Total integration and active participation in the learning process in textile engineering education

The aim of this case study was to study how combining several textile engineering courses into a larger entity and applying student-centred teaching methods helped learning, activation, motivation and commitment. The courses were combined in order to give the students a more holistic view. The subject was a class of textile engineering students in their second year at Tampere Polytechnic, Tampere, Finland, including ten young women in their early 30s. The combination included the seamless integration of lectures and laboratory works. The teaching methods were renewed with hopes of getting better learning results and more meaningful learning. Research tools such as questionnaires, tests, focused interviews and observations were utilised. Also, the students' and teacher's learning diaries and exams were at the researchers' disposal. These teaching arrangements helped the students' learning and understanding. Good motivation and commitment could also be achieved. The close integration of theory and laboratory works turned out to be a successful arrangement. The students also took responsibility of their learning and the lecturer enjoyed his work. However, a decisive attitude and keen interest in pedagogical development is needed in order to succeed.

[1]  E. Mayo The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization , 1934, Nature.

[2]  Lawrence Field,et al.  Guglielmino's Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale: Should it Continue to Be Used? , 1991 .

[3]  L. Shulman Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching , 1986 .

[4]  N. S. Edward,et al.  Evaluation of a constructivist approach to student induction in relation to students' learning styles , 2001 .

[5]  E. Mazur,et al.  Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results , 2001 .

[6]  Germain Simons,et al.  Learning and Teaching Styles , 2001 .

[7]  Emily L. Allen,et al.  Assessing the Effectiveness of a Faculty Development Program, part 1: Cooperative Learning. , 2000 .

[8]  L. V. Dijk,et al.  Interactive lectures in engineering education , 2001 .

[9]  Jouni Viiri Teaching the Force Concept: A Constructivist Teaching Experiment in Engineering Education , 1996 .

[10]  Malgorzata S. Zywno,et al.  The Effect of Individual Learning Styles on Student Outcomes in Technology-enabled Education* , 2002 .

[11]  Eric Mazur,et al.  Peer Instruction: A User's Manual , 1996 .

[12]  Richard M. Felder,et al.  MATTERS OF STYLE , 2004 .

[13]  Lawrence Field An Investigation Into the Structure, Validity, and Reliability of Guglielmino's Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale , 1989 .

[14]  Arthur N. Geddis Transforming subject‐matter knowledge: the role of pedagogical content knowledge in learning to reflect on teaching , 1993 .

[15]  R. Felder Reaching the Second Tier--Learning and Teaching Styles in College Science Education. , 1993 .

[16]  M. Ahtee,et al.  An International Study of Prospective Teachers’ Initial Teaching Conceptions and Concerns: the case of teaching ‘combustion’ , 1999 .

[17]  L. Guglielmino Development of the self-directed learning readiness scale , 1977 .

[18]  Samuli Kolari,et al.  Does Pedagogical Training Benefit the Engineering Educator , 2002 .

[19]  Reinders Duit,et al.  Students' Alternative Frameworks and Science Education. Bibliography. 3rd Edition. IPN Reports-in-Brief = Alltagsvorstellungen und Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht. Bibliographie. 3. Auflage. IPN-Kurzberichte. , 1991 .

[20]  Lucy M. Guglielmino Reactions to Field's Investigation Into the SDLRS , 1989 .

[21]  L. Adrianne Bonham,et al.  Guglielmino's Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale: What Does It Measure? , 1991 .