Annotated bibs
-
Upload
blake-steiner -
Category
Documents
-
view
156 -
download
5
description
Transcript of Annotated bibs
Running head: Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 1
Engineering EducationAnnotated Bibliography
Blake Steiner
University of Central Florida
ENC 1102
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 2
Abstract
After exploring genres common to the field of engineering through a preliminary
genre analysis, I continued analyzing the language and genres of my field by researching
one of the building blocks of becoming an engineer. I gathered articles relating to the
education of engineering that makes one become a successful engineer. Through my
research I found sources discussing the application of new technologies in engineering
education (Delale, F et al. (2011); Orange, A et al. (2012); Borrego, M, Lindsay, E, &
Madhavan, K. (2011)), the different learning styles of engineers (Felder, R, & Silverman,
L. (1988); Kolmos, A, & Holgaard, J. (2003); Holvikivi, J. (2007)), as wells as the
various teaching methods involved in engineering education (Bernhard, J.(1997); Goh, S.
(2012); Felder, R et al. (2000); Courter, S et al. (1996)). These sources have helped me to
identify the various aspects of what is involved in the education of engineers in relation
to the field of engineering. In addition, these articles have helped me continue exploring
the genre conventions that I will need to learn as I enter a new community through my
major. These articles offer information on how engineers think, learn, speak, and how
they work with arising technology, which is crucial for anyone to know that is entering
that profession. While some of these sources were published years ago, they still hold
beneficial information to those who are studying engineering, but on the other hand some
methods are outdated due to advances in technology.
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 3
Bernhard, J. (1997). ”Challenges and Strategies for Electrical Engineering Education”.
Presented at Frontiers in Education Conference. Available at
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=632708
Jennifer Bernhard, an Electrical and Computer Engineering professor at the
University of New Hampshire, asserts her teaching methods and strategies, and
the uses of them in “fostering new perspectives and insights” in engineering
education, in her 1997 article “Challenges and Strategies for Electrical
Engineering Education”. She supports this assertion through her personal
experience as an engineering professor and defining her specific strategies for
teaching different levels of engineering. She divides these levels among freshman,
sophomores, juniors, seniors, and graduate students, using separate strategies that
each correlate to the students particular level of experience. Her purpose was to
show other professors and students, in that profession, methods of teaching
engineering students in order to further their education. The intended audience for
this source is the students or professors involved in the education of engineering,
and this audience is targeted by stressing the importance of strategies needed for
successful education of engineering students.
This source is relevant to my topic because the author focuses on how engineers
learn and the teaching methods that allow them to do so. Bernhard states that the
main challenge of engineering is “to teach students how to think independently,
solve problems, and innovate”. She states what the purpose of engineering
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 4
education is and argues on what needs to be done in order for that education top
come into fruition. This article also relates to the article written by Engineering
TA Fellows, as they discuss the fact that they need to recognize this challenge for
effective teaching.
Borrego, M, Lindsay, E, & Madhavan, K. (2011). “eLearning Research Opportunities
in Engineering Education”. Advances in Engineering Education, 2.3, 5-10.
Maura Borrego, Euan Lindsay, and Krishna Madhavan, professors from various
universities, claim the potential benefit of elearning through technology in
engineering education in their article “eLearning Research Opportunities in
Engineering Education”. They support this claim by describing how technology
has advanced communication, computational, and information technologies,
causing an innovation in engineering education making elearning a strong source
of learning. Some of these technologies include forms of games, clickers, and
technical/team solutions. Through the application of eLearning, professors can
make use of communicative and informative technology through a form of
computer infrastructure to advance education. The purpose in writing this article
was to evaluate the potential that elearning will have on engineering education
due to the development of new technology. The audience intended for this article
is professors in engineering education that would want to implement the use of
eLearning for their students, and the audience was targeted by the authors use of
data collected from engineering courses using eLearning.
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 5
The source is relevant to my topic as in this article the authors describe elearning
is using forms of technology in order to innovate engineering education.
Elearning is a growing form of teaching and the authors describe that elearning
could play a great potential role in engineering education. Using elearning there
would be networking frameworks through the technologies and the authors state
that “the development of well-defined theoretical frameworks centered on the use
and adoption of elearning has great potential to forge new directions in the field of
engineering education.” This simply means that these “theoretical frameworks”
would be based on using advances in information and communication
technologies to further eLearning education in engineering. The article is relatable
to the one written by Amy Orange et al, who describes the application of new
technology within the engineering curriculum. Both are similar as they describe
the use of new technology in engineering education, but in this source it describes
a broader spectrum of the applications of eLearning in general.
