Using argumentation as a learning strategy to improve student performance in engineering Statics

ABSTRACT

Research suggests that a significant reason that a large number of students earn low grades in the fundamental engineering science course Statics is that they may be entering the course with incorrect conceptual knowledge of mathematics and physics. The self-explanation learning approach called collective argumentation helps k-12 students to understand their misconceptions of mathematical principles that often appear abstract to them. This study investigated collective argumentation as an instructional approach that helps engineering students identify and correct their misconceptions of topics taught in Statics. Results suggest that argumentation improves student performance as measured by grades earned on semester exams. Survey and focus group results suggest that students did not understand the argumentation process. Therefore, the students did not like using it as a learning approach.

KEYWORDS:

• Argumentation
• conceptual learning
• Statics
• engineering education

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributor

Tim L. Foutz is a Josiah Meigs Distinguished Teaching Professor in the College of Engineering at the University of Georgia. This study was part of his responsibilities activities as a University System of Georgia SoTL Fellow, and Dr Foutz continues this work with a focus to reduce the number of students who must repeat fundamental engineering courses. His current research involves developing new approaches to teach computer programming to elementary school students in addition to his efforts to improve veterinary orthopaedic practices.

Additional information

Funding

This study was funded by The University of Georgia Center for STEM Education.