You are here

Home » Content

INITIATIVES TO FOSTER ENGINEERING STUDENT MOTIVATION: A CASE STUDY

Journal Name:

  • Journal of Technology and Science Education

Publication Year:

  • 2017
DOI: 
https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.265

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
There is little doubt that student motivation is essential in providing a beneficial learning experience. One way to produce such motivation is to stimulate it through suitable assessment methods. This paper shares the experience acquired by the authors, who are university lecturers in Civil Engineering at the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, both through their assessment methods and feedback received via the modular object-oriented dynamic learning environment (Moodle) platform. During the last eight years the authors have progressively included increasingly dynamic methods in their teaching and assessment, with highly satisfactory results being obtained. The last three academic years have seen a test through co-assessment being added. In addition, during the last two an assessment exercise has been implemented through use of the aforementioned Moodle. Each test has a weight of 5% in the final mark for the module. After sitting the respective Moodle test, the students filled in a questionnaire that sought their views not only on the teaching methods but also on the degree of motivation they felt from such methods. As expected, the results showed that the students considered the internet-based Moodle platform to be useful. However, the most notable finding was that the majority indicated that alternative teaching and assessment methods (such as, among others, cooperative learning) were those that were most beneficial to their learning experience. Over 70% of the students thought that the use of the Moodle platform and other teaching and assessment techniques had motivated them with an average, high or significantly high intensity. In particular, the students highlighted the use of cooperative learning with 86% feeling that it helped them to learn.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-initiatives-foster-engineering-student-motivation-case-study.pdf
  • 3
291
312
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Badia-Valiente, J.D., Olmo Cazevieille, F., & Navarro Jover, J.M. (2016). On-line quizzes to
evaluate comprehension and integration skills. Journal of Technology and Science Education (JOTSE),
6(2), 75-90. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.228
Bleske-Recheck, A., Zeug, N., & Webb, R. (2007). Discrepant performance on multiple-choice
and short answer assessments and the relation of performance to general scholastic aptitude.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 89-105.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600800763
Bravo, E.R., Amante-García, B., Simo, P., Enache, M., & Fernandez, V. (2011). Video as a new
teaching tool to increase student motivation. 2011 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference
(EDUCON), 638-642. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2011.5773205
Bushell, G. (2006). Moderation of peer assessment in group projects. Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher Education, 31(1), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500262395
Carless, D. (2003). Putting the learning into assessment. The Lecturer Trainer, 17(3), 14-18.Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (1999). Peer and Lecturer assessment of the Oral and Written Tasks of
a Group Project. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(3), 301-314.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293990240304
Coll, C., Rochera, M.J., Mayordomo, R., & Naranjo, M. (2007). Evaluación continua y ayuda al
aprendizaje. Una experiencia de innovación en Educación Superior con ayuda de TIC. Electronic
Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 5(3), 783-804.
Darby, J. (2007). Evaluating course evaluations: The need to establish what is being measured.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(4), 441-455.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600898577
Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijmans, D. (1999). The Use of Self-, Peer- and Co-assessment in
Higher Education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079912331379935
European Ministers of Education (1999). The Bologna declaration of 19 June 1999. Joint
declaration of the European Ministers of Education.Available online at: http://www.bolognaberlin2003.
de/pdf/bologna_declaration.pdf (Last access date: january 14th, 2006).
Felder, R.M. (1996). The warm winds of change. Chemical Engineering Education, 30(1), 34-35.
Gessa, A. (2011). La coevaluación como metodología complementaria de la evaluación del
aprendizaje. Análisis y reflexión en las aulas universitarias. Revista de Educación, 354, 749-764.
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’
learning. Learning and Lecturing in Higher Education, 1, 3-3
Glaser, R., & Silver, E. (1994). Assessment, testing and instruction: Retrospect and prospect.
Review of Research in Education, 20, 393-419. https://doi.org/10.2307/1167389
Jordi-Nebot, L., Pàmies-Vilà, R., Català-Calderon, P., & Puig-Ortiz, J. (2013). Enhancement in
evaluating small group work in courses with large number of students. Machine theory at
industrial engineering degrees. Journal of Technology and Science Education (JOTSE), 3(1), 11-22.
https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.5 5
Keppell, M., Au, E., & Chan, C. (2006). Peer learning and learning-oriented assessment in
technology-enhanced environments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 453-464.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600679159MacAlpine, J. (1999). Improving and encouraging peer assessment of student presentations.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(1), 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293990240102
Marcé-Nogué, J., Gil, LL., Pérez, M.A., & Sánchez, M. (2013). Self-assessment exercises in
continuum mechanics with autonomous learning. Journal of Technology and Science Education
(JOTSE), 3(1), 23-30. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.5 7
Omar, S., Jain, J., & Noordin, F. (2013), Motivation in Learning and Happiness among the Low
Science Achievers of a Polytechnic Institution: An Exploratory Study Original. Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 702-711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.143
Rodríguez-Largacha, M.J., García-Flores, F.M., Fernandez-Sanchez, G., Fernandez-Heredia, A.,
Millan, M.A., Martinez, J.M. et al. (2015). Improving Student Participation and Motivation in the
Learning Process. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., 141(1), article number:04014005.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000209
Reyes, E., & Gálvez, J.C. (2010). Experiencias Docentes en Innovación Educativa como Mejora
de una Enseñanza Tradicional de los Materiales de Construcción. Formación Universitaria, 3(4),
13-24. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-50062010000400003
Reyes, E., & Gálvez, J.C. (2011). Introduction of Innovations into the Traditional Lecturing of
Construction and Building Materials. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., 137(1), 28-37.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000033
Ruiz, G., Gálvez, J.C., Benítez, J.M., Olivares, M.A., & Reyes, E. (2001). Hacia un Enfoque
Científico-Tecnológico en la Enseñanza del Hormigón Estructural como Material de
Construcción. Primeras Jornadas de ACHE sobre la Enseñanza del Hormigón Estructural, Madrid, pp.
265–270.
Stephens, R., & Richey, M. (2011). Accelerating STEM Capacity: A Complex Adaptive System
Perspective. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(3), 417-423. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-
9830.2011.tb00020.x
Sun, J.C.-Y. (2014). Influence of polling technologies on student engagement: An analysis of
student motivation, academic performance, and brainwave data. Computers & education, 72, 80-89.
Available online at: http://www.cidui.org/revistacidui/index.php/cidui/article/view/605
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.010Taras, M. (2002). Using assessment for learning and learning from assessment. Assessment and
Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(6), 501-510. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293022000020273
Von Glasersfeld, E. (1998). Anticipation in the Constructivist Theory of Cognition. International
Conference on Computing Anticipatory Systems Liège, August 11-15, 1997. Published in D.M.
Dubois (Ed.). Computing anticipatory systems (38-47). Woodbury, NY: American Institute of
Physics. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.56332
Woolf, H. (2004). Assessment criteria: Reflections on current practices. Assessment and Evaluation
in Higher Education, 29(4), 479-493. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930310001689046

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com