Comparing Characteristics of final projects: BSc students vs. Practical Engineering students – the supervisors’ point of view Nissim Sabag1, Elena Trotskovsky2 1
ORT Braude College of Engineering, Karmiel, Israel,
[email protected] 2 ORT Braude College of Engineering, Karmiel, Israel,
[email protected]
Abstract Many researchers mention various kind of project learning. Inquiry-based learning, product-based learning, project-oriented learning and project-based learning are among the various terms associated with project learning. The two colleges in the common campus, the college of engineering and the college of practical engineering, carrying the similar name ORT Braude College (of engineering, or of practical engineering respectively), constituted a final project as an obligatory requirement for graduating. Although the degree of BSc is well recognized worldwide, the practical engineer degree needs to be explained as a degree on a higher level than a technician is but not as comprehensive academically as a BSc. The practical engineer degree requires two years of study after matriculation to complete. An interesting aspect to investigate is a comparison of the quality between the populations in terms of their final projects. Seven supervisors, who instruct both BSc and practical engineering students during project work, were interviewed and the project books of their students were analysed. The preliminary results show that BSc students are required to explain their design considerations, such as why they choose a specific method and discuss other options. They had to determine the product specifications prior to starting to design and to verify reaching the exact specifications. In contrast, the practical engineering students are required to explain the principle of operation of their project, and to demonstrate that the product functions appropriately. An additional important finding is that BSc students initiate the project topic more frequently than the practical engineering students do.
Keywords: Project learning, Engineering education, Final project.
1. Introduction On the campus of ORT Braude, Karmiel, Israel, are two educational institutions carrying the same name: the ORT Braude Academic College of Engineering and the ORT Braude College of Practical Engineering (PE). Both institutions have electrical engineering and electronics departments. Graduates of the academic college receive a BSc degree and the graduates of the Practical Engineering College receive a PE degree. A PE degree requires two years of study after completing the matriculation. A final project is a mandatory requirement for graduation for both courses of study. Therefore, it is interesting to compare the accomplishments resulting from the project activity.
2. Literature review Patton argued that project-based learning (PBL) refers to students designing, planning, and carrying out an extended project that produces a publicly exhibited output such as a product, publication, or presentation. Inquiry-based learning, product-based learning, project-oriented learning and project-based learning [1], "p.13" are among the terms related to PBL. Shekar states that project-based learning is essential to integrate the disciplines of design, marketing and manufacturing towards the common goal of creating a new product [2]. Engineering design is a central engineering activity [3]; therefore, it is very important to include it in
undergraduate engineering curriculum [4] to help students to improve their academic achievement and skills and to develop high level thinking skills. During PBL, students are exposed to problem-solving and design activities which demand high level of thinking skills [3]. Project-based learning approach is useful because it "can provide students with real design experiences and opportunities to reflect on the design process" [5], "p. 749". Waks and Sabag showed that PE students who practice what they learned about digital electronics through project-based learning attained higher achievement levels in digital electronics compared to their peers who learned the conventional way [6]. Sabag, Trotskovsky and Waks explored the PBL environment and showed that PBL activities encourage students to reflect on their thinking [7],[8]. Integrating PBL into undergraduate curriculum in science and technology education, as described in [9], exposes students to the processes which are typical for engineering design. Meaning identification and analysis of requirements, collection and analysis of appropriate information, analyzing advantages and disadvantages and definition of alternative solutions, choosing the optimal solution, preliminary and detailed design, construction of a model or prototype and evaluation. When carrying out a design project, the students must see the final product (completed) and understand the relationships and effects among the product components. Completing a final project is a mandatory requirement of the engineering curriculum at many academic institutions and colleges for practical engineering. At the end of the project activities, students must document their work and present the project at an evaluation forum. Similarities and differences in various aspects of project implementation for BSc and PE students has not yet been researched. The current study aims at contributing to the knowledge in this area.
3. The research question What are the accomplishments reached by students who perform final projects during their studies toward BSc in Electrical and Electronics Engineering compared with students who perform their final project in the framework of PE Electrical and Electronics, as seen from the supervisors’ point of view?