Courter, S et al. (1996). Strategies for Effective Teaching. A Handbook for Teaching
Assistants. Retrieved from
http://www.engr.wisc.edu/services/elc/strategies.pdf
Sandra Courter et al, members of the College of Engineering TA Fellows, assert
their concept of an effective teaching method for engineering education in their
1996 handbook “Strategies for Effective Teaching: A Handbook for Teaching
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 6
Assistants”. They support this assertion through outlining the specifics of a better
engineering education through practical examples and techniques. The article
addresses the use of practical examples, show and tell, case studies, guided design
projects, open-ended labs, flowchart technique, open-ended quizzes,
brainstorming, and using the question-and-answer method. The purpose in writing
this handbook was to layout specific examples for teaching assistants to use in the
engineering curriculum. The audience for this handbook was intended for
teaching assistants in the engineering curriculum, but it is beneficial to anyone
involved in engineering education as a layout of teaching methods. The audience
is targeted by describing specific teaching methods that would be useful to anyone
teaching in engineering education.
The source is relevant to my topic as it describes specific teaching methods used
in engineering education. As stated by the source, the mission of the College of
Engineering is to “create, integrate, transfer, and apply engineering knowledge”.
This simply means that this concept of engineering is to be achieved through
using this handbook for effective teaching methods in order to match the students’
learning styles. The source is also relatable to the article written by Felder et al,
who also outlines specific teaching methods in the curriculum. While the
handbook is also relatable to the article written by Bernhard, it is slightly different
as it is teaching methods for the overall engineering education experience, while
in Bernhard’s she divides the teaching methods by level of education gained so
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 7
far. It also has to be kept in mind that all of these articles were published in a
variety of years, which could be why the teaching methods are different.
Delale, F et al. (2011). "Infusion of Emerging Technologies and New Teaching Methods
into The Mechanical Engineering Curriculum at The City College of New York."
Advances in Engineering Education, 2.4, 14-50.
Feridun Delale et al, professors of the Department of Mechanical Engineering in
the City College of New York, asserts the role of using new technologies and
teaching methods into the engineering curriculum through their 2011 article
“Infusion of Emerging Technologies and New Teaching Methods into The
Mechanical Engineering Curriculum at The City College of New York”. They
support this assertion by explaining the use of these technologies in the mechanics
of solids, fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, transfer and rate mechanisms, as well
as electrical theory. Although they describe the applications of emerging
technologies in those fields, the specific technology involved is not clearly
defined. While this is true, the authors acknowledge the fact that keeping
emerging technologies in mind is very important when reforming the engineering
curriculum. Their purpose in writing this article was to demonstrate the
application of new technology in engineering education and showing its
importance in reforming an engineering curriculum. The intended audience for
this article is anyone who is interested in the teaching of engineering, such as an
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 8
engineering professor. The audience is targeted by using the mechanical
engineering department curriculum at the City College of New York as an
example.
The source is relevant to my topic as the use of new technology has a great impact
in the teaching of engineering. Students will learn how to apply emerging
technologies for their field and will be prepared when they finish their education.
They state that so far, “it appears that students’ confidence and overall academic
performance has improved in some courses following the reform”, where the
reform is meaning the introduction of the new technology. Delale et al, is
providing evidence that the new technology has shown results when used in
teaching. This article is closely related to the one written by Amy Orange et al,
who discusses the use of technology in undergraduate mechanical engineering
courses.
Felder, R et al. (2000). “THE FUTURE OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION II.
TEACHING METHODS THAT WORK”. Chem. Engr. Education, 34.1, 26-39.
Richard M. Felder et al, professors from various Universities, assert their concept
on the most beneficial teaching methods in engineering education in their 2000
article “THE FUTURE OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION II. TEACHING
METHODS THAT WORK”. They support this assertion by clearly identifying
the key components of teaching the course. These key components include
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 9
formulating and publishing clear instructional objectives, establishing relevance
of course material and teach inductively, balancing concrete and abstract
information in every course, promoting active learning, using cooperative
learning, giving challenging but fair tests, and conveying a sense of concern about
the students learning. Their purpose in this article was to outline the key elements
towards developing an effective teaching method for engineering students. The
intended audience of this article would be those involved in the teaching of
engineering. They target this audience by using teaching methods from other
schools in engineering education as an example.
