Heat Conduction Study 

Comparison of Learning Experience of 10.302 Students Running a Heat Conduction Study in Lab or Remotely

October 3, 2005

Purpose

The purpose of the study is to explore the learning experience of 10.302 students running a heat conduction study remotely, or in the lab.

Research Questions

How did conducting the experiment in the lab or remotely affect student learning in the areas of understanding, learning behavior, and quality of the experience?

How effective did students find the graphical interface?  What worked? What didn't?

What were students' attitude toward the analysis component of the lab experience?  

What level of learning was required to complete the assignment?

What did students learn?

How did students find the overall experience?

How does faculty members' explaining how they reasoned through the development of the heat conduction lab affect student perception of engineering reasoning?

Method

Subjects:  students enrolled in 10.302 in fall, 2005

Design:  Half the class complete data gathering in the lab, while the other half of the class will gather data remotely using the same interface and equipment.  For the second experiment, the two groups will switch. After the completion of each lab, a faculty member will walk the class through how the faculty members developed the assignment, the kinds of reasoning they used to shape the assignment, and what they learned from the data.

Method:  A three page survey is currently under development that will consist of fill-in questions, open-ended questions, and statements that require students to express their level of agreement by means of seven-point scales.  In addition, survey scales (indexes comprised of item groupings) will be developed to represent measures of graphical interface and documentation satisfaction, the degree to which deep learning occurred; the effect on understanding; and the quality of the learning experience.  The survey will be completed after students turn in their lab assignments.

Analysis:  The statistical analysis will include scales development,  means, standard deviations, reliability scores, and t-tests.  In addition, a content analysis will be performed on open-ended questions.

Project TimeLine

October 2005:  Develop survey,  administer survey for Lab I

November 2005: Administer survey for Lab II;
   Data entry and coding of open-ended question responses 
   		    
December 2005: Analyze data

January 2005: Write report

Budget

Activity
	
Time	
Cost	
Data entry and coding 
	30 hours	30 x $20 = $600	
Meetings	15 hours	15 x $60 = $900
	
Scale development ,  data analysis of two surveys,  content analysis of open-ended questions
	60  hours	60 x $60 = $3600	
Report writing 
                        	40 hours	40 x $60 = $2400	
Total	145 hours	$7500