Interactive Computer-Centered Instructions for Science and Engineering Education

Mohammad A. Matin

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Denver, Colorado, USA.

DOI: 10.4236/ce.2012.33059                

Abstract

Both the formal and informal cooperative learning methods are proven pedagogical tools that provide the context for engaging students in reflective judgment and consultation. The cooperative method pays close attention to the multiple learning styles of students participating in the classroom project. Our engineering program’s goal is to expose students majoring in engineering (electrical, computer and mechanical) to a positive interdependence, face-to-face interaction, development of interpersonal skills and individual accountability. We introduces the use of Blackboards and clickers together to enhance cooperative learning aimed at educating students to succeed in today’s global economy. As such, classroom instruction and group projects were assigned to foster an environment that maximized the use of computers, took advantage of information and resources available on the internet and Blackboards, and nurtured cooperative learning among groups. This paper describes a method to create a learner-centered, cooperative environment, which will engage students, give positive interdependence, face-to-face interaction, and will help them to develop interpersonal skills and individual accountability in better understanding, critical thinking and judgment, all of which are necessary skills to succeed in twenty first century economy. This teaching method already impacted hundreds of students from fall, winter and spring, 2007 to spring 2011 and will impact thousands of students in the future. At the end of the courses outcomes were evaluated using developed questionnaires using Clicker response system. To answer one of the questions, “I wish the professors in my other classes use the clicker”, 72.1% strongly agree or agree, 18.3% disagree and 9.7% strongly agree. To answer another question, “The use of clickers in techhnology-21 class improves my ability to learn the material”, 88.3% strongly agree or agree, 9.6% disagree and 2.1% strongly agree. According to the results obtained from the questionnaire, students heavily benefited from the clicker system. The assessments were done anonymously.

Keywords

Clicker; Engineering Education; Pedagogy; Blackboard; Cooperative;Face-to-Face Interaction

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning—A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27, 18-25.
[2]	Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. Washington DC: George Washington University.
[3]	Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath and Company.
[4]	Dewey, J. (1944). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, NY: The Free Press.
[5]	Felder, R. M. (1994). Any questions? Chemical Engineering Education, 28, 174-175.
[6]	I-Clicker (2011). The decision is simple. URL (last checked 11 July 2011). http://www.iclicker.com/dnn/Abouticlicker/AdvantagesBenefits/tabid/145/Default.aspx
[7]	Derek Bok Center (2007). Interactive teaching DVD: Promoting better learning using peer instruction and just-in-time teaching. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
[8]	Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. (2001). Joining together: Group theory and group skills (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
[9]	Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Active learning: cooperation in the college classroom (2nd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Press.
[10]	Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active learning: cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
[11]	Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. & Smith, K. A. (1998). Maximizing instruction through cooperative learning. ASEE Prism, 7, 24-29.
[12]	Lyman, F. T. (1998). The responsive classroom discussion: The inclusion of all students. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Mainstreaming Digest (pp. 109-113). College Park: University of Maryland Press.
[13]	Matin, M. A., & Edelstein, J. (2008). Clicker: A personal response system for effective teaching. Proceedings of International Conference on Technology, Communication and Education, Kuwait, 7-9 April 2008, 48-50.
[14]	Macmillan News (2011). Move adds leading college custom publisher to macmillan portfolio. URL (last checked 12 July 2011). http://us.macmillan.com/splash/news/news07.html
[15]	McKeachie, W. (1999). Teaching tips (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
[16]	Mazur Group (2011). Peer instruction. URL (last checked 12 July 2011). http://mazur-www.harvard.edu/research/detailspage.php?rowid=8
[17]	Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting active learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
[18]	Scott, M. (2007). Innovations in undergraduate physics education at Illinois. URL (last checked 12 July 2011). http://research.physics.uiuc.edu/ PER/Course_Revisions.html
[19]	Turning Technologies, LLC (2011). Turning ideas into solutions. URL (last checked 12 July 2011). www.turningtechnologies.com