Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-rnpqb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-01T00:24:57.083Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 31 - Use of Information Technology in Engineering Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2015

By
Krishna Madhavan  and
Euan D. Lindsay
Edited by
Aditya Johri  and
Barbara M. Olds
Krishna Madhavan
Affiliation:
Purdue University
Euan D. Lindsay
Affiliation:
Central Queensland University
Aditya Johri
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
Barbara M. Olds
Affiliation:
Colorado School of Mines
Get access

Summary

Introduction: The Opportunity of Information Technology in Engineering Education

Engineering as a profession is changing at a rapid pace in large part owing to an ever-evolving technology landscape. The technological changes are wrapped increasingly in societal transformations that allow for better and rapid exchange of information and practices. Distance, time, and space are no longer boundaries for the practice of engineering. Essentially, the transition of computing infrastructure from an individual “sitting at the desk in isolation” paradigm to a “network-based” paradigm has resulted in knowledge production and sharing at a pace previously never considered possible. More importantly, the transformation of engineering practice through information technology is seen in the convergence of theory and experimentation (which are traditional approaches to engineering problem solving) with modeling and simulation, where design and problem solving are primarily in silico (meaning performed on a computer [chip] or using computer simulation). “Advances in computing and simulation coupled with technologies that mimic rudimentary attributes in analysis, may radically redefine common practices in engineering” (National Academy of Engineering [NAE], 2004, p. 15). Information technology (IT) impacts our daily lives in fundamental ways. Nowhere is this impact more obvious than on a university campus.

