Index – Enhancing Learning and Teaching Through Student Feedback in Engineering

Index

A

academic staff, 121–2
accountability
tension with improvement, 9–11
tension with improvement implications for methodology, 11–13
ways of asking feedback, 12–13
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET), 86–7
achievement levels, 87
action-based evaluation programme, 53
‘action research’ method, 45
actual operational activities, 103–4
administrative decision-making, 133
art students, 118
Asian academic programmes, 52
Asian students, 54
assessment data, 17–18
assessment validity, 18
assignments, 87
Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM), 67
attentive listening, 66
attractiveness problem, 7–8

B

British Association of Graduate Recruiters (BAGR), 62
Built Environment, 120
business communication skills, 75

C

Careers Services, 116
case study approach, 44
central quality assurance units, 54
Chile
communication challenges, 37
engineering advances using student feedback, 25–39
engineering students feedback findings and discussion, 36–8
faculty education competencies, 37
feedback value, 36–7
higher education student and alumni feedback, 28–9
need for engineering education research, 38
need for structural capacities, 37–8
official pressures, policies and incentives relevance, 36
professional licensing, 36
tertiary education context, 26
tertiary sector quality, 26–7
Chilean Society for Engineering Education (SOCHEDI), 31
CISCO academy, 115
civil, 26
civil engineering programmes, 26
classroom feedback, 88–90
Comisión Nacional de Acreditación (CNA) See National Commission for Accreditation
communication apprehension, 65, 70–2
mean value, 72
overall PRCA questionnaire scores, 71
sample group PRCA scores, 71
communication skills, 5, 21, 62, 64–5
improvement, 70
synergy effect in engineering education, 6
computer-assisted assessment, 122
conceptual understanding, 4, 14
confidence improvement, 70
constructive action, 48
Cooke Report, 110
course development, 17–18
course evaluation, 28, 85
consistency, 46
course experience questionnaire (CEQ), 96
course module, 95
coursework, 121

D

data analysis, 52
20-day soft skills programme, 75
deep approach, 15–16
degree study programme, 95
demography, 112
design implementation phase, 50
diagnostic feedback, 133
dialogue, 103

E

education quality, 134
education reforms, 53
education research, 132
education students, 118
employability development, 114–16
engineering curriculum, 4
engineering education advances in Chile using student feedback, 25–39
desired outcomes, 3
discipline-specific overview and background, 1–21
education outcomes improvement, 2–3
Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 44–5
issues and future trends of student feedback, 132–6
problem-solving skills improvement, 3–5
skills and attributes improvement, 5–6
student and alumni feedback, 29–33
student feedback, 1–21
student feedback in UK, 108–27
students’ perception and feedback of soft skills role, 61–81
engineering education programmes
quality enhancement of student feedback in Thailand, 84–91
requirements, 86–7
types of student feedback in Thailand, 87
Engineering Profession Control Committee (EPCC), 85
engineering programmes
high drop-out rate, 7
recruitment, 7
engineering students, 118
feedback in institutional surveys, 113–16
response rate, 111–12
English language, 62
enhancement, 76
enhancement-led approach, 10–11, 21
entrepreneurial skills development, 75
Escuela de Artes y Oficios, 33
ethnographic approach, 8
examinations, 87

F

faculties, 26
Faculty of Education, 121
Faculty of Engineering, 95
Faculty of Engineering and Computer Technology, 115–16, 121
feedback collection
action approach, 53
survey techniques, 66
feedback motivation, 48
feedback solicitation, 18
first-year male engineering students, 62
five-point Likert scale, 68
focus groups, 66
formative assessment, 43–4
formative evaluation, 96
formative feedback, 135
formative operational evaluations, 99–100
institutional level operational evaluation, 100
formative student feedback
advantages, 50–1
difficulties, 51–2
enhancing teaching and learning quality, 43–56
possibilities, 52–4
full institutional autonomy, 27
functioning evaluation system, 101–4

G

general education course, 88–89
globalisation, 53
group discussion
apprehension, 72
student communication
apprehension analysis, 73
module, 75
group sharing, 76

H

hard skills, 63
higher education, 133
Higher Education Quality Assurance Law, 27
Hong Kong Polytechnic University, 44–5

I

in-depth interviews, 19
independent t-tests, 74
Indian engineering students, 62
innovation learning activity, 3
Institute of Engineers of Chile (IIC), 31–3
institutional action plans, 118
institutional research studies, 38
institutional response, 118–24
institutional surveys
engineering student feedback, 113–16
institutional response, 118–24
issues relating to multi-campus university, 124–5
interactive sessions, 76
internationalisation, 53
Internet, 122
interpersonal communication apprehension, 73
public speaking apprehension analysis, 74
student communication apprehension analysis, 74
interpersonal skills, 75, 114
interviews, 75
intrapersonal relationship skills, 75
iterative development process, 8

J

Jaipur Engineering College and Research Centre (JECRC)
case study background, 67–9
soft skills level investigation methods, 68
King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT), 88–91
classroom feedback, 88–90
seminars, 90–1

L

Latin American Tuning Project, 30–1
online survey, 31
leadership skills, 65
leaning experience, 6
learner-centred training, 76
learning, 96, 100, 133
learning objectives, 48
learning process, 48
learning support, 122
lifelong learners, 62

M

management information systems, 121
management skills, 65
manipulation, 4
Mazur, E., 18
MECESUP funds., 28, 36
MECESUP projects, 30
meetings apprehension, 72
student communication apprehension analysis, 73
mid-stage feedback, 50–1
Ministry of Education (Chile), 27, 36
Ministry of University Affairs, 86
mock group discussion, 75
mock interviews, 70, 76
multi-campus university, 124–5
multidisciplinary knowledge, 86
multidisciplinary skills, 86

N

National Commission for Accreditation, 27
National Education Act (1999), 85–6
National Student Survey (NSS), 110, 111
engineering students, 112–13
National System of Higher Education Information, 27
National System of Higher Education Quality Assurance, 27

O

obligatory internships, 35
on-campus recruitment, 64
one-minute paper, 18–19
one-to-one interviews, 66
one-to-one sessions, 76
‘open’ approach, 11
operational evaluation, 96
concerning aspects, 101–2
institutional level, 100
oral communication, 67
oral discussions, 18
outcome-based learning, 53
outcome evaluation, 47
overall satisfaction, 113–14

P

persistence problem, 7–8
personal development, 7
personal identity formation, 7–8
personal report of communication apprehension (PRCA), 67
gender basis, 74–5
physical engineering programme, 35
pilot tutorials, 122
positive attitude, 66
post-evaluation management, 46–7
posted questionnaires, 66
practical preparation skills, 65
presentations, 75
problem-solving sessions, 19–21
problem-solving skills
improvement, 3–5
professional context, 5
programme accreditation policies, 26–7
programme evaluation, 53
programme implementation, 53
programme planning, 53

Q

qualitative data, 52
quality assurance, 9
quality assurance system
formative operational evaluations, 99–100
quality enhancement, 94–105
summative student evaluations, 96–99
system importance for quality culture, 101–4
terminology, 95–6
quality culture
concerning aspects, 102
system importance, 101–4
quality enhancement, 9, 133
quality assurance system, 94–105
quantitative ratings, 11

R

real problems, 4
reporting evaluation, 96
retention issue, 39
ROSE study, 7
Royal Institute of Technology, 19

S

self-assessment processes, 28
seminars, 90–1
sense of belonging, 8
Sheffield Hallam University (SHU), 111, 119
Sistema Nacional de Aseguramiento de la Calidad de la Educación Superior See National System of Higher Education Quality Assurance
Sistema Nacional de Información de Educación Superior See National System of Higher Education Information
small group meetings, 49
social learning format, 21
soft skills, 134
enhancement strategies, 75–6
importance, 63–4
JECRC case study background, 67–9
JECRC case study findings, 69–5
student and facilitator perspectives enhancement, 68–9
student self-ranking, 69
students’ perception and feedback in its role in engineering education, 61–81
students’ suggestions for enhancement, 70
various roles, 64
soft skills development, 35
‘stakeholders, ’ 133
stakeholders conflict, 10
standardised evaluation approach, 47
standardised feedback systems, 122–3
‘Strengthening of structural capacities at the Faculty of Engineering and its applications to curricula innovation  and didactics’ project, 35
student assessment, 116–25
student-centred learning, 53
student comments, 116
student communication, 118, 119–120
student diversity, 37
student drop-out rates, 30
student evaluation system, 96
student expectations, 17
student experience survey, 110
student feedback, 1–21, 66–7
assessment, 116–25
assessment data, 17–18
collection purpose clarification, 9–13
direct learning improvement, 18–19
effective learning case, 19–21
engineering education advances in Chile, 25–39
engineering education improvement, 14–21
engineering education in UK, 108–27
engineering in institutional surveys, 113–16
engineering programmes requirements, 86–7
engineering students in NSS, 112–13
engineering students response rate, 112–13
existing data sources, 110–11
framework for interpretation, 15–17
issues and future trends in engineering education, 132–6
King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT), 88–91
outside class student activities, 19
problem-solving skills improvement, 3–5
quality enhancement of engineering programmes in Thailand, 84–91
student learning focus, 17
types in engineering programmes in Thailand, 87
understanding and improving learning experience, 6–9
student learning, 134
student panels, 66
student rating system, 15
student reflection, 19, 89–90
student satisfaction, 96, 114–15, 118, 119, 123, 124
Student Union, 125
suitability, 115
summative evaluation, 44, 95
summative feedback, 135
summative reporting evaluation systems
concerning aspects, 101
summative student evaluations, 96–9, 135
summative student feedback
advantages, 46–7
common problems and limitations, 47–9
surface approach, 16
systems view, 4

T

teacher, 102–4
actual operational activities, 103–4
student dialogue conditions, 103
teaching objectives, 103
workloads, 52
teacher-led sessions, 20
teaching, 96, 100, 133
investigation, 6
objectives, 103
teaching performance, 50
teamwork capability, 65–6
technical context, 6
Technology Innovation Centre (TIC), 121
time-on-task evaluation, 19
traditional teaching approach, 33

U

undergraduate engineering programmes, 85
university, 26
University of Central England (UCE), 111, 119–120
University of Santiago of Chile (USACH), 33–5
feedback impact on study programmes, 34–5
USACH Centre for Research in Creativity and Higher Education, 27
work experience employability development, 114–16

W

work experience organisation, 114–160