首页> 外文会议>American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition >Does Interdisciplinary Collaboration Alter Student Perceptions of their Disciplines? A Case Study of a User-Centerd Design Experience for Mechanical Engineering and Early Childhood Education Students
【24h】

Does Interdisciplinary Collaboration Alter Student Perceptions of their Disciplines? A Case Study of a User-Centerd Design Experience for Mechanical Engineering and Early Childhood Education Students

机译:跨学科合作是否会改变学生对其学科的看法?机械工程与幼儿教育学生用户中心设计经验的案例研究

获取原文

摘要

Interdisciplinary collaboration between undergraduate students in engineering and non-engineering disciplines is mutually beneficial. For the engineering students, such collaborations provide opportunities to practice effective communication and to utilize their technical expertise in a broader social and societal context; and, for the non-engineers, collaboration demystifies the engineering profession, contextualizes prior STEM knowledge, and, in some instances, allows for the physical realization of concepts through hands-on design and prototyping. The benefits of interdisciplinary collaboration are best realized when students view each other's respective skillsets and chosen professions as being valuable and necessary in achieving the ultimate goals of the group. The origin and nature of students' beliefs about dissimilar professions warrants further investigation, particularly as it relates to interdisciplinary collaborative experiences, which have the potential to reshape, either positively or negatively, a priori beliefs about peer collaborators. The purpose of this case study was to characterize the impact of an interdisciplinary collaboration on engineering and non-engineering undergraduate students' perceptions of their peers in dissimilar professions. The setting for the study was a mid-sized, research-intensive land grant university in the eastern US, where second and third-year mechanical engineering (ME) and early childhood education (ECE) students were placed on interdisciplinary teams and tasked with designing and fabricating a novel toy for young children that promotes constructive play. Online surveys were administered prior to and after this one semester course and focused on: (1) a priori knowledge and experience of the other group's subject area; (2) effect of interdisciplinary project on interest in other group's subject area; and (3) perceptions of other group's profession and/or their skills. Survey results showed that neither ME nor ECE students had a prior exposure to the other discipline. After completing the course, ME students perceived that they knew more about child development, play, and the design of children's toys, and ECE students reported they better understood the types of engineering disciplines. Interesting, ECE students less positively rated their ME counterparts post versus pre-course in the following areas: "very good at math & science," "hardworking," "good communicators," and "intense." Both ECE and ME students finished the course with balanced perceptions of their own disciplines relative to their counterparts. Both ECE and ME cohorts, on average, agreed that their counterparts' professions were equally legitimate and disagreed that there was a discrepancy in rigor between ECE and ME. ECE students solidly agreed that ME was a more valued discipline, although ME students were more neutral on this view. These findings suggest that engineering students have little content knowledge or experience in disparate fields, such as in this case child development and education, and benefit from interdisciplinary collaboration both in terms of content knowledge and developing a healthy appreciation for outside expertise. The collaboration also benefited the non-engineering students by demystifying the field of engineering, potentially alleviating "imposter syndrome" by normalizing team performance expectations, and providing some literacy of the engineering design process. In the case of early childhood education students, these altered perceptions of the engineering discipline may have impact on their self-efficacy for teaching science and engineering (Maier et al., 2013; Kallery 2004; Watters et al., 2000); as such their teaching in these two content areas may positively influence the perceptions of engineering by their future students, particularly females and minorities. This study adds to the growing body of research on the benefits of interdisciplinary collaboration at the undergraduate le
机译:本科生在工程和非工程学科之间的跨学科合作是互惠互利的。对于工程专业的学生,​​这样的合作提供机会练习有效的沟通,并利用在广泛的社会和社会背景的技术专长;并且,对于非工程师,协作神秘面纱工程专业,contextualizes之前STEM知识,并在某些情况下,允许的概念通过动手设计和原型的物理实现。跨学科合作的好处时,学生们互相查看各自的技能和不同专业为实现集团的最终目标有价值和必要的最好实现。关于不同行业需要进一步的研究,特别是因为它涉及到多学科协作的经验,其中有潜力重塑,无论是正面还是负面的,关于对合作者的先验信念的起源和学生的信仰的本质。这种情况下,研究的目的是表征工程和非工程本科学生对在不同行业的同龄人的看法的跨学科合作的影响。这项研究的背景是在美国东部,在第二和第三年的机械工程(ME)和幼儿教育(ECE)的学生被安置在跨学科的团队,并与设计负责中型,研究型赠地大学并制造新的玩具,促进有建设性的游戏年幼的孩子。在线调查是之前和这一个学期的课程后管理和集中在:(1)先验知识,另一组的主题领域的经验; (2)对另一组的主题领域的兴趣跨学科项目的影响;另一组的职业和/或他们的技能和(3)的看法。调查结果显示,无论是我,也不ECE学生有事先接触到其他学科。在完成课程后,学生ME看出他们更了解孩子的发展,游戏和儿童玩具的设计,以及ECE学生报告说,他们更好地理解该类型的工程学科。有趣的是,ECE学生少积极评价他们对我的同行相比张贴在以下几个方面预科课程:“在数学与科学非常好”,“勤奋”,“善于沟通”和“激烈”。双方ECE和ME的学生相对于它们的同行自己学科的平衡感知完成课程。双方ECE和ME同伙,平均而言,一致认为他们的同行的职业是同样合法的和不同意,有在欧洲经委会和我之间的严密性的差异。 ECE学生扎实认为ME是一个更有价值的学科,虽然ME同学们对此的看法比较中性的。这些结果表明,工程专业的学生必须在内容的知识而言,发展一个外部专家健康升值含量很少知识或在不同的领域,如在这种情况下,儿童发展和教育,并受益于跨学科的合作经验。该合作还通过神秘化工程领域,通过标准化的团队业绩的预期可能缓解“骗子综合症”,并提供工程设计过程中的一些素养受益非工程专业的学生。在儿童早期教育的学生的情况下,工程学科的这些改变看法可能对他们的自我效能感影响教学科学与工程(Maier等,2013; 2004年Kallery;沃特斯等,2000);因此他们在这两个内容领域的教学可以通过他们未来的学生,尤其是女性和少数族裔积极影响工程的看法。这项研究增加了研究的越来越多的跨学科合作的在本科乐好处

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号