Show simple item record

dc.contributor.convenorCurtin Universityen_US
dc.contributor.authorStewart, Rodneyen_US
dc.contributor.authorWalker, Angelaen_US
dc.contributor.editorA/Prof Euan Lindsay and Dr Yasir M. Al-Abdelien_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T15:02:21Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T15:02:21Z
dc.date.issued2011en_US
dc.date.modified2012-03-12T05:51:07Z
dc.identifier.refuriwww.aaee.com.au/en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/43578
dc.description.abstractThe very nature of an Engineer implies that one has an inherent passion for investigation and problem solving. The secondary school system and to some extent the traditional university system is focused on teacher-centred learning; however, this approach does not ideally foster deep learning approaches, research-based learning (RBL) and teamwork that are vital attributes of any graduate engineer. Previous studies have confirmed that engineering students thrive and feel comfortable with traditional teacher-centred learning, which is focused on exams, and rote learning. These research studies instigated a strong resolve of many engineering educators to implement project/problem-based learning (PBL) approaches in program curriculum in order to enhance graduate outcomes. This study offers one of the first attempts to link engineering students' approaches to learning with their assessment type preferences. The study empirically confirmed the proposition that deep learners also had a greater preference for deep assessment items and surface learners preferred surface assessment methods. Surface learners ranked both surface and deep assessment items on average lower than deep learners, indicating that surface learners do not have the same level of engagement in their learning through assessment in general. The paper concludes with some recommendations for engineering education policy and practice.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_US
dc.format.extent104517 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.publisherCausal Productionsen_US
dc.publisher.placePerth, Australiaen_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://www.aaee.com.au/en_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://www.aaee.com.au/conferences/2011/en_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_US
dc.relation.ispartofconferencenameAustralasian Association of Engineering Education (AAEE) 2011 Conferenceen_US
dc.relation.ispartofconferencetitleProceedings of the 2011 AAEE Conferenceen_US
dc.relation.ispartofdatefrom2011-01-05en_US
dc.relation.ispartofdateto2011-01-07en_US
dc.relation.ispartoflocationFremantle, Western Australiaen_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchScience, Technology and Engineering Curriculum and Pedagogyen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode130212en_US
dc.titleLinking engineering students’ assessment preferences to their learning approachesen_US
dc.typeConference outputen_US
dc.type.descriptionE1 - Conference Publications (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeE - Conference Publicationsen_US
gro.facultyGriffith Sciences, Griffith School of Engineeringen_US
gro.rights.copyrightCopyright remains with the authors 2011. The attached file is posted here with permission of the copyright owner[s] for your personal use only. No further distribution permitted. For information about this conference please refer to the publisher’s website or contact the authors.en_US
gro.date.issued2011
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Conference outputs
    Contains papers delivered by Griffith authors at national and international conferences.

Show simple item record