course was similar to thechemical engineering laboratory course.However,the proportion ofthe total gradeallocated to activities relatedtothe e-learning modulewas only 5% based on completion ofthe e-learning module and submission of the six-element team performanceplan. However,team performance did not explicitly contributetothe final course grade. A score of 80% or greater onthe final challenge defined successful completion ofthe e-learningmodule.
Assessment
A preliminary assessment study was conducted usingthe results of thepilot deployment of the Learningfrom Failure e-learning module.Twotypes of assessment were conductedto evaluate potential benefits gained fromthe integrated e-learningmodules. The first was assessment of improvementinstudents’ behavior/mindsetin engineering entrepreneurship with respectto a specific module through survey responses. This was atwo-step assessment withthe pre-survey administered beforethe deployment of an e-learningmodule, andthe post-survey takingplace after completion of the e-learning module andthe contextual activity. The studentstookthe same module specific surveyinthe pre- and post-assessment. The pre- and post- survey results were then compared and analyzedto measurechanges instudents’ mindset.
There were 8 questionsin thesurvey. Students were askedto ratetheiragreementlevel on a f ive-point Likert scale. An additional choice “I don’t know” was alsoincluded inthesurveyto
4 presentsthe survey ofthe e-learning moduleLearningfrom Failure, and Table5 showsthe analysis ofthe results. All pre-test and post-test means were adjusted sothatthe direction of improvement for all questions wasthe same. Inthis case, anincreaseinthe post-testmean shows animprovementin student responses. Before administeringthe e-learningmodule, the“I don’t know” option was checked 34times. This number was reducedto 4 atthe completion ofthe module, which supports ourassertion thatthe e-learning moduleshelp students acquire knowledge aboutthetopics they cover.The means for 2 out of the8 questions improved significantly showingthatthe e-learning modulescould potentially help students develop an entrepreneurial mindset.
Figure 4 Learningfrom Failure: Module specific survey
Table 5.Learningfrom Failure:Improvementin studentperspectives
Total Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8
I don’t understand the question
Pre-test 34 8 3 1 9 2 1 3 7 Post-test 4 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Mean
comparison Pre-Post-testestt 11.27 .20 12.54 .97 21.47 .77 22.17 .70 32.00 .61 11.89 .80 22.55 .26 11.57 .57 Difference 0.07 0.57 0.70 0.53 0.39 0.10 0.30 0.00 Percent
Improvement 5.8% 28.9% 39.5% 24.4% 14.9% 5.0% 12.8% 0.0%
The secondtype of assessment evaluated student knowledge acquisition from the e-learning module. The direct assessment was conducted using regular class assignments, final exams and class discussions as explainedinthe Implementation Framework section above. The direct assessment results of theLearningfrom Failure e-learning moduleare shown in Table6. There
were four componentsinthis assessment: online module completion, online discussion,
contextual activity and module final exam. All students participatedinthe contextual activity and final exam assessments, 85.7% ofthe students completedthe online module, but only 35.7% of themjointhe online discussion. The average grades for allthe assessment components varied from 80to 93.6, which demonstrated very goodlearning.
Table 6.Learningfrom Failure: Directassessment results
Performance Indicator ModuKEENle On Grade line KEENDiscuss Onion line ConRobotexttuaicsl Pro Actjecivt ity FinaKEENl Assessmen Modulet % of students completing
the assignment 85.7% 35.7% 100% 100% Average gradein each
assignment (out of 100) 93.6 93.0 89.8 80.0
Conclusions
Engineering graduates should possess an entrepreneurial mindset and skillsin orderto become better at identifying opportunitiesto create value.An entrepreneurial mindset will allowthem to usetheirtechnical skills effectivelyinturning opportunity to an achievementthat hassocietal and economic value. Engineering students with entrepreneurialtraining are thereforeexpected to begin their career witha competitive advantage. To develop entrepreneurial engineers,the
Tagliatela College of Engineering atthe University of New Haven is enrichingits curriculumby integratinge-learning modulesinto regular engineering courses.When complete,there will be 18 e-learning modulestargetingvarious entrepreneurial concepts and skills based on theKEEN Framework.Inthis paper,the approach of integrating thee-learningmodulesinto regular engineering courses is described.Preliminary assessment results obtained fromthe pilot
deployment ofthese e-learningmodules are also presented.The results showthat theintegrated e-learning modulescan be effectiveinincreasing students’level of content knowledge.
Future work will involve continuingassessment activities as more e-learningmodules are
integratedinto coursestoidentify strengths, revisionsneededin modules, and adjustment needed intheintegration.Full deployment ofthe five modules discussed will be completed bythe end of spring 2016. Statistical analyses will be performedto evaluatetheimpact oftheintegrated approach as more student datais collected.The five modules describedinthis paper were
deployed at five otherinstitutions in spring 2016and datathat will help assessment will become available fromthoseinstitutions as well. Additional efforts are being takento broadenthe deployment at otherinstitutions.
References
1. Byers T., Seeling T., Sheppard S., andWeilerstein P. (2013).Entrepreneurship: Its Rolein Engineering Education. The Bridge, 43(2), 35-40.
2. Clough G.W. (2006). Reforming Engineering Education.The Bridge, 36(2), 3-4.
3. Babson Research Group and Quahog Research Group, LLC (2014). Grade Change: Tracking Online Education inthe United States.Allen, I.E., and J. Seaman. Retrieved from
4. Abdous, M.,and Yoshimura, M. (2010). Learner Outcomes and Satisfaction: A Comparison of Live V ideo-Streamed Instruction, Satellite Broadcast Instruction, and Face-to-Face Instruction. Computers & Education, 55(2), 733-741.
5. Ariadurai, S. A.,and Manohanthan, R. (2008). Instructional Strategiesin Teaching Engineering at a Distance: Faculty Perspective. International Review of Researchin Open and Distance Learning,9(2): 1-11.
6. Bourne, J., D. Harris, and F. Mayadas, (2005). Online Engineering Education: Learning Anywhere, Anytime. Journal of Engineering Education,94(1), 131-146.
7. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology.MIS Quarterly,13(3): 319-340.
8. Osborne, R. E., Kriese, P., Tobey, H., and Johnson, E. (2009). And Neverthe Two Shall Meet?: Student vs. Faculty Perceptions of Online Courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research,40(2): 171-182.
9. Tanner, J. R., Noser, T.C.,and Totaro, M.W. (2009). Business Faculty and Undergraduate Students' Perceptions of Online Learning: A Comparative Study. Journal of Information Systems Education,20(1): 29-40.
10. Tabata, L.,and Johnsrud, L. (2008). "The Impact of Faculty Attitudes Toward Technology, Distance Education, and Innovation. Researchin Higher Education,49(7): 625-646.
11. U.S. News Education (n.d.). Online programs. Retrieved January 28, 2016 from http://www.usnews.com/education/online-education
12. Bucciarelli, L.,and D. Drew. (2015) On MOOCs. The Bridge,45(3), 43-50.
13. Holmes, D. (2015). Viral Videos onthe Mechanics of Materials (PowerPoint slides).7thAnnual Frontiers of
Engineering Education Symposium, Irvine, CA. Retrieved from
https://www.naefoee.org/symposia/currentsymposium.aspx?tabid=13147
14. Bajwa, W. (2015) Flipping of Large Engineering Coursesin Resource-Limited Settings (PowerPoint slides).7th
Annual Frontiers of Engineering Education Symposium, Irvine, CA. Retrieved from https://www.naefoee.org/symposia/currentsymposium.aspx?tabid=13147
15. Khan, F.,and K. V. Singh, (2014). Embedded Learning Modules forthe Mechanical Engineering Curriculum. 121stASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, IN.
16. Altuger-Genc, G., and I. Audin, (2015) Design and Development of Self-Directed Learning Modules for Foundations of Computer Programming Course. 122ndASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, WA.
