Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department...
Transcript of Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department...
![Page 1: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning
Larry Caretto
Mechanical Engineering Department
June 9, 2006
![Page 2: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
Outline
Background Teaching method
– Spend 50% of class time on group work– Use weekly quizzes to keep students current
Assessment Conclusions
![Page 3: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Background
Personal motivation for this approach– Long term interest in getting students involved with
discussion during lecture– Educational research shows benefits of active learning
versus lecture for student learning– Survey data shows that students now spend less time
outside of class doing work than previously ABET wants assessment and improvement President Koester’s learning-centered university
initiatives
![Page 4: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Koester on a learning centered university (August 21, 2003)
Learning in and outside classroom Specified learning outcomes Shift focus from teaching to learning
– Learning is “cumulative consequence and judgments for all aspects of the learning environment”
Document what students learn
![Page 5: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
ABET accreditation criteria are learning centered
ABET has already focused engineering education on cumulative result– Having graduates meet overall objectives and
outcomes is key to accreditation– ABET also emphasizes assessment and
continuing improvement– Improvement means that we have to examine our
practices as they effect student learning– ABET requires documentation of results
![Page 6: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
How to improve student learning in an individual class?
Basic assumptions– Students do not devote much time outside class to
work on homework problems to learn material– In class lecturing, without active student
participation is not effective use of time– Students need motivation to learn material on a
regular basis
Each of these is addressed by the practices discussed here
![Page 7: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Outline
BackgroundBackground Teaching method AssessmentAssessment ConclusionsConclusions
![Page 8: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Course organization and teaching schedules
The course is organized into twelve subject-matter units, each taking one week
Each unit contains – Lecture on new material for 30 – 40 minutes– Group problem solving for 75 minutes– A 30 minute quiz– Feedback on quizzes for 5 – 15 minutes
Two different schedules tested and student preferences assessed
![Page 9: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Course organization with initial schedule
Each unit has the following time distribution– 30 to 40 minute lecture on new course material on
day N– 75 minute group work session solving problems
on new material with instructor providing help as needed on day N+1
– 30 minute quiz on material with 5 to 15 minutes of follow up discussion of quiz on day N+2
![Page 10: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Initial Weekly Schedule of Activities
Tuesday Thursday
Quiz on previous week material – 30 minutes
Group problem solvingFeedback on quiz solution 5 – 15 minutes
Lecture on new material 30 – 40 minutes
![Page 11: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Course organization with modified schedule
Each unit has the following time distribution– Feedback on previous quiz 5 to 15 minutes on day N– 30 to 40 minute lecture on new course material on
day N– 30 minute simple group exercise on day N– 45 minute group work session solving problems on
new material with instructor providing help as needed on day N+1
– 30 minute quiz following group work on day N+1
![Page 12: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Modified Weekly Schedule of Activities
Tuesday Thursday
Group problem solving on material presented previous Thursday
45 minutes
Return quiz and discuss difficult points (5 – 10
minutes)
Lecture on new material
45 minutes
Quiz on material covered in group problem solving
30 minutes
Initial group problem solving (20 – 25 minutes)
![Page 13: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Lecture notes
Lectures use power point slides Students asked to respond to questions on
slides during lecture, but no assessments of responses collected
Handout sheets of slides made available on web for students to download
Students find notes more useful than lectures themselves
![Page 14: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Group problem-solving sessions – initial schedule
Students self select groups (3 to 5 students) Problems handed out at start of class
– Typically two problems to illustrate essential kinds of problems for week’s material
– First problem is subdivided into steps that lead students through solution
– Second problem does not provide steps
Solutions posted on web after class
![Page 15: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Group problem-solving sessions – modified schedule
On day of quiz the group activities are similar to those of the initial schedule– Solutions posted on web after quiz
On day of lecture there is a brief problem solving session that asking students to solve a modification of an example problem presented in lecture– Solutions included as part of lecture notes
![Page 16: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Instructor role in group work sessions
Prepare and hand out problems Get students working and encourage group
interaction in dysfunctional groups Answer group questions and interrupt all
groups to clarify common questions Lead discussion in final five minutes to
review what students have learned and give hints for unsolved problems
![Page 17: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Typical semester schedule for 30 classes of 75 minutes each
24 days to cover 12 instructional units with the cycle of lecture – group work – quiz
1 day for introductory lecture 2 days to review for midterm and administer
midterm 2 days at end of semester for final review 1 holiday
![Page 18: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Course elements and weighting in final grade
Homework assigned but not collected; solutions posted on course web site
Quizzes count 30% of total grade Midterm 20% Final 30% Writing assignment 10% Design project 10%
![Page 19: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Outline
BackgroundBackground Teaching methodTeaching method Assessment ConclusionsConclusions
![Page 20: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Five semesters of data
Assessments based on students present on day of assessment; grade distribution based on total enrollment– Spring 2003: 20 students; 16 assessments – Fall 2003: 30 students; 29 assessments – Fall 2004: 31 students; 19 assessments – Spring 2005: 31 students; 23 assessments– Spring 2006: 32 students; 24 assessments– Total is 144 students and 111 assessments
![Page 21: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Which schedule do students prefer?
Switched schedule after spring break Asked preference with five responses
– Initial much better (numerical score 2)– Initial better (numerical score 1)– No difference (numerical score 0)– Modified better (numerical score -1)– Modified much better (numerical score -2)
Used numerical scores for statistical analysis
![Page 22: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Initial muchbetter
Initial better No difference Modified better Modified muchbetter
Spring 2005
Spring 2006
Results of student preferences regarding schedule
![Page 23: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Mean student opinion is no difference in schedules
Average scores for two semesters are 0.09 and -0.04 (0 is no difference)
p values for null hypothesis that mean is zero are 0.81 and 0.90 for the two semesters
Although the mean score is no difference there are sharp differences of student opinion about which schedule is better
![Page 24: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Assessment questions
Students value course elements in helping them learn course material– Preparation for quizzes and examinations– Group work– Text reading and homework assignments– Lectures and downloaded lecture notes– Writing assignment and design project
Short abbreviation for these items shown on next chart
![Page 25: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
Not useful
Some-what useful
Students value of course elements for their learning
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4 Spring2003Fall2003Fall2004Spring2005Spring2006
Very useful
Useful
![Page 26: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
Students perception of course load and difficulty
Compare following items to other engineering courses– Time spent studying for course– Amount of material presented in course– Degree of difficulty of course material– Level of understanding of course material
Abbreviations for these items used on next chart shown in bold italics above
![Page 27: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Much less
About the same
Somewhat less
Students’ perceptions of course material and work required
0
1
2
3
4 Much more
Somewhat more
![Page 28: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
Grade distributions
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
A/A- B+/B/B- C+/C/C- D/F
Spring2003Fall2003Fall2004Spring2005Spring2006
![Page 29: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Students self-evaluation of how well they learned course topics
0
1
2
3
4Fall2003
Very good
Good
Adequate
Poor
Very poor
![Page 30: Teaching Thermodynamics with Collaborative Learning Larry Caretto Mechanical Engineering Department June 9, 2006.](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649eba5503460f94bc21c4/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
Conclusions
Assessed student opinion of course activities that help them learn the material better
This presentation covers one approach for teaching one course– Five classes with a total of 144 students (111
assessment forms) and no control group With this approach, students assess group work,
downloaded notes and exam preparation as most helpful items in learning