1. Low-Ee Huei Wuan, SP Wong Khoon Yoong, NIE STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF WAYS TO LEARN ENGINEERING MATHEMATICS: ARE THESE WAYS CDIO-RELATED?

2. Introduction There had been many research studies on learning experiences of students in higher education (Biggs, 2003; Entwistle, 1997) Surface or deep approaches to learning depending on workload and teaching (Marton & Saljo, 1976) Relevant to CDIO Standard 8 (active learning)

3. This presentation Learning experiences of SP students Data collected before SP adopted CDIO Initiative Will suggest several areas of implementing active learning, based on students’ perspective, rather than those of faculty or standards-setters

4. Literature review 1/2 Active learning possible even with lecture as teaching method (Struyven, Dochy & Janssens, 2008) Key is in prompt, and quality feedback on student work (ibid.) Requirement of feedback for student is found in CDIO Standard 8

5. Literature review 2/2 Students may not recognise objectives of tasks as planned by lecturers (Bell, Crust, Shannon & Swan, 1993) Students’ perceptions may differ amongst themselves, and with lecturer (Shimizu, 2002, Low-Ee & Wong, 2008)

6. Participants 235 Year 2 Engineering Mathematics students Pre-SSQ (Student Study Questionnaire) administered in May 2007 Post-SSQ at end Oct 2007

7. Instrument 1/2 57 6-point Likert-type items Conscientious Effort: 13 items Metacognition: 15 items Involving others: 15 items Resources for learning: 10 items Miscellaneous: 4 items

8. Instrument 2/2 Frequency of use: “How often did you learn in this way?” (1 = Not at all; 2 = Occasionally; 3 = Sometimes; 4 = Quite often; 5 = Often; 6 = Always); Helpfulness: “How helpful it was towards learning Maths 1/2?” (1= Waste of time; 2 = Of little help; 3 = Some help; 4 = Quite helpful; 5 = Helpful; 6 = Very helpful).

9. Findings: Frequency of use Mean of 1.64 to 4.24: occasional to quite often None of the study behaviour were used very often, or always SD of 1.11 to 1.67: variation in use of study behaviour

10. Findings: Helpfulness Mean of 2.01 to 4.27: little help to quite often None of the study behaviour were helpful or very helpful SD of 1.28 to 1.66: study behaviours more helpful to some students and less so for others

11. Table 1 Top four items in terms of frequency of use CatQWays of learning Maths 2 Frequency Helpfulness MeanSDMeanSD CE2 Paid attention to lecturer’s explanations. 4.141.474.271.44 MC26 Recognised when to use the appropriate mathematical formula. 3.901.404.071.44 RE44 Took note of lecturer’s hints for tests and examination. 3.911.543.801.55 RE46 Worked through past year tests and examination papers in Maths. 4.241.674.271.65

12. Table 2 Top four metacognitive items CatQWays of learning Maths 2 Frequency Helpfulness MeanSDMeanSD MC26 Recognised when to use the appropriate mathematical formula. 3.901.404.071.44 MC19 Checked my work while doing it. 3.761.443.701.44 MC23 Analysed mistakes made in solving tutorial problems. 3.711.443.891.43 MC47 Identified important concepts learnt in Maths. 3.621.433.801.53

13. Table 3 Bottom four items in terms of frequency of use CatQWays of learning Maths 2 Frequency Helpfulness MeanSDMeanSD RE8 Referred to mathematics books from the library. 1.641.112.011.40 RE11 Used computer-based programs e.g., Graphmatica and online applets. 1.931.262.071.28 IO1 Copied my friends’ Maths tutorials. 2.041.182.881.61 RE22 Searched for mathematics resources on the internet. 2.151.392.311.40

14. Table 4 Four items Maths 1 means higher than Maths 2 CatQ Ways of learning Maths 1 or Maths 2 Maths 1 Maths 2 MeanSDMeanSD CE2Paid attention to lecturer’s explanations. 4.671.154.141.47 CE36Completed tutorial exercises assigned by the lecturer. 4.391.373.861.51 CE52Was punctual for Maths lessons. 4.321.363.741.50 CE55Looked forward to coming to class. 3.551.493.131.50

15. Table 5 Four items Maths 1 means lower than Maths 2 CatQ Ways of learning Maths 1 or Maths 2 Maths 1 Maths 2 MeanSDMeanSD CE29Read through Maths lecture notes before the next lecture. 2.291.252.591.34 MC57Planned my own schedule for Maths revision. 3.181.583.351.64 IO7Approached Maths lecturers even after class. 1.961.102.191.24 IO28Presented solutions of tutorials to the class. 2.381.312.551.28

16. Figure 1: Bar charts of frequency and helpfulness

17. Concluding Remarks 1/4 Study provided empirical data about learning experience at SP Students generally made use of traditional study behaviours – typical of students who focus on getting good grades Objective of doing well in traditional assessment

18. Concluding Remarks 2/4 Slightly lower means in traditional study behaviour for Maths 2 Slightly higher mean for metacognitive behaviour in Maths 2, although not significant Interactions with others during learning not common Use of technology resources and library books was quire rare

19. Concluding Remarks 3/4 Enriching curriculum with more experiential, industry-related tasks Students to solve real problems Include modelling using technology Include learning activities involving others New activities to be infused explicitly but slowly

20. Concluding Remarks 4/4 For staff development in Standard 10 of CDIO Initiative, teaching staff to be encouraged to conduct action research One feasible area is to gather data on student learning in order to better match the planned learning experiences to student preferences of learning

21. Feedback Appreciate input from audience Observations that I might have missed? Comments?

22. Thank you Huei Wuan: lowhw@sp.edu.sg