Academic Exchange Quarterly Winter 2001 ISSN 1096-1453
Volume 5, Issue 4
in
Internet Assisted Laboratory Teaching
Garry Crawford,
Crawford
is a lecturer in Social and Cultural Studies in Sport and has conducted several
pieces of evaluative and market research on both educational and industrial
institutions.
Abstract
This paper presents the
preliminary findings from an evaluation conducted on the implementation of
Internet assisted teaching of fluid mechanical engineering laboratory sessions
on a university degree programme. It compares the particular merits of
laboratory sessions in which students receive instruction from Internet based
presentations compared with those who received instruction from 'traditional'
tutor led sessions, through a process of questionnaire based surveys and direct
observations. The paper concludes that
Internet assisted sessions allow students to easily repeat experimental
instructions and provide late or absent students the opportunity to easily
catch up with missed work. However,
students still appear more likely to ask staff for assistance than rely on the
Internet resources for information, and the Internet based programme,
as applied here, has encountered some practical difficulties that have greatly
reduced its effectiveness as a teaching aid.
* * *
This
paper is a single case evaluation of the implementation of Internet assisted
learning into the teaching of degree level fluid mechanical engineering
laboratory sessions at one British university.
The
initial impetus for implementing Internet assisted learning within laboratory
sessions arose out of a number of difficulties that had been observed during
the 'traditional' tutor led teaching of these laboratory sessions. These included that student often spent a
considerable amount of time waiting for assistance from a member of staff, late
or absent students had difficulty catching up with work, and that many students
had little understanding of the experimental, theoretical or report
requirements of the work they were undertaking.
It was hoped that the placing of computer terminals with access to
Internet based resources containing experimental and background details in the
laboratory would help remove many of these difficulties encountered with tutor
led sessions. Though in the sessions
under evaluation here, these computers based resources could only be accessed
in the laboratory, by placing these on the Internet it is intended that future
students will be able to access this from terminals outside of the laboratory
at their own convenience.
This
evaluation draws direct comparison between what will be referred to as Internet
assisted sessions and traditional tutor led sessions. The typical format of a tutor led session is
that a tutor will start each laboratory session by briefly addressing the whole
class. Students are then split into
groups (usually four groups of two or three students) who move over to their
apparatus. The tutor (and sometimes a
member of support staff) will visit each group in turn, providing help and
specific information on the experiments.
In an
Internet assisted sessions students are split into small groups upon arriving
at the session and directed to computer terminals with headphones. The students then listen to an Internet based
presentation involving directions, theory and report requirements of the
experiment(s). After listening to this
presentation students then move over to their apparatus and begin the
experiments. Again members of staff are
on hand to assist students and offer guidance on the experiments.
Evaluation
Criterion
It was
decided that the most suitable criterion for the evaluation of the Internet
assisted learning programme were those factors that
were initially perceived as being advantageous with this type of session. These were that the Internet assisted sessions
would provide:
o
Clearer
introduction to the laboratory topic
o
More efficient
use of laboratory time
o
Students
arriving late can catch up easily
o
Ability to
revisit instructions and information so that students can clarify
misunderstandings
o
Clearer focus
on report requirements
o
Absent students
can pick-up the detail of missed work in subsequent sessions
Additionally
the piloting stage of this evaluation process raised the issues of whether the
students understood the theoretical background to the work they were doing, and
if they understood how to precisely undertake the experiments. Consequently, these two criteria were added
to the evaluation process.
The
Evaluation Process
For
comparative purposes it was decided to compare students from the same year
groups undertaking laboratory sessions either with instruction using the
Internet based resources or a traditional tutor based introduction.
The
number of laboratory sessions undertaken by students throughout the year is
limited and it was decided that the researcher would visit as many sessions as
time allowed throughout the year. A
total of eight laboratory sessions were studied; five of these were Internet
assisted sessions, and three tutor led.
This provided an overall sample of eighty-five students.
It was
decided to use two primary methods of evaluation to triangulate the data
gathered; these were a questionnaire based survey and non-participant
observations by the researcher.
Questionnaires were selected as these allow a sizable sample and body of
quantitative data to be gathered in a short space of time, while observations
allow for more depth and qualitative understanding of the students' experiences
of the sessions (May, 1993).
First,
a simple questionnaire based upon the eight outcomes (given above) was
constructed and distributed to students, comparing students in Internet
assisted sessions with those who received a tutor led laboratory session.
Second,
the researcher was present at all eight laboratory sessions to observe and
record the behaviour of students receiving both the
Internet assisted and tutor led laboratory sessions. The role of the researcher was primarily as a
non-participant observer, though throughout the observations process the
researcher would often ask the students ad hoc questions relating to their
understanding of the experiments and their views on the delivery of the
session.