A new generation of students – digital natives – armed with a dizzying array of gadgets and gizmos roam the hallways of academic institutions struggling to keep pace with speed of the digital world. Learning happens everywhere and at any given time. A recently published U.S. National Academy of Sciences report entitled Learning Science in Informal Environments: People. Places, and Pursuits states, “all learning environments, including school and non-school settings, can be said to fall on a continuum of educational design or structure” (National Research Council [NRC], 2009, p. 47). Information technology allows this continuum to be traversed and possibly controlled in very useful and effective ways.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research , pp. 633 - 654
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, G. B., Madhavan, K. P. C., Zentner, M. G., Denny, N., Shivarajapura, S., & Klimeck, G. (2010). User flow informatics to personalize learning in engineering cyber-environ-ments – nanoHUB.org: A case study. Paper presented at the ASEE 9th Global Colloquium on Engineering Education, Singapore.Google Scholar
Aktan, B., Bohus, C. A., Crowl, L. A., & Shor, M. H. (1996). Distance learning applied to control engineering laboratories. IEEE Transactions on Education, 39(3), 320–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrich, C. (2004). Simulations and the future of learning. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.Google Scholar
Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (1991). Computer-based instruction: Methods and development (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Aragon, S. R. (2003). Creating social presence in online environments. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2003, 100, 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armbrust, M., Fox, A., Griffith, R., Joseph, A. D., Katz, R., Konwinski, A.,…Zaharia, M. (2010). A view of cloud computing. Communications of the ACM, 53(4), 50–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ausubel, D. P. (2000). The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view. Dordrecht, The Netherlands and Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bainbridge, W. S., & Roco, M. C. (2006). Progressive convergence. In Bainbridge, W. S. & Roco, M. C. (Eds.), Managing nano-bio-info-cogno innovations: Converging technologies in society (pp. 1–8). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borgman, C. L., Abelson, H., Dirks, L., Johnson, R., Koedinger, K. R., Linn, M. C.,… Szalay, A. (2008). Fostering learning in a networked world: The cyberlearning opportunity and challenge (N. T. F. o. Cyberlearning, Trans.). Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
Brotherton, J. A., & Abowd, G. D. (2004). Lessons learned from eClass: Assessing automated capture and access in the classroom. Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 11(2), 121–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bursilovsky, P., & Peylo, C. (2003). Adaptive and intelligent web-based eduational systems. International Journal of Artificial in Higher Education, 13(2–4), 159–172.Google Scholar
Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53, 445–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing, and mathematics. In Resnick, L. A. (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Copley, J. (2007). Audio and video podcasts of lectures for campus-based students: Production and evaluation of student use. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(4), 387–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corter, J. E., Esche, S., Chassapis, C., Ma, J., & Nickerson, J. V. (2011). Process and learning outcomes from remotely operated, simulated, and hands-on student laboratories. Computers and Education, 57(3), 2054–2067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
De Jong, T., & Van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engineers Australia. (2012). Autonomous trucks roll out in the Pilbara. Mining 2012 – Special Insert of the Engineers Australia magazine. Retrieved from
Foster, I. (2005). Service-oriented science. Science, 308(5723), 814–817.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedman, T. L. (2007). The world is flat 3.0: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York, NY: Picador Reading Group.
Gartner Research. (2012). Hype cycles. Retrieved from
Grimson, J. (2002). Re-engineering the curriculum for the 21st century. European Journal of Engineering Education, 27(1), 31–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hackman, M. Z., & Walker, K. B. (1990). Instructional communication in the televised classroom: The effects of system design and teacher immediacy on student learning and satisfaction. Communications Education, 39(3), 196–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.Google Scholar
Harward, V. J., del Alamo, J. A., Lerman, S. R., Bailey, P. H., Carpenter, J., DeLong, K.,…Zych, D. (2008). The iLab shared architecture: A Web services infrastructure to build communities of Internet accessible laboratories. Proceedings of the IEEE, 96(6), 931–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hertel, J. P., & Millis, B. J. (2002). Using simulations to promote learning in higher education: An introduction (1st ed.). Sterling, VA: Stylus.Google Scholar
Ijsselsteijn, W. A., de Ridder, H., Freeman, J., & Avons, S. E. (2000). Presence: Concept, determinants and measurement. In Proceedings of the SPIE, 3959.CrossRef
Jonassen, D. H., Campbell, J. P., & Davidson, M. E. (1994). Learning with media: Restructuring the debate. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42(4), 31–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, G. E., Judd, T. S., Churchward, A., Gray, K., & Krause, K.-L. (2008). First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 108–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klimeck, G., Bjaalie, L., Steiger, S., Ebert, D., Kubis, T. C.,Mannino, M.,…Povolotskyi, M. (2005). Quantum Dot Lab. Retrieved from . (DOI: 10.4231/D3B27PR0Q).CrossRef
Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42(2), 7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasry, N. (2008). Clickers or flashcards: Is there really a difference? The Physics Teacher, 46, 242–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, E. D., & Good, M. C. (2005). Effects of laboratory access modes upon learning outcomes. IEEE Transactions on Education, 48(4), 619–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, E. D., Naidu, S., &Good, M. (2007). A different kind of difference: Theoretical implications of using technology to overcome separation in remote laboratories. International Journal of Engineering Education, 23(4), 772–779.Google Scholar
Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3(2). Retrieved from Google Scholar
Lowe, D. B., Conlon, S., Murray, S., Weber, L., de la Villefromoy, M., Lindsay, E. D.,… Tang, T. (2011). Labshare: Towards cross-institutional laboratory sharing. In Azad, A. K. M., Auer, M. E., & Harward, J. (Eds.), Internet accessible remote laboratories: Scalable E-learning tools for engineering and science disciplines. IGI Global.Google Scholar
Lunetta, V. N., & Hofstein, A. (1981). Simulations in science education. Science Education, 65(3), 243–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, G., Shih, F., & Dragovich, J. (2007, June 24–27). Real-time access to experimental data using tablet PCs. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Honolulu, HI.Google Scholar
Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user's manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Messman, S. J., & Jones-Corley, J. (2001). Effects of communication environment, immediacy, and communication apprehension on cognitive and affective learning. Communications Monographs, 68(2), 184–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, A., Masterton, J. T., Christophel, D. M., & Shea, K. A. (1996). College teacher immediacy and student ratings of instruction. Communications Education, 45, 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, S. J., & Lasky, V. L. (2006). A remotely accessible embedded systems laboratory. In Sarkar, N. (Ed.), Tools for teaching computer networking and hardware concepts. London: Information Science.Google Scholar
Murray, S., Lindsay, E. D., Lowe, D. B., & Tuttle, S. W. (2010). Derivation of suitability metrics for remote access mode experiments. Paper presented at the Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation, Stockholm, Sweden.
National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2004). The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
National Academy of Engineering (NAE). (2008). Grand challenges for engineering in the 21st century. Retrieved from
National Research Council (NRC). (2003). Beyond productivity: Information technology, innovation, and creativity (D. o. E. a. P. Sciences, Trans.). Retrieved from
National Research Council (NRC). (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits (D. o. B. a. S. S. a. Education, Trans.). Retrieved from .
Nortcliffe, A., & Middleton, A. (2008). A three year case study of using audio to blend the engineers learning environment. Engineering Education, 3(2), 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogot, M., Elliot, G., & Glumac, N. (2003). An assessment of in-person and remotely operated laboratories. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(1), 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, R. G., Harrington, J. A., & Reeves, T. C. (2003). Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1), 59–71. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Oppenheimer, O. (2003). The flickering mind: The false promise of technology in the classroom and how learning can be saved. New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
O’Reilly, T. (2007). What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications and Strategies, 65(1), 17–38. Retrieved from Google Scholar
Pinder-Grover, T., Millunchick, J. M., Bierwert, C., & Shuller, L. (2009). The efficacy of screencasts on diverse students in a large lecture course. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
Reiser, R. A. (1994). Clark's invitation to the dance: An instructional designer's response. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42(4), 45–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, L. G. (1998). Teaching engineers to be creative. Paper presented at the Frontiers in Education, Tempe, AZ. Retrieved from
Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68–88.Google Scholar
Russell, M. (2005). Evaluating the weekly-assessed tutorial sheet approach to assessment: Background, pedagogy and impact. Journal for the Enhancement of Learning and Teaching, 2(1), 26–35.Google Scholar
Russell, M. (2006). Evaluating the weekly-assessed tutorial sheet approach to assessment: The students’ experience. Journal for the Enhancement of Learning and Teaching, 3(1), 37–47.Google Scholar
Schofield, D., Lester, E., & Wilson, J. A. (2004). Virtual reality interactive learning environments. Paper presented at the EE2004, Wolverhampton, UK.
Stumpers, B. D., & Lindsay, E. D. (2011, December 4–7). Remote laboratories: Enhancing accredited engineering degree programs. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Australasian Association for Engineering Education Conference, Fremantle, Australia.
Suroweicki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds. New York, NY: Anchor.Google Scholar
TIME magazine. (2006). Time. Retrieved from 0,16641,20061225,00.html
Weber, B., Mahapatra, S., Ryu, H., Lee, S., Fuhrer, A., Reusch, T. C. G.,…Simmons, M. Y. (2012). Ohm's law survives to the atomic scale. Science, 335(6064), 64–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West-Burnham, J., & Coates, M. (2007). Transforming education for every child. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Woolf, B. P. (2009). Building intelligent interactive tutors: Student centered strategies for revolutionizing e-learning. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufman.Google Scholar
Wulf, W. A. (1998). Diversity in engineering. The Bridge, 28(4). Retrieved from Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×