4. Methodology The objective of this paper is to compare the characteristics of engineering students’ final project and PE students’ final project. The study presented in this article used a qualitative approach, which was developed in the second half of the 20th century in social science disciplines such as sociology, anthropology and educational studies in order to understand students’ behaviours and thinking processes [10]. The focus here is on interpretive research, which aims to understand and interpret actions, meanings, processes, and relationships of the investigated phenomenon [11]. 4.1 Research tools The research tools used for are in-depth interviews with supervisors and analysis of the project books that the students wrote as part of their project work. 4.2 Research population The research population consisted of seven senior supervisors with professional experience ranging from 31 to 53 years. The supervisor with 31 years of professional experience has worked chiefly in the engineering design industry and two years in academia; he guided 10 students in the two institutions. The senior supervisor, who guided about 50 PE students and many BSc students in their final projects, has 53 year of professional experience, including 20 years in academia. The book projects of more than 20 students were also analyzed.
5. Findings 5.1 Project books findings Twenty project books, representing a random sample of hundreds projects books, were analyzed. Ten of them belong to PE students and ten to BSc students. Analyzing the projects’ book revealed that the projects of the BSc students differ from the projects of the PE students. The comparison results are presented in Table 1: Table 1. Comparison of PE students’ project books with BSc students’ projects books
Characteristic Content
PE projects All projects are based on a microcontroller, or programmable array (FPGA), with some peripheral components, sensor and actuator or display. No innovation is expected.
Specifications
None of the books included the specifications of the designed project.
System thinking
There is no sign of system thinking. The books contain only explanations about how the components work, usually taken from the components’ data sheets. There is no list of the student’s tasks.
Student tasks
Debugging
There is no description of malfunction correction.
BSc projects The projects differ from one another. Some innovative thinking is expected (e.g., a monitor for home beer machine or a traffictiming controller). Some projects deal with developing efficient algorithms for signal processing. Detailed specifications are frequently appear at the beginning of books. It is mandatory that the student confirm the project meets the specifications. The system principal of operation is usually explained in the books. All the explanations are original work of the student. The student’s tasks are detailed in the book. Moreover, the student is required to describe in the book how he/she fulfilled his/her tasks. The student is required to describe in detail at least one or two cases of malfunction correction.
5.2 Findings from interviews with supervisors All the interviewees are supervisors with rich experience in engineering design in industry and in academia. The cumulative number of students they guided during final projects reached into the hundreds. Therefore, it is essential to present the supervisors’ point of view. All the supervisors agreed that the nature of PE students’ project is tangible, based on micro-controllers and peripherals, while the BSc project demands more theoretical background and might include newly acquired knowledge for both the student and the supervisor. Quotes from the interviews with supervisors support this assertion. Ph. has 53 years of professional experience and 25 years in teaching. When asked to compare the nature of PE projects and BSc projects, he remarked: All the PE projects must be visible; they are mainly known control systems. On the other hand, the BSc projects deal with new knowledge; for example, the student who designed a cooling system based on a semiconductor device had to learn about the process first.
S. has 38 of experience in industry and teaching: When it comes to BSc students, I am ready to take a chance and start a project even though there is uncertainty or missing knowledge at the beginning; I don’t dare to do this with PE students.
Initiating the project subject is the supervisor’s role only in the case of PE projects. For BSc projects, many students initiate their own ideas. Moreover, in cases in which the supervisor suggests the project subject, the BSc students collaborate by suggesting their own ideas. The next quote illustrates this occurrence. B. has 31 years of professional experience and two years of teaching: Initiating the project subject is mainly the supervisor’s role. Lately, more and more BSc students respond to the challenge and initiate their own ideas.
Setting the project’s specifications at the beginning and proving that the project meets them is mandatory for BSc students, but this is not required for PE students, as stated by M. (38 years of professional experience and 22 years of teaching). M.: The BSc student defines the technical specifications with the supervisor’s guidance, but in the case of the PE student, the supervisor defines the entire student’s mission, usually not written in detail. S.: Writing the project’s specifications is a mandatory requirement for the BSc student, there is not such an obligation for PE students.
P. has 31 years of professional and 13 years of teaching experience: BSc projects require predefined measurable and detailed specifications, but for PE projects, the specifications are flexible.
The BSc students’ tasks are to design the entire project (software and hardware), assemble the circuits, locate and correct all malfunctions. The PE students’ tasks are usually to assemble the circuits and, in the case of very evident malfunctions, to correct them. The expectation is that the supervisor will fix the more complicated malfunctions. The next quotations support this observation. F. has 35 years of professional and 13 years of teaching experience: The PE students do not design the electronic circuits; they get the schema from the supervisor and assemble the circuit.
E. has 35 years of professional and teaching experience: The BSc student is required to design the hardware and software of the project, to compare alternatives and choose the best solution. The supervisor is there to guide the student and answer his/her questions. The PE student needs continuing guidance throughout the work.
Both PE and BSc students are required to document their project work. However, there are differences between documentation of these two populations. PE project books appear as a collection of component explanations, without a system approach and without design considerations; there are no descriptions of the student’s work (e.g. malfunction corrections). On the other hand, BSc project books must reflect a system approach, including design considerations and design alternatives and at least two descriptions of malfunction corrections, as noted in the following statements. B.: The BSc student has to write in detail about the design considerations, justify the decisions made, how the student has overcome the obstacles, as well as revisions done during the project work. Ph.: The BSc student describes the engineering work done by him/her during the project work; nevertheless, the PE project’s book is anecdotal.
S.: There is documentation of system considerations in the BSc project books but not in the PE project books; there you can find many detailed data sheets.
6. Conclusion The final project is mandatory for BSc graduates as well as practical engineers. However, the roll of these two populations in industry is not the same. The BSc graduate frequently deals with engineering design in industry. The engineer’s job involves specification of the technical characteristics of designed system, giving a considered opinion to selecting optimal solutions the designed system, verifying that the system meets the predefined specifications as well as assisting with documentation, which is very important to the firm where the engineer works. The PE graduate usually work in maintenance or final test departments in industry. Therefore, the debugging qualifications are their main "working tools". Based on the findings above, both from the project books and from the interviews with the supervisors, it can be claimed that the BSc projects are well oriented to prepare the students for their future work in industry. Nevertheless, it is suggested that the PE College should be consistent in requiring the students to perform malfunction debugging with less reliance on supervisors’. Improving the documentation is also advised.
References [1]
A. Patton, "Work that matters. The teacher’s guide to project-based learning," Published by the Paul hamlyn foundation, 2012. http://www.innovationunit.org/sites/default/files/Teacher ’s%20Guide%20to%20Projectbased%20Learning.pdf, Last accessed 12 March 2015
[2]
A. Shekar, "Active learning and reflection in product developmentengineering education,"European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 32, No. 2, 2007, pp. 125–133
[3]
C.L. Dym, A.M. Agogino, O. Eris, D.D. Frey, and L.J. Leifer, "Engineering Design Thinking, Teaching, and Learning," Journal of Engeneering Education, 94 , vol.1, 2005, pp.103-120.
[4]
W. H. Wood, "Decision-based design: a vehicle for curriculum integration," Internatiomnal Journal of Engeneering Education, 20, Vol. 3, 2004, pp. 433-439.
[5]
J. Borgford-Parnell, K. Deibel, and C.J. Atman, "From engineering design research to engineering pedagogy: Bringing research results directly to the students,"International Journal of Engineering Education,26, Vol. 4, 2010, pp. 748-759.
[6]
S. Waks, N. Sabag, "Technology Project Learning Vs. Lab Experimentation," Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 13, No 3, Kluer Academic / Plenum Pub. 2004, pp. 333-342.
[7]
N. Sabag, E. Trotskovsky, S. Waks, "Engineering Design Project as a Reflection Promoter,"European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 39, No. 3, 2014, pp. 309-324.
[8]
N. Sabag, E. Trotskovsky "Students’ Reflections on their Internship Design Project in Industry," International Conference on Engineering Education ICEE, Belfast, U.K. August, 2011.
[9]
M. Frank, "A systems approach for developing technological literacy," Journal of Technology Education,Vol. 18, No. 1, 2006, pp. 39-53.
[10]
N. K. Denzin, and Y. S. Lincoln, Eds., The sage handbook of qualitative research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2005.
[11]
S. Weil, "Qualitative methods in Israel,"Forum: Qualitative Social Research Sozialforschung,Vol. 6, No. 3, art. 46, 2005.http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/download/9/20, Last accessed 16 March 2015
Authors Principal author: Nissim Sabag is a senior lecturer in the Department of Electronics & Electrical Engineering, ORT Braude College, Karmiel, Israel. He holds a BSc in EEE, a BSc, MSc, PhD in Technology and Science Education from the Technion–Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa. Will present the paper. Co-author: Elena Trotskovsky is a senior lecturer at the Department of Electronics & Electrical Engineering, and head of the unit of engineering education, ORT Braude College, Karmiel, Israel. She holds an MSc in Electronics from Ufa Aviation University, Russia; PhD and MSc in Technology and Science Education from the Technion–Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa.
