Top Banner

Click here to load reader

Engineering Education & Engineering Education Research XIONG ChinMin, Prof. PhD Invited Talk @FAFU. April 29, 2014

Dec 17, 2015

ReportDownload

Documents

diane-ford

  • Slide 1
  • Engineering Education & Engineering Education Research XIONG ChinMin, Prof. PhD Invited Talk @FAFU. April 29, 2014
  • Slide 2
  • 2 Outlines 1.Background 2.Engineering Education 3.Engineering Education Research 4.An Example 5.Q&A
  • Slide 3
  • 3 1. Background Professors duty: Create knowledge Educate student Doing research & Teaching at same time?? engineering education Research Who am i ?
  • Slide 4
  • 4 Educational Research in 2010-14 SSCI Chin-Min Hsiung. (2010). Identification of Dysfunctional Cooperative Learning Teams Based on Students Academic Achievement. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(1), 45-54. (SSCI, Rank=9/184, IF=2.219 in 2010) Chin-Min Hsiung. (2011). Identification of dysfunctional cooperative learning teams using Taguchi quality indexes. Educational Technology & Society, 14(3), 152-162. (SSCI, Rank=58/206, IF=1.011 in 2011) Chin-Min Hsiung. (2012). The Effectiveness of Cooperative Learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(1), 119-137. (SSCI, Rank=16/216, IF=1.925 in 2012) Chin-Min Hsiung, Shi-Jer Lou, Chi-Chang Lin, and Pei-Ling Wang. (2013). Identification of dysfunctional cooperative learning teams and troubled individuals. British Journal of Educational Technology. (In press). (SSCI, Rank=37/216, IF=1.313 in 2012) Chin-Min Hsiung, L. F. Luo, and H. C. Chung. (2014). Early Identification of Ineffective Cooperative Learning Teams. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. (in Press). (SSCI, Rank=20/216, IF=1.632 in 2012) SCI. EI Chin-Min Hsiung. (2010). An experimental investigation into the efficiency of cooperative learning with consideration of multiple grouping criteria. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(6), 679-692. (EI in 2010 ) Chin-Min Hsiung. (2011). Empirical investigation into the ability-condition interaction effect of cooperative learning. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(2), 303-309. (SCI)
  • Slide 5
  • 5 2014-- A quantitative approach to assessing team functioning in cooperative learning environments (in review) Enhancing engineering students cooperative learning performance further (in review) Enhancing technical paper reading comprehension using cooperative learning approach (????)
  • Slide 6
  • 6 . 2013. I-V ( I394964) . 2013. I-V ( I394965) . 2013. I-V ( I415203) . 2013. I-V ( I414033) Chin-Min Hsiung. (2012). A generalized Norde plot for reverse biased Schottky contacts. International Journal of Minerals, Metallurgy and Materials, 19(1), 54-58. (SCI)
  • Slide 7
  • 7 2. Engineering Education current situations Students are not well prepared 6 million & 100% Multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1983) Teachers are not well prepared Teacher-centered vs. Student-centered
  • Slide 8
  • 8 Teacher-centered Learning Rote-learning Care only about grades Passive & No passion
  • Slide 9
  • 9 Blooms Taxonomy Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create
  • Slide 10
  • 10 Student-centered Learning Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn. Benjamin Franklin
  • Slide 11
  • 11 Student-centered approach Active learning Peer-instruction Inquiry-based learning Problem-based learning Cooperative learning
  • Slide 12
  • 12 Problem-based learning encourages students to pose questions, propose hypotheses, make predictions, use tools to gather and analyze data, generate inferences in light of empirical evidence, construct arguments, communicate their findings, use a broad array of reasoning strategies that involve critical, creative, causal, and logical thinking