The
Sample
A total
of 85 students completed questionnaires and were observed during this
evaluation process. No conscious
decision was made to obtain an equal or varied number of year groups, instead
the researcher simply attended as many sessions as was possible to obtain a
sizeable sample. Of these 85 students
62.4% of these were in degree year zero (foundation year), and the remaining
37.6% were in degree year two.
Of the
85 students, 63.5% were seen in Internet assisted laboratory sessions, with the
remaining 36.5% in tutor led sessions.
There were two main reasons for this.
First, the onus was on trying to observe as many laboratory sessions in
the second semester as possible, rather than purposively selecting a balanced
number of students in both Internet and tutor led sessions. Second, in relation to the observations it
was more important to see Internet assisted sessions, as it was these under
evaluation.
Student's
Responses
This
section provides the findings from the questionnaire based survey and the
observations undertaken during this evaluation.
The questionnaire provided students with eight statements and asked them
to rate these along a likert-scale on the basis of
whether they strongly agree, agree, neither agree nor disagree, disagree or
strongly disagree with each of these.
What are presented here are frequency tables of how students answered
each question (all eighty-five students answered every question).
Introduction was clear?
Statement
one asked students if "The introduction to the laboratory session was
clear". As table 1 shows, very few
students strongly agreed with this statement for either Internet or tutor led
sessions. However, it is evident that
far more students agreed with this statement for tutor led than Internet led
assisted sessions. This would seem to
indicate that there is some difficulty with the clarity of the Internet
assisted programme.
This may be attributed to the sound quality of the Internet based presentation,
as during the observation of sessions many students expressed difficulty
hearing the presentation.
See issue’s website < http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/win01.htm>.
It is
also apparent that there was a considerable disparity in the amount of information
students were given in Internet assisted and tutor led sessions. In tutor led sessions the member of staff
would often give students very little theoretical background to the experiment;
concentrating mainly on the key points of the experiment, before quickly moving
on to the next group. Conversely,
students who used the Internet received very detailed background
information. However, they did not
appear to pay a great deal of attention to this and on two occasion (out of the
five observed Internet assisted sessions observed) students skipped through
this section very quickly.
Starting laboratory work quickly
Statement
two addressed the question of whether students felt that they could start
laboratory work quickly. The majority of
students in both tutor and Internet assisted sessions stated that they either
agreed or strongly agreed with this statement - indicating that in both types
of sessions most students felt that they could quickly start experiments. However, this appeared stronger for tutor led
sessions, and moreover, almost a quarter (24.1%) of students in Internet
assisted sessions disagreed with this statement. See issue’s website <
http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/win01.htm>.
A
possible explanation for this is that many of the students listened to the
whole Internet based presentation in one sitting, while in the tutor led
sessions students received this information in smaller snippets throughout the
session. As Setzer
(1989) suggests, one potential limitation of many computer based learning
packages is that they can often be time consuming and excessively repetitive,
and this would appear to be the case in this situation.
In the
Internet assisted sessions student usually spent around 20 minutes at the
beginning of the session with the computer before moving onto the
experiment. This was considerably longer
than the period of instruction received in the tutor led sessions where most
students usually received about 10 minutes of instruction at the beginning of
the session. However, in tutors led
sessions the tutors (usually two) visited each group in turn starting them off
on the experiment, and in each observed tutor led session it was about 20
minutes into the session before all groups had begun the experiment. Therefore, in tutor led sessions many
students spent over 10 minutes waiting for a member of staff before beginning
the experiment.
Late students can catch up work?
The
third statement asked if students felt that if they arrived late they would be
able to catch up with the work they had missed.
This was an area where the students clearly felt that the Internet
assisted sessions had an advantage over traditional tutor led sessions - with
83% of respondents in Internet assisted sessions either agreeing or strongly
agreeing with this statement.
See issue’s website < http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/win01.htm>.
This
was upheld by the researcher's observations of these sessions. Late students in tutor led sessions had often
missed the tutor's introduction and had to rely on being told what to do by
their fellow students. In Internet
assisted sessions there was always at least one computer terminal free that
late students could use.
Instructions could be repeated
The
fourth statement asked students if they thought experimental instructions could
be easily repeated in their session.
Again this is an area where the Internet assisted sessions performed
very well. 55.6% of respondents from
Internet assisted sessions strongly agreed that instruction could be
repeated. This again was also evident
from observations as students often returned to the computer terminal to
revisit information and most frequently the report requirements were viewed
again towards the end of the session.
Hence, as Setzer (1989) argues, one clear
advantage of this type of computer based teaching programme
is that they allow students to progress at their own pace.
