Editorial

This special issue of Engineering Education: Journal of the Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre showcases a range of papers that cover various aspects of improving student engagement by reporting on a diverse set of initiatives taken at various universities in the UK and Germany.

Student engagement implies more than student motivation, since it is known that the level of motivation a student brings to a lecture, design class, laboratory session etc, will be affected, for better or worse, by what happens in that session (i.e. how much the student has engaged with the session (Gross Davis, 1993)).

Motivating students to study