  • Slide 13
  • 13 Cooperative learning Theory based Social cognitive theory, Social constructivist theory, Social interdependence theory Evidence supported Model guided
  • Slide 14
  • 14 Cooperative learning Evidence supported higher achievement greater long-term retention of what is learned more frequent use of higher-level reasoning (critical thinking) and meta-cognitive thought more accurate and creative problem solving more willingness to take on difficult tasks and persist (despite difficulties) in working toward goal accomplishment more intrinsic motivation transfer of learning from one situation to another greater time on task
  • Slide 15
  • 15 Cooperative learning Model guided (Johnson, Johnson & Smith)
  • Slide 16
  • 16 Education Research?? Less competition Less resources needed Fertile ground
  • Slide 17
  • 17 How? I am around A team at FAFU? Aim high
  • Slide 18
  • 4. An Example:
  • Slide 19
  • 19 19
  • Slide 20
  • 20 I. Identifying dysfunctional teams Important Research Question Often occurred in practice Few studied Novel schemes needed 20
  • Slide 21
  • 21 1.A Computer-aided Assessment Tool Academic performance* Taguchi quality index** Mean & variance Mahalanobis distance metric*** Correlated data * JEE, 2010 Identification of Dysfunctional Cooperative Learning Teams Based on Students Academic Achievement ** ETS, 2011 Identification of dysfunctional cooperative learning teams using Taguchi quality indexes ***BJET, 2013 Identification of dysfunctional cooperative learning teams and troubled individuals 21
  • Slide 22
  • 22 1.B Larger-the-Better problem Positive & large Academic performance Positive & large SN= -10 log(1/y i 2 /n) 22
  • Slide 23
  • 23 1.C : Correlated data 23
  • Slide 24
  • 24 MD: Mahalanobis distance MD = (X-M) T A -1 (X-M)/k, X status vector of an unknown group M mean of the reference group A covariance of the reference group k number of variables 24
  • Slide 25
  • 25 II. Find reference group using SN Calculate A & M of the reference group Compute and Compare MD of the unknown teams 25
  • Slide 26
  • 26 III. 7 Trials 4 homework tests 4 unit tests 26
  • Slide 27
  • 27 Reference & unknown groups Trial 1 Group 1 1 1 SN 1 SN Mean (SN) MD HighMediumLow HighMediumLow O 959985 957172 39.3137.76 38.542.40 F 858479 687752 38.2935.99 37.140.17 A 848581 655948 38.4134.96 36.690.34 G 857383 627546 37.9935.18 36.590.07 I 779377 476451 38.1934.43 36.310.59 M 867753 658245 36.5335.33 35.930.60 H 818944 637356 35.7335.97 35.852.04 N 877470 645043 37.6334.03 35.830.79 B 828893 702873 38.8332.55 35.694.53 P 939867 477434 38.2933.01 35.652.80 C 838081 834434 38.1932.93 35.562.88 K 658883 344872 37.6633.03 35.352.33 D 839167 745429 37.8432.43 35.143.75 J 928486 662735 38.7830.94 34.869.62 L 736881 442632 37.2930.04 33.6711.39 E 948346 493012 36.0825.49 30.7937.73 27
  • Slide 28
  • 28 MDs of unknown group 28
  • Slide 29
  • 29 Verification 29
  • Slide 30
  • 30 Dysfunctional teams in 7 Trials Team Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 M C D N P J L E : : X-Y 30
  • Slide 31
  • 31 IV. Proposed a Computer-aided assessment tool Quantified quality using Taguchi SN Identified dysfunctional teams using MD metric Verified via field experiments 31
  • Slide 32
  • 32 Engineering & Educational Research William the Conqueror --1066
  • Slide 33
  • 33 5. Q&A
  • Slide 34
  • 34 Thank you for your attention C.M. Hsiung 2014/04/29 @ 34
  • Slide 35
  • 35 Research at FAFU Scientific Creativity Develop a Tool Compare cross- culturally Develop an instructional method Examine peer- influence Problem Finding Develop a Tool Compare cross- culturally Develop an instructional method Examine peer- influence