The Department of Electronic Engineering at the Vaal University of Technology, South Africa, emphasizes the importance of practical instruction within a laboratory environment for engineering students, primarily through the design of electronics and telecommunication systems. This article uses the example of a module in radio engineering offered by the department to explore the importance of blending theory and practice in a curriculum for engineering students through two different approaches: presenting the theory before the practice; or the practice before the theory. The merits of both are discussed. The case study showed that either approach can be successfully implemented in a curriculum for engineering students.
NicolaiL. M., ‘Viewpoint: An industry view of engineering design education’, International Journal of Engineering Education, 14(1) (1998), 7–13.
4.
WrightP. H., Introduction to Engineering, 3rd edition (Wiley, New York, 2002), p. 21.
5.
PradosJ. W., ‘Can ABET really make a difference?’, International Journal of Engineering Education, 20(3) (2004), 315–317.
6.
FelderR. M.BrentR., ‘Designing and teaching courses to satisfy the ABET engineering criteria’, Journal of Engineering Education, 92(1) (2003), 7–25.
7.
WaldM., ‘Publishing for engineering education in a global dimension’, 2000 International Conference on Engineering Education, Grand Hotel, Taipei, Taiwan, 14–16 August 2000.
SEFI (European Society for Engineering Education), www.sefi.be, accessed January 2008.
10.
LicklE., ‘Work in progress – putting engineering pedagogy in Europe and Asia on an international level’, 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Milwaukee, 10–13 October 2007.
BuckleyR.CapleJ., The Theory and Practice of Training, 5th edition (Kogan Page, London, 2004), p. 7.
13.
SADC (Southern African Developing Community), http://sadc.org, accessed February 2008.
14.
GuestG., ‘Lifelong learning for engineers: A global perspective’, European Journal of Engineering Education, 31(3) (2006): 273–281.
15.
ECSA (Engineering Council of South Africa), http://www.ecsa.co.za, accessed November 2006.
16.
SeelN. M.DijkstraS., Curriculum, Plans and Processes in Instructional Design: International Perspectives (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 2004), p. 26.
17.
CarlA. E., Teacher Empowerment Through Curriculum Development Theory and Practice, 2nd edition (Juta & Co., Lansdowne, 2002), pp. 34–40.
18.
KilićT.PuljakI.BegušićD., ‘Studying electrical engineering and information technology and the University of Split, Croatia’, International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, 44(2) (2007), 175–183.
19.
NisbetJ. B.EntwistleN. J.McQuillinB.RobinsonI. M., ‘Staff and student perceptions of the teaching–learning environment: A case study’, International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, 42(1) (2005), 30–40.
20.
DavisL., ‘Students focus on what they want’, International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, 39(3) (2002), 238–244.
21.
JohnV., ‘Engineering education – finding the centre or “back to the future”’, European Journal of Engineering Education, 25(3) (2000), 215–225.
22.
SubicA.MaconachieD., ‘Strategic curriculum design: An engineering case study’, European Journal of Engineering Education, 22(1) (1997), 19–33.
23.
HargreavesD. J., ‘Student learning and assessment are inextricably linked’, European Journal of Engineering Education, 22(4) (1997), 401–409.
24.
HargreavesD. J., ‘How undergraduate students learn’, European Journal of Engineering Education, 21(4) (1996), 425–434.
25.
GravettS., Adult Learning Designing and Implementing Learning Events: A Dialogic Approach, 2nd edition (Van Schaik, Pretoria, 2005), pp. 14–15.
26.
NewbleD.CannonR., A Handbook for Teachers in Universities and Colleges – A Guide to Improving Teaching Methods, 3rd edition (Kogan Page, London, 1995), pp. 60–61.
27.
RSA (Republic of South Africa), DoE (Department of Education), Formal Technikon Instructional Programmes in the RSA, report 151 (96/01) (Government Printer, Pretoria, 1996), p. 204.
28.
BarkleyE. F.CrossK. P.MajorC. H., Collaborative Learning Techniques: A Handbook for College Faculty (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 2005), pp. 16, 44.
29.
ThorleyL.GregoryR. (editors), Using Group-Based Learning in Higher Education (Kogan Page, London, 1994), p. 25.
30.
ChickeringA. W.GamsonZ. F., ‘Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education’, AAHE Bulletin, 39(7) (1987), 3–7.
31.
SwartA. J.SchoemanR. S.De JagerH., ‘Assessing senior engineering students with regard to radio communication principles’, EIAE conference, University of Bridgeport, Virtual Forum Online, 10–20 December 2005.
32.
SwartA. J.De JagerH., ‘Utilizing computer aided equipment in conveying amplitude modulation principles to senior engineering students’, ARCEE conference, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, 25–26 September 2006.
33.
McCownR.DriscollM.RoopP. G., Educational Psychology: A Learning-Centered Approach to Classroom Practice, 2nd edition (Allyn & Bacon, London, 1996), pp. 403–405.
34.
KellyA.V., The Curriculum Theory and Practice, 5th edition (Sage, New York, 2004), p. 131.
35.
SalviaJ.YsseldykeJ. E., Assessment, 6th edition (Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA, 1995), pp. 116, 117.
36.
DymC. L., ‘Designs, systems, and engineering education’, International Journal of Engineering Education, 20(3) (2004), 305–312.
