Beyond “group work”: an integrated approach to support collaboration in engineering education

AbstractBackgroundWorking effectively in a collaborative team is not only an outcome required by ABET but also one that scholars and practitioners recognize as necessary for being a successful professional engineer. Technology-based solutions hold promise for supporting collaboration; however, research has shown that technology alone is not sufficient to develop students’ collaborative skills. The authors created a combined pedagogical and technological environment—Google Drive Environment for Collaboration (GDEC)—to support collaborative problem-solving during a semester-long team undergraduate human factor engineering design project. The environment uniquely used an “off-the-shelf” tool to implement collaborative scripts to take advantage of the affordances offered by the cloud-based collaboration technology environment that may contribute positively toward learning and collaboration. We examined the following research questions:What is the relationship between the use of an online collaboration environment and student learning outcomes?What is the relationship between the use of an online collaboration environment and student collaboration skills? We used individual and per team collaborative contributions to GDEC as the independent measure of collaboration, and project scores, homework, and exam scores as dependent variables to show evidence of student learning. GDEC contributions were collected for the three project phases and regressed to student learning measures. Pre/poststudent collaboration skills were measured using the Dimensions of Teamwork Survey. Student open-ended responses to per phase surveys were analyzed for additional evidence of collaborative skills and use of the GDEC environment.ResultsRegression analyses clustered by group showed statistically significant relationships between:Individual student contributions to the collaborative environment and homework and project and second exam scores. Pre- to post collaboration skill scores on all Dimensions of Teamwork scales increased; however, the differences were not statistically significant.ConclusionsWe argue these results are promising as the combination of pedagogical strategies with the readily available off-the-shelf technology tools used to create GDEC and can be easily replicated. Further, student comments indicated they found the GDEC environment easy to use and effective, and they intended to use similar tools for future collaborative activities.

[1]  Yu-Hui Ching,et al.  Web 2.0 Applications and Practices for Learning Through Collaboration , 2014 .

[2]  Miguel Nussbaum,et al.  Technology as small group face-to-face Collaborative Scaffolding , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[3]  Thérèse Laferrière,et al.  Technology in Support of Collaborative Learning , 2007 .

[4]  Pieter J. Beers,et al.  Coercing shared knowledge in collaborative learning environments , 2006, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[5]  R. Calvo,et al.  Engineering students' conceptions of and approaches to learning through discussions in face-to-face and online contexts , 2008 .

[6]  F. Fischer,et al.  Fostering collaborative knowledge construction with visualization tools , 2002 .

[7]  Paul G. Shotsberger The Human Touch: Synchronous Communication in Web-Based Learning. , 2000 .

[8]  J. Bruner,et al.  The role of tutoring in problem solving. , 1976, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[9]  Daniel A. McAdams,et al.  Distributed ideation: idea generation in distributed capstone engineering design teams , 2011 .

[10]  B. Belland Scaffolding: Definition, Current Debates, and Future Directions , 2014 .

[11]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Everyday Problem Solving in Engineering: Lessons for Engineering Educators , 2006 .

[12]  C. Bao Iturbe,et al.  Educating the engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education to the new century , 2009, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[13]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  Supporting interactive argumentation: Influence of representational tools on discussing a wicked problem , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[14]  Michael K Parides,et al.  Separation of individual‐level and cluster‐level covariate effects in regression analysis of correlated data , 2003, Statistics in medicine.

[15]  Joel S. Greenstein,et al.  The Use of Groupware for Collaboration in Distributed Student Engineering Design Teams , 2002 .

[16]  Marcia C. Linn,et al.  Internet Environments for Science Education , 2004 .

[17]  Päivi Häkkinen,et al.  Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[18]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Designing Biases That Augment Socio-Cognitive Interactions , 2005 .

[19]  Kathleen M. Swigger,et al.  Online collaboration: Collaborative behavior patterns and factors affecting globally distributed team performance , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[20]  John M. Parente,et al.  Collaborative Learning vs. Lecture/Discussion: Students' Reported Learning Gains * , 2001 .

[21]  H. Gardner,et al.  Learning: Peering Backward and Looking Forward in the Digital Era , 2009 .

[22]  Daniel P. Siewiorek,et al.  Supporting collaborative learning in engineering design , 2005, Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, 2005..

[23]  Kate Kinsella Designing Group Work that Supports and Enhances Diverse Classroom Work Styles. , 1996 .

[24]  Wanlei Zhou,et al.  Employing Wikis for Online Collaboration in the E-Learning Environment: Case Study , 2005, Third International Conference on Information Technology and Applications (ICITA'05).

[25]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  A Scaffolding Design Framework for Software to Support Science Inquiry , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[26]  Martin Hyde,et al.  Pair work—A blessing or a curse?: An analysis of pair work from pedagogical, cultural, social and psychological perspectives , 1993 .

[27]  Leonard Springer,et al.  Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis , 1997 .

[28]  William H. Dutton,et al.  Clouds, big data, and smart assets: Ten tech-enabled business trends to watch , 2010 .

[29]  B. Millis,et al.  Complex Cooperative Learning Structures for College and University Courses , 1994 .

[30]  C. Schunn,et al.  Commenting on Writing , 2006 .

[31]  Michael Pressley,et al.  A portrait of benchmark school: How a school produces high achievement in students who previously failed. , 2006 .

[32]  E. Cohen Restructuring the Classroom: Conditions for Productive Small Groups , 1994 .

[33]  Roy D. Pea,et al.  How to improve collaborative learning with video tools in the classroom? Social vs. cognitive guidance for student teams , 2012, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[34]  A. King Scripting Collaborative Learning Processes: A Cognitive Perspective , 2007 .

[35]  Michele D. Dickey Teaching in 3D: Pedagogical Affordances and Constraints of 3D Virtual Worlds for Synchronous Distance Learning , 2003 .

[36]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Cooperative Learning Returns To College What Evidence Is There That It Works , 1998 .

[37]  M. Borrego,et al.  Team Effectiveness Theory from Industrial and Organizational Psychology Applied to Engineering Student Project Teams: A Research Review , 2013 .

[38]  Yehuda E. Kalay,et al.  Virtual Learning Environments , 2003 .

[39]  Jeroen Janssen,et al.  Influence of group member familiarity on online collaborative learning , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[40]  Elizabeth Bagley,et al.  Epistemic network analysis : a Prototype for 21 st Century assessment of Learning , 2009 .

[41]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Creative Controversy: Intellectual Challenge in the Classroom , 1992 .

[42]  Brian J. Reiser,et al.  Scaffolding Complex Learning: The Mechanisms of Structuring and Problematizing Student Work , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[43]  Aoife Ahern What are the perceptions of lecturers towards using cooperative learning in civil engineering? , 2007 .

[44]  F. Fischer,et al.  Epistemic and social scripts in computer–supported collaborative learning , 2005 .

[45]  S. Volet,et al.  Group work at university: significance of personal goals in the regulation strategies of students with positive and negative appraisals , 2006 .