This source is relevant to my topic as it outlines the best teaching methods
involved in engineering education and clearly defines them. The authors state that
“performance of an individual student in a class depends on a staggering variety
of factors, many of which are out of the instructor’s control”, and even though this
so, they created the article in order to provide a way to address many of these
factors. They are providing specific ways in which the professor using these
methods can further the education of their students. This source is relevant to the
articles written by Bernhard and Goh, who also discuss various teaching methods
for engineering education.
Felder, R, & Silverman L. (1988). “Learning And Teaching Styles In Engineering
Education”. Engr. Education, 78.7, 674-681.
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 10
Richard Felder and Linda Silverman, educators at the North Carolina State
University (1988), assert their belief that the diverse learning styles of engineering
students play a huge role in their education and the teaching styles given by their
instructors has a dramatic effect on the quality of their learning, in their article
“Learning and Teaching Styles In Engineering Education”. They support this
assertion through examples of psychology, charts, and specific definitions on the
different learning styles. The article shows that although most engineers are
active, sensing and visual learners, there are many that have different learning
styles. They try to explain this diversity by claiming that it is due to all of the
different fields in engineering. Their purpose in writing this article was to explain
the diverse learning and teaching styles involved in engineering education, to
show educators the specific forms of teaching that they should adhere to. The
intended audience of this source is anyone who is interested in engineering who
wants to know how engineers learn and the best ways for someone to learn in that
field. They target this audience by stating the specific learning styles used by
engineers.
The source is relevant to my topic since the methods on teaching engineers and
the subject of how they learn, is a huge part of engineering education. Although
Felder and Silverman are not engineers, but rather psychologists who analyze
engineers, their work still has meaning in the education of engineering. They state
that how much a student learns in a class is “governed in part by that student’s
native ability and prior preparation but also by the compatibility of his or her
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 11
learning style and the instructor’s teaching style”. In order for engineering
students to learn it is dependent on how the material is given and the teaching
methods that the instructor would use. This source is closely related to the article
written by Holvikivi, who also discusses the importance of understanding the
learning styles of engineers when trying to make efficient forms of educating
them.
Goh, S. (2012). “Star Power for teaching professional skills to engineering students”.
Advances in Engineering Education, 3.1, 3-16.
Suk Meng Goh, director of the Curtain Sarawak Research Institute, asserts the
uses of the concept of “star power” towards teaching engineers in his 2012 article
“Star Power for teaching professional skills to engineering students”. He supports
this assertion by defining the role that this new method of teaching plays in the
education of engineers. The game “Star Power” was seen to have potential in
learning professional engineering skills and is easily adjustable to emphasize
different elements of those skills. With such promise, this game could be used
widely in engineering education. His purpose in writing this article was evaluating
the potential that playing the game of “Star Power” has towards teaching
engineers. The intended audience of this source is anyone involved in new
methods of teaching engineers, such as professors in engineering or those
involved in engineering firms. The author targets this audience by using data
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 12
collected from an experiment using “star power” for the first time for engineering
students in the mechanical engineering department.
The source is relevant to my topic because the author introduces a new method of
teaching engineers in order to better their education. This method once had a
different use, but the author believes in its application towards engineering. He
states that “although Star Power is normally played from a sociology context, the
current survey suggests that the game can provide a simulation to practice
professional skills that are relevant to an engineer.” The game wasn’t designed for
engineering, but using it as a teaching method provides practical uses for the
education of engineering. This source is closely related to the article written by
Bernhard who discusses various teaching methods according to how far you are in
engineering education, while Goh describes more of a general teaching method.
Holvikivi, J. (2007). “Learning styles in engineering education: the quest to improve
didactic practices”. European Journal of Engineering Education, 32.4, 401-408.
Jaana Holvikivi, professor at the Helsinki Metropolia University of Applied
Sciences, in their 2007 article “Learning styles in engineering education: the quest
to improve didactic practices”, suggests that engineering education can greatly
improve through increasing the level of didactic understanding within engineering
colleges and through collaborating with educational scientists. She supports this
suggestion through analyzing engineers by testing their learning styles,
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 13
thoroughly describing who they are and how they think, and using Kolb’s model
of experiential learning as an example of understanding how engineers learn.
Holvikivi uses data collected from learning style tests to show the typical learning
styles of engineers, which typically showed similar results, but in the data there
were many individuals who showed other learning styles. Although the students
express diverse learning styles, she believes there are still ways to create teaching
methods that encompass the needs of those different styles. Her purpose in
writing this article was to show her idea of effective ways of bettering the
education of engineers through the study of learning styles in order to figure out
the mind of an engineer and the best way to educate it. The intended audience is
for professors in engineering as well as psychologists that are interested in the
way engineers think and learn. Holvikivi targets this audience by using data
collected from testing the learning styles of engineering students.
The source is relevant to my topic since the article uses the concept of the analysis
of learning styles to create ways to benefit engineering education. She believes
that “choosing efficient approaches to develop engineering education is a
demanding task” where “considerable effort, research and new insights are
needed.” Holvikivi is simply stating that creating effiecient ways to further
engineering education is very complex and requires much effort and research in
order to truly understand engineers, but it can be done. This article is relatable to
Felder and Silverman’s article as they both discuss how understanding the
learning styles of engineers, holds a great importance in their education. Although
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 14
Felder and Silverman addresses the learning styles of an engineer in a more direct
answer, Holvikivi addresses it as something that is very vague and hard to
understand, and to truly understand engineers it a difficult task.
Kolmos, A, & Holgaard, J. (2003). Learning Styles of Science and Engineering Students
in Problem and Project Based Education, Department of Planning and
Development, Aalborg University. Available at http://www.sefi.be/wp-
content/abstracts/1243.pdf
Anette Kolmos and Jette Holgaard, professors in the Department of Planning and
Development at Aalborg University, in their 2003 article “Learning styles of
science and engineering students in problem and project based education”, asserts
the idea that engineers although most are active, sensing and visual learners, there
are varied examples of diverse learning styles among the other categories within
their respective fields. They support this assertion through examples of gathered
data of engineering as well as other fields, testing their learning style types. The
results of this data conclude that it is because of the variety of fields that there
exists all different types of engineers; each type with their own unique learning
style. The purpose of writing this article was to identify the most common
learning styles used by engineers and differentiate them from other professions. In
doing so, effective courses can be made to fit those specific styles. The intended
audience for this article is not necessarily just for those involved in the education
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 15
of engineering, but rather anyone that wants to know who engineers are and how
they think, such as professors of engineering, students, and researchers. They
target this audience by specifically describing the diverse learning styles of
engineers and using data to test their learning styles.
This source is relevant to my topic as it determines the learning styles of an
engineer. Knowing the learning styles are important in engineering education as it
allows for the instructor to shape the course curriculum in order to satisfy that
type of learning. The authors stated that “engineering students are not just one
cohort with similar learning patterns” and this is important to acknowledge when
trying to understand engineers. Among their respective fields, engineers typically
think and learn in different ways. The article is relates to the article written by
Felder et al, who also discusses the learning styles of engineers and acknowledges
its importance and how it pertains to education.
Orange, A et al. (2012). “An Evaluation of HigherEd 2.0 Technologies in Undergraduate
Mechanical Engineering Courses”. Advances in Engineering Education,
3.1, 18- 47.
Amy Orange et al, professors from various colleges, express their idea on the use
of new technologies to further engineering education in their 2012 article “An
Evaluation of HigherEd 2.0 Technologies in Undergraduate Mechanical
Engineering Courses”. They support this expression by using the data the
Engineering Education Annotated Bibliography 16
collected from various colleges that were using higher education technologies
such as video solutions, course blogs, course wikis, lecture podcasts, and showing
the direct result that occurred in each of those schools. While collecting data,
infusing these technologies into certain schools provided positive results, showing
that students overall have higher success in engineering courses that use higher
education technologies. Their purpose in writing this article was to identify the
effect that new technology has on engineering education. The intended audience
for this paper is most likely professors involved in engineering education that
want to further their students’ education. They target this audience by using data
collected from engineering students using higher education technologies in their
curriculum.
The source is relevant to my topic as it discusses the application of new
technology in engineering education and how it is beneficial towards the teaching
of students in engineering. The authors state that “students who did well in the
course overall were more likely to have an enjoyable experience creating a final
project and feel that they gained a greater knowledge of course concepts via the
project”, where the final project involves using the higher education tech.
Through this they show that students overall have a better education when
applying new technology into the curriculum, shown through positive results.
This article is relatable to the source written by Delale et al, who agrees with the
positive aspects of infusing new technologies into the engineering curriculum.