120 likes | 212 Views
What do they know? An entry-level test for electricity. Gerard Rowe. Context. Mismatch Industry demand for more engineering graduates vs. lack of growth in high-school pool Growth likely from under-represented groups and students with lower achievement levels
E N D
What do they know? An entry-level test for electricity Gerard Rowe
Context • Mismatch Industry demand for more engineering graduates vs. lack of growth in high-school pool • Growth likely from under-represented groups and students with lower achievement levels • Academic preparedness needs to be assessed
Background • The compulsory electrical engineering course ELECTENG 101 is perceived as “difficult” • Pass rates have not been as high as in other year-one courses, particularly for under-represented groups such as Maori and Pacifika • There is a perception that the modular teaching and assessment of the national high-school qualification has not prepared students well for study in this course
Diagnostic Tests • Part 1 Electrical Engineering • Part 2 Circuit Theory, Electronics, Electromagnetics • Ready for First Year Quiz
Diagnostic test • Diagnostic assessment administered on day 2 • 30 minutes, 22 questions • 20 MC & 2 free-response questions covering:– simple circuit theory– forces on charges & currents in magnetic fields– electromagnetic induction • Questions based on high-school physics & maths
Diagnostic Test results 2007 Mean = 10.4 Pass rate 30%
The Diagnostic Test, a closer lookKnown conceptual misunderstandings from PER:- Sequential thinking- Misapplication of Ohm’s law- Current is “used up” 2007 Correct (D) 52%, (A) 37% 2008 Correct (D) 61%, (A) 29%
Tests for sequential thinking.2007 23% correct (B) 39% (A), 15% (E)2008 27% correct (B) 38% (A), 20% (E)
Diagnostic Tests • Part 1 Electrical Engineering • Part 2 Circuit Theory, Electronics, Electromagnetics • Ready for First Year Quiz
Interventions • Minor changes to lecture delivery and content of tutorials • Active learning in class • OASIS practice problems • Peer marking • Part 1 Assistance Centre • Part 1 Lecturers’ Network • Foundation Tutorials for at-risk (Part 2) students
Conclusions • The diagnostic test was valuable as a “wake-up call” and led to behavioural changes on behalf of students and some modification to course content. • Significant (pre-tertiary) conceptual errors were identified. • Many students appear to follow a “sequential thinking” model. • Many students inappropriately apply Ohm’s law. • Misunderstandings can be corrected by appropriate course interventions.
Where to from here? • Shared NZEEL identification of learning obstacles / threshold concepts (TC) • Shared resources for overcoming TC • Use of NZEEL wiki for dissemination • NZEEL coordination of input to NCEA/CIE/IB curricula • Design of resources for high schools • Concept inventory dissemination, evaluation, development, refinement • Establish smalls groups to work on key areas of curricula • Curriculum design (research vs practice) – the role of CDIO? • Learning styles – development of variety of resources