Using everyday engineering examples to engage learners on a massive open online course

Abstract

A massive open online course on the laws of thermodynamics has been designed using the 5Es (Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, Evaluate) lesson planning methodology and delivered using everyday engineering examples to provide familiar contexts for both a global cohort of more than 3000 learners ranging in age from teenagers to septuagenarians in 137 different countries plus a large class of 355 university undergraduates. In addition to the structured pedagogy, the massive open online course included innovations in the use of practical exercises, that could be performed in the learner’s kitchen, and worked examples to enhance the learning experience. The massive open online course was provided in parallel with an introductory undergraduate course and as an additional learning resource for the undergraduate students. A little less than one-fifth of the undergraduates participated in the massive open online course and just over half of these responded that it would be an acceptable substitute for traditional lectures. The percentage completing the massive open online course was relatively high at 28% compared to 21% for other massive open online courses on the same platform, which is attributed to the pedagogy and strong support for social learning based on a survey of fully participating learners in the last week of the five-week course.

Keywords

Massive open online course thermodynamics everyday examples constructionist learning engineering undergraduate context practical exercises social learning

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Zhan

Fong

PSW

Mei

, et al. Sustainability education in massive open online courses: a content analysis approach. Sustainability 2015; 7: 2274–2300.

Hansen

Reich

Democratizing education? Examining access and usage patterns in massive open online courses. Science 2015; 350: 1245–1248.

Evans

Myrick

JG.

How MOOC instructors view pedagogy and purposes of massive open online courses. Distance Educ 2015; 36: 295–311.

Sinclair

Boyatt

Rocks

, et al. Massive open online courses: a review of usage and evaluation. IJLT 2015; 10: 71–93.

Literati

Implications of massive open online courses for higher education: mitigating or reifying educational inequalities?

Higher Educ Res Develop 2015; 34: 1164–1177.

Borras-Gene

Martinez-Nunez

Fidalgo-Blanco

new challenges for the motivation and learning in engineering education using gamefication in MOOC. IJ Eng Educ 2016; 32: 501–512.

Atkin

Karplus

Discovery or invention?

Sci Instruct 1962; 29: 45–47.

Patterson

Campbell

Busch-Vishniac

, et al. The effect of context on student engagement in engineering. Eur J Eng Educ 2011; 36: 211–224.

Snow

CP.

The two cultures: and a second look. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1964.

10.

Uffink

Bluff your way in the second law of thermodynamics. Stud His Philosophy Sci B Stud His Philosophy Mod Phys 2001; 32: 305–394.

11.

Akih-Kumgeh

Toward improved understanding of the physical meaning of entropy in classical thermodynamics. Entropy 2016; 16: 270

12.

Atkins

The laws of thermodynamics: a very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

13.

Campbell

Patterson

Busch Vishniac

, et al. Integrating applications in the teaching of fundamental concepts. In: Proc. 2008 ASEE annual conference and exposition (AC 2008-499), 2008.

14.

https://realizeengineering.blog/everyday-engineering-examples/ (accessed 17 April 2018).

15.

Patterson

(ed). Real life examples in thermodynamics. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 2010.

16.

Patterson

(ed). Real life examples in mechanics of solids. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 2008.

17.

Patterson

(ed). Real life examples in dynamics. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 2009.

18.

Patterson

(ed). Real life examples in fluid mechanics. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 2011.

19.

Rayyan

Fredericks

Colvin

, et al. A MOOC based on blended pedagogy. J Comput Assist Learning 2016; 32: 190–201.

20.

Delgado Kloos

Muniz-Merino

Alario-Hoyes

, et al. Mixing and blending MOOC technologies with face-to-face pedagogies. In: Proc. 2015 IEEE global engineering education conference, pp.967–971, 2015.

21.

Rosser

SV.

Gender issues in teaching science. In: Rose

Brown

(eds) Report on the 2003 Workshop on Gender Issues in the Sciences. Waterville, ME: Colby College, 2004, , pp. pp. 28–37. http://www.colby.edu/∼bbrown/2003Workshop.html (accessed 3 December 2018).

22.

Wigfield

Eccles

JS.

Expectancy-value theory of motivation. Contemp Educ Psychol 2000; 25: 68–81.

23.

Honey

Mumford

The manual of learning styles. 3rd ed. Maidenhead: Peter Honey Publications Limited, 1992.

24.

WISE. Women in Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics: from Classroom to Boardroom. UK Statistics, https://www.wisecampaign.org.uk/resources/2012/12/uk-statistics-2012 (2012, accessed 17 April 2018).

25.

WISE. Women in Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics: from Classroom to Boardroom. UK Statistics, https://www.wisecampaign.org.uk/resources/2015/07/wise-statistics-2014 (2014, accessed 17 April 2018)

26.

Zeldin

Pajares

Against the odds: self-efficacy beliefs of women in mathematical, scientific and technological careers. Am Educ Res J 2000; 37: 215–246.

27.

Hazari

Tai

Sadler

PM.

Gender differences in introductory university physics performance: the influence of high school physics preparation and affective factors. Sci Ed 2007; 91: 847–876.

28.

Hyde

The gift: creativity and the artist in the modern world. London: Cannongate, 2012.

29.

Delanda

The Storm in the Computer. In: Philosophy and simulation: the emergence of synthetic reason, pp. 7-21. London: Continuum, 2011.

30.

Braun

Ronzheimer

Schreiber

, et al. Negative absolute temperature for motional degrees of freedom. Science 2013; 339: 52–55.