K. N. Raja Rao
1*,
N. S. Narahari
2,
C. Bindu Ashwini
3
- Dept. of Telecommunication Engineering, R.V. College of Engineering, Bangalore, India
- Dept. of Industrial Engineering & Management, R.V..College of Engineering,
Bangalore, India
- Dept. of Placement and Training, R.V. College of Engineering, Bangalore, India
Abstract
This paper proposes a cognitive framework based on the proposed teaching and learning in engineering education that integrates the affective aspects of learning. Since the last half of the 20th century, the World has been experiencing rapid transformation in the field of Engineering Education, led by the changing Knowledge society. In the present context learning sciences focuses on learning and learners in addition to teaching and teachers. The goal is "to understand the cognitive and social processes in a better way that results in the most effective learning, and to use this knowledge to redesign classrooms and other learning environments so that people learn more deeply and more effectively". This paper explores the literature on direct teaching behaviors and cognitive development that may help foster student learning. A number of teaching attributes such as organization, expressiveness, enthusiasm and rapport/interaction have been found to have a positive relationship with indicators of student-learning and student persistence. Designing challenging teaching units that encourage skills such as independent thinking, experimentation and communication is the objective of an engineering education. Finally we discuss the experiments being made in our institution to make engineering education effective through experiential learning.
References
- Malan, (2000) The New Paradigm of outcome-based education in perspective. Journal of family Ecology and Consumer Science, 28. 2000.
- Carberry, Lee, & Ohland, (2010) Measuring engineering design self-efficacy. Journal of Engineering Education, Vol 99, No 1, 2010, pp. 71-79.
- Gondim & Mutti, (2011) Affections in Learning Situations: A Study of an Entrepreneurship Skills Development Course. Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 23, No. 3, 2011.
- Anderson & Krathwohl, (2001) A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
- Lewis (2009) Using learning theory to promote desired attributes for living in the 21st Century. Retrieved from 21, February, 2011 from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/files/2009-lewisexam2.pdf
- Picard et al., 2004; Strobel et al., 2011; Hassan, 2011)6. Affective learning-a manifesto. BT Technology Journal � Vol 22 No 4, October 2004.
- Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, (2004) School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence, Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
- Cruickshank & Fenner, (2007) The Evolving Role of Engineers: Towards Sustainable Development of the built Environment. Journal of International Development, 19 (1), 11-121, (Published online: 2 Jan, 2007).
- Kirschner, Sweller and Clark (2006) Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching", Educational Psychologist, Vol. 41/2, pp. 75-86.
- Bransford, Brown and Cocking, (2000) How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
- Paas, Van Gog and Sweller,(2010) Cognitive load theory: New conceptualizations, specifications, and integrated research perspectives. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 115-121.
- Walsh, 2005 The Tutor in Problem Based Learning: A Novice's Guide, www.fhs.mcmaster.ca/facdev/documents/tutorPBL.pdf .
