Student Learning Journey Map (SLJM): an instructional design process and toolkit to support constructive enhancement
Duangthida Hussadintorn Na Ayutthaya, Pisut Koomsap
Abstract
Abstract Engineering education has gradually shifted from knowledge-focused teacher-centered learning to competence-focused student-centered learning attempting to expose students to a variety of learning activities as experience gained is crucial for the internalization of their knowledge and development of their competence. Besides intensive lectures and laboratory sessions, several teaching and learning methods have been brought to the discipline as an effective alternative accelerator supporting student learning within outcome-based learning. However, some instructors may find it difficult to employ the methods for enriched learning experiences since unique implications for individual methods, alignment to content, and other course design components are necessary. As a consequence, journeys become malfunctioned and unengaged, hindering achieving course learning outcomes. Therefore, this paper presents a course planning and preparation process and toolkit under the view of students to enrich their learning experience. SLJM is developed based on Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle and the LOVE learning experience model. It navigates the instructors through the process of transforming a course into an engaging and constructive learning journey with a step-by-step visual representation of how to choose and arrange the methods and prepare other course components. An intensive graduate course on Product Design and Development is employed to demonstrate the SLJM’s usefulness.
Keywords
References
Arana-Arexolaleiba, N., & Zubizarreta, M. I. (2017). PBL Experience in Engineering School of Mondragon University. In A. Guerra, R. Ulseth & A. Kolmos (Eds.), PBL in engineering education (pp. 89-102). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Coşkun, S., Kayıkcı, Y., & Gençay, E. (2019). Adapting engineering education to industry 4.0 vision. Technologies, 7(1), 10. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/technologies7010010.
Fink, L. D. (2007). The power of course design to increase student engagement and learning. Peer Review: Emerging Trends and Key Debates in Undergraduate Education, 9(1), 13-17.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(23), 8410-8415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111.
Gardner, S. K. (2008). “What’s too much and what’s too little?”: the process of becoming an independent researcher in doctoral education. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(3), 326-350.
Gelmez, K., & Arkan, S. (2021). Aligning a CAD Course Constructively: Telling-to-Peer and Writing-to-Peer Activities for Efficient Use of CAD in Design Curricula. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32, 1813-1835. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09656-8.
Hussadintorn Na Ayutthaya, D., & Koomsap, P. (2017). Assessment of Student Learning Experience with ‘LOVE’. In INTED2017 Proceedings (pp. 1973-1982). Spain: iated.
Hussadintorn Na Ayutthaya, D., & Koomsap, P. (2018). An application of ‘LOVE’ model for assessing research experience. In M. Peruzzini (Ed.), Trandisciplinary engineering methods for social innovation of industry 4.0 (pp. 712-720). http://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-898-3-712.
Hussadintorn Na Ayutthaya, D., & Koomsap, P. (2019). LOVE-based teaching and learning method classification. In INTED2019 Proceedings (pp. 3521-3529). Spain: iated.
Hussadintorn Na Ayutthaya, D., Koomsap, P., Lima, R. M., & Nitkiewicz, T. (2019). Learning experience from teaching and learning methods in engineering education: instructors’ viewpoint. In INTED2019 Proceedings (pp. 3557-3563). Spain: iated.
Katsidis, C., Anastasiades, P. S., & Zacharopoulos, P. G. (2008). e-learning at the technological educational institute of crete: an evaluation based on the student experience. WSEAS Transactions on Advances in Engineering Education, 5(8), 1790-1979.
Kolb, B. (1984). Functions of the frontal cortex of the rat: a comparative review. Brain Research. Brain Research Reviews, 8(1), 65- 98.
Koomsap, P. (2018). Curriculum development of master’s degree program in industrial engineering for Thailand sustainable smart industry. Retrieved in 2019, February 25, from https://msie4.ait.ac.th/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2018/05/The-conceptual-Modelfor-MSIE4.0-English-Version-1.pdf
Koomsap, P., Hussadintorn Na Ayutthaya, D., Nitkiewicz, T., Lima, R. M., & Luong, H. T. (2019). Course design and development: focus on student learning experience. In R. M. Lima, V. Villas-Boas, L. Bettaieb, & K. Akrout (Eds.), International Symposium on Project Approaches in Engineering Education (Vol. 9, pp. 144-153). University of Minho.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Wellsprings of knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Lovitts, B. E. (2005). Being a good course‐taker is not enough: a theoretical perspective on the transition to independent research. Studies in Higher Education, 30(2), 137-154.
Mohd-Yusof, K. (2017). Sustaining change for PBL at the course level: taking the scholarly approach. In A. Guerra, R. Ulseth & A. Kolmos (Eds.), PBL in engineering education (pp. 13-32). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Peyton, J. K., More, S. K., & Young, S. (2010). Evidence-based, Student choice instructional practices (pp. 20-25). Center for Applied Linguistic.
Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. London: Routledge & Kagan Paul.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231. Reynolds, H. L., & Kearns, K. D. (2017). A planning tool for incorporating backward design, active learning, and authentic assessment in the college classroom. College Teaching, 65(1), 17-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2016.1222575.
Sajjad, S. (2010). Effective teaching methods at higher education level. Pakistan Journal of Special Education, 11, 29-43.
Salleh, B. M., Othman, H., Esa, A., Sulaiman, A., & Othman, H. (2007). Adopting problem-based learning in the teaching of engineering undergraduates: a Malaysian experience. In International Conference on Engineering Education (pp. 3-7). Coimbra.
Schuster, K., Groß, K., Vossen, R., Richert, A., & Jeschke, S. (2016). Preparing for industry 4.0–collaborative virtual learning environments in engineering education. In S. Frerich, T. Meisen, A. Richert, M. Petermann, S. Jeschke, U. Wilkesmann & A. E. Tekkaya (Eds.), Engineering education 4.0 (pp. 477-487). Cham: Springer.
Serin, H. (2018). A comparison of teacher-centered and student-centered approaches in educational settings. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 5(1), 164-167. http://dx.doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v5i1p164.
Sheely, S. (2006). Persistent technologies: Why can’t we stop lecturing online. Who’s learning, 769-774.
Tsai, M. T., & Lee, K. W. (2006). A study of knowledge internalization: from the perspective of learning cycle theory. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(3), 57-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13673270610670858.
University of Minnesota. (2022). Transdisciplinary skills. Minnesota: Authentic Learning@UMN. Retrieved in 2022, July 20, from http://authenticlearning.umn.edu/transdisciplinary-skills
Wanyama, T., Singh, I., & Centea, D. (2018). A practical approach to teaching industry 4.0 technologies. In M. Auer & D. Zutin (Eds.), Online engineering & internet of things (Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, No. 22, pp. 798-808). Cham: Springer.
Zappe, S., Leicht, R., Messner, J., Litzinger, T., & Lee, H. W. (2009). “Flipping” the classroom to explore active learning in a large undergraduate course. In 2009 Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 14-1385). Asee.
Zull, J. E. (2002). The art of changing the brain: enriching teaching by exploring the biology of learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC.
Submitted date:
08/10/2022
Accepted date:
10/11/2022
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email