See issue’s website < http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/win01.htm>.
In
tutor led sessions 58.1% of respondents agreed that instructions could be
repeated if required. Presumably, this
is due to the tutor and members of support staff being available to answer
questions throughout the session. Staff
were also available during the Internet assisted sessions, but the computers
added a second source of information, and one that was always readily available
to students.
This
appeared a real practical advantage with the Internet assisted sessions. In all of the Internet assisted sessions
observed, students frequently returned to the computer terminals for more
help. However, in both types of session
it was evident that students preferred to ask members of staff for assistance
when available. As Brunt (1997) suggests
adult students learn easier by talking to a real person. But, when staff were not available the
Internet added a second source of help and information that was not available
in the tutor led sessions.
Understanding of report
requirements
Though
slightly more respondents in Internet assisted sessions suggested that they
strongly agreed that they understood the report requirements of the session,
far more respondents in tutor led sessions stated that they agreed that they
understood the report requirements.
See issue’s website < http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/win01.htm>.
Though,
students in Internet assisted sessions had an additional source of information
(the computers) than those in tutor led sessions, these findings may suggest
that students generally felt more assured by receiving all their information
from a tutor.
Absent students can catch up work
Statement
six asked students if they thought that "this form of introduction allows
absent students the opportunity to obtain details of the session that they
missed". It appears that
respondents to this question largely agreed that the Internet assisted sessions
did allow absent students to catch up with missed work, with 85.2% of
respondents in Internet assisted sessions stating that they either agreed or
strongly agreed with the statement.
See issue’s website < http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/win01.htm>.
In
particular, some students stated that placing the information on the Internet
(so that this could be accessed at any time) will be a great advantage with
catching up with work and writing of reports.
And as Underwood (1994) argues, providing students with greater
flexibility and control of their education can often benefit their process of
cognitive learning.
Understanding of theoretical
background
Statement
seven asked students if they understood the theoretical background of the
experiment they were undertaking. As
table 7 shows, the students' answers appear more favourable
for tutor led sessions. In both types of
session more respondents suggested that they understood the theoretical
background than those who stated that they did not, but this divide was more favourable for tutor led sessions.
See issue’s website < http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/win01.htm>.
However,
in tutor led sessions students actually received less theoretical background,
so one possibility is that the Internet assisted sessions provided too much
theory and the students quickly lost interest in this or were overwhelmed with
information.
Understanding of how to perform
experiment
Statement
eight asked respondents if they understood how to undertake the session's experiments. Again the results appear to favour tutor led sessions.
This maybe because in tutor led sessions a member of staff was always
present and was able to show students directly how undertake the
experiments. From observations of tutor
led sessions, it is apparent that very few students knew how to undertake the
experiment upon arriving at their apparatus, and waited for a member of staff
to show them. Likewise, with the
Internet assisted sessions the students often required additional help from a member
of staff after listening to the presentation.
One possible explanation for these findings is that the students may
have seen this as a detriment of the Internet based programme
(that they still needed to ask for help) while with tutor led sessions this was
an accepted part of the process.
See issue’s website < http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/win01.htm>.
Conclusion
This
evaluation of the implementation of Internet assisted sessions into the
teaching of fluid mechanical laboratories suggests that this has met some of
its initial aims. The computer terminals provided an extra source of
information for the students, allowed late or absent students to catch up with
work, and for all students to receive information together and quickly at the
start of the session.
However,
the Internet assisted sessions (as implemented in this case) did have certain
limitations. Most notable of these were
practical difficulties with the sound quality of the presentations and the
excessive time spent by students using the programme. Furthermore, even though the Internet
assisted sessions provided students with far more background and theoretical
information than tutor led sessions, students did not feel that they had
necessarily benefited from this.
This
short case evaluation would appear to suggest that in the teaching of
engineering laboratory sessions the Internet based resources need to be viewed
as a teaching aid and an additional source of information for the students, and
not as replacing the duties of teaching and support staff. The computers did not replace the personal
guidance and assistance that staff member could supply, but they did reduce the
time students normally would have wasted waiting for assistance from a member
of staff, and consequently helped reduce some pressure on staff.
References
Brunt, J. M. (1997) 'Can You Put Your Arm Around a Student on the
Internet', J. Fields (eds.) Electronic Pathways (NIACE:
May, T. (1993) Social Research: Issues, Methods and Process (OUP: Buckingham).
Setzer, V. (1989) Computers in Education (Floris
Books:
Underwood, J. (1994) 'Where Are We Now and Where Are We Going?', J.
Underwood (eds.) Computer Based Learning: Potential into Practice (David
Fulton: