Asean Journal of Engineering Education最新文献

{"title":"Pedagogical-Publication Tensions in Undergraduate Engineering Thesis Supervision","authors":"Brad Stappenbelt, Abheek Basu","doi":"10.11113/ajee2019.3n1.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11113/ajee2019.3n1.22","url":null,"abstract":"In light of the assessment criteria for the doctor of philosophy and masters by research degrees, postgraduate thesis supervision can reasonably be categorised as predominantly research output focussed. This goal is naturally congruent with the publication agenda driving much academic staff activity in the modern ‘publish or perish’ university culture. In contrast, due to the lack of student research experience, the undergraduate thesis is necessarily focussed primarily on the development of research skills (i.e. it is process not output oriented). Undergraduate thesis supervision requires more than just research skills from supervising staff. The lessons learnt from postgraduate research supervision are therefore not always directly transferable to undergraduate thesis supervision. In contrast to the vast body of work in the field of doctoral research supervision, there exists a dearth of literature on undergraduate dissertation supervision. The present study examined the alignment of university, supervisor and student expectations regarding responsibilities in the undergraduate engineering thesis. University expectations, having undergone rigorous review, form the sound pedagogical practice baseline that should be applied to undergraduate supervision. Expectations of academic staff supervisors and thesis students were obtained through the use of survey tools. The surveys used in the present study were adapted from the Role Perceptions Rating Scale (RPRS). Alignment between student and university expectations regarding undergraduate thesis responsibilities in the present study was generally poor. The discrepancy between supervisor and university expectations was even greater, with academic staff generally alarmingly assuming the bulk of the responsibility for many core thesis tasks. The main driver identified for this behaviour (i.e. the supervisor expectations that undergraduate thesis research would contribute to publications) was investigated through post-survey discussions and interviews. Taking primary responsibility for core thesis tasks away from the student, although improving the likelihood of successful research output, diminishes the ability for an accurate assessment of adequate academic performance. The learning that is intended to result from the undergraduate thesis is devalued when research outcomes are prioritised over research process.","PeriodicalId":411547,"journal":{"name":"Asean Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"51 3-4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132463644","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"CDIO- The Framework for Outcome-based Engineering Education for Accreditation: A Case Study of Thai Industrial Engineering Program","authors":"Sirichai Torsakul, Anin Memon, Surat Triwanapong, Natha Kuptasthien","doi":"10.11113/ajee2019.3n1.24","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11113/ajee2019.3n1.24","url":null,"abstract":"The recent movement of Thai engineering education and accreditation is a shift from content- to outcome-based. With the aim to achieve an accreditation by the Thailand Accreditation Body of Engineering Education (TABEE) and an international recognition, the objective of this paper is to share how the industrial engineering (IE) program of Thailand’s Rajamangala University of Technology Thanyaburi (RMUTT) has applied the Conceive-Design-Implement-Operate (CDIO) framework to transitioning from the content- to outcome-based curriculum. For the methodology, the learning outcomes in the CDIO Syllabus were mapped to the Thailand Qualification Framework (TQF)’s engineering curriculum requirements and to TABEE Criterion 3 (learning outcomes and assessment). The mapping was to portray their complementary nature. To this end, the CDIO implementation in accordance with the 12 CDIO Standards was undertaken and the details elaborated. The rubric-based CDIO and TABEE self-evaluations were carried out and the results translated into actions for continuous improvement. The 4-5 rubric scores from 2013-2018 suggesting that the successful CDIO implementation contributes to the concurrent fulfillment of the TQF and TABEE learning outcomes.","PeriodicalId":411547,"journal":{"name":"Asean Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129731342","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Guideline to an Effective Implementation of Student-Centered Learning in Engineering Education: Informal Cooperative Learning (ICL)","authors":"Syed Ahmad Helmi Syed Hassan, K. Mohd-Yusof, Z. Zakaria","doi":"10.11113/ajee2020.4n2.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.11113/ajee2020.4n2.12","url":null,"abstract":"The year 2020 witnessed several world transformations: from the new millennial of the 21st Century into the 4th Industrial Revolution, and now with the global pandemic of Covid-19. All these require educational transformations, especially in engineering. The challenging world requires new skills, particularly lifelong learning, complex problem solving and adaptability, the blurring systems of the 4th Industrial Revolution needs dynamic and integrated curriculum, and the global pandemic forces the extensive use of online learning. All these transformations, with respect to engineering education, requires the transformation of education from teacher-centered to student-centered learning (SCL), as outlined in the Outcome-Based Education (OBE). This paper systematically addresses how the transformation of engineering education can be achieved with effective implementation of SCL using a simple but just as powerful method, the Informal Cooperative Learning (ICL).","PeriodicalId":411547,"journal":{"name":"Asean Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133649328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}