1. IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Page 1 Thinh Nguyen School of Engineering & Science Context Photonics in 3 rd year EE program Not main stream electronics No feed-in to research Make photonics more interesting Make students more engaged More hands-on learning Semi-PBL projects for labs Sensory Homunculus Man INCREASING STUDENT ENGAGEMENT & ATTENTION THROUGH PRE-READING (IN PHOTONICS)

2. Page 2 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Issues Increased practical time, decreased lecture time No change in lecture content Need for change of mode of lecture delivery Introduce Just-In-Time Teaching for lectures

3. Course Structure Page 3 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion OLD UNIT EFT load : 6 credit points Contact Hours : 2.5 hr/wk Lecture/Tutes : 2 hr/wk (Traditional lectures) Practicals : 0.5 hr/wk (recipe-based labs) NEW UNIT EFT load : 6 credit points Contact Hours : 2.5 hr/wk Lectures/Tutes : 1.5 hr/wk (Just-in-Time Teaching) Practicals : 1 hr/wk (PBL-based)

4. Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT) Learning material delivered via WebCT Students required to read learning material prior to class Students learn at their own pace Familiarity of learning material before lectures Students assessed prior to class using online tests Page 4 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion

5. Online Assessment 4-5 questions: – 2 - 3 short-answer conceptual questions – 1 understanding question – 1 learning time question Assessment closes 1 day before class No time limit Plagiarism is checked using Turnitin Page 5 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion

6. Online Assessment Page 6 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion

7. Online Assessment Benefits: – Formative assessment – Near immediate feedback – Early identification of at-risk students Page 7 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion

8. Assessment Results Page 8 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion

9. Using Results to Guide Teaching Results used to identify discussion topics No traditional lectures Better assimilation of learning material More relevant learning experience More efficient use of class time Students more engaged and more active in discussions Attendance not required if topic is understood Page 9 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion

10. Page 10 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Attendance Rate 2009 Ave: 72% 2010 Ave: 84%

11. Page 11 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Learning Time 2009 Ave: 2.4 hr 2010 Ave: 2.5 hr

12. Page 12 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Student Grades 2008 2009

13. Page 13 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Student Performance In Other Units

14. Page 14 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Student Evaluation Online anonymous survey of students 30 Questions – 10 related to the unit – 10 related to the teachers – 10 related to practicals – 24 close ended questions – 6 open ended questions

15. Page 15 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Responses to Closed Ended Questions

16. Page 16 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Responses to Open Ended Question

17. Page 17 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Increased engagement of the learning material Increased understanding of the learning material Better way for students to manage their learning Increased attendance of classes Better pass rate

18. Page 18 IntroductionCourse StructureAssessmentTeachingStudent EvaluationConclusion Questions?