Recently, more students have entered Dutch higher education. This is a consequence of the possibility to offer students to enter higher education, with a certificate from senior secondary education (SSVE). In earlier days most students in higher education had passed senior general secondary education (SGSE), or even pre-university education. It is to be expected that these 'new' students approach learning in a different way compared to the 'traditional' students in higher education. The goal of this study was to examine the possible differences between the two groups of students mentioned, and to gain insights in the role possible differences play in the way the two groups of students approach learning. Students' personality characteristics, regulation strategies, learning conceptions and motivational orientations were studied in relation to study approaches. It was assumed that patterns of relations between the variables mentioned would be different for the two groups of students. More specifically, it was expected to find stronger and more crystallised relations between variables within the group of SSVE-students. Indeed, when entering Higer Education, SSVE students scored higher than SGSE students on the personality variables autonomy and conscientiousness; as to their personal orientations on learning and instruction they were more self-test oriented and they scored higher on concrete processing and construction of knowledge. However, the strength and direction of the relations between the variables are the same for both groups. Our findings increase insights into relations between students' personalities and their approaches to learning when entering higher education; this concerns two groups of students from different educational backgrounds. Practically this implies that intake assessments considering personality and self-knowledge might help teachers, coaches and policy makers in advising students how to appraoch learning, when entering higher education. Copyright Elsevier Inc.
LINK
Learning by Design (LBD) is a project-based inquiry approach for interdisciplinary teaching that uses design contexts to learn skills and conceptual knowledge. Research around the year 2000 showed that LBD students achieved high skill performances but disappointing conceptual learning gains. A series of exploratory studies, previous to the study in this paper, indicated how to enhance concept learning. Small-scale tested modifications, based on explicit teaching and scaffolding, were promising and revealed improved conceptual learning gains. The pretest-posttest design study discussed in this paper confirms this improvement quantitatively by comparing the conceptual learning gains for students exposed to the modified approach (n = 110) and traditional approach (n = 77). Further modifications, which resulted in a remodified approach tested with 127 students, show a further improvement through reduced fragmentation of the task and addressed science. Overall, the remodified approach (FITS model: Focus - Investigation - Technological design - Synergy) enriches technology education by stimulating an empirical and conceptual way of creating design solutions.
Peer reviewed paper op SEFI Engineering Education congress 2009 In engineering programs an important part of the learning process takes place in practical assignments like capstone projects, internships and co-op assignments in industry. The assignments are very divers. Students have different roles, work in different environments and the learning outcomes are not uniform. So how can the individual learning outcomes or growth competencies of the assignments be determined? To cope with this question the authors developed and implemented a method to monitor and assess the individual learning outcomes of the assignments. The method can be used to match a student to his next assignment in such a way that he can build his individual learning track. The method defines three aspects of an assignment: the role of the engineer (i.e. project leader, designer, researcher), the domain(s) of the assignment (i.e. user interface, software engineering) and a general results matrix that describes results and the level required to produce them. To manage the process learning outcomes are defined as products so project management methods can be used to plan, monitor and assess learning outcomes. Key aspects of the method are: 1. A general results matrix for engineering assignments 2. Learning outcomes that are defined as results in the matrix and these results can be assessed. 3. The results have levels so the learning outcomes can grow during the programme. 4. The method can be used to match, monitor and assess students on one assignment. 5. The method can be used to match, monitor and assess students for the entire programme. 6. The tools that are developed are based on an industry standard for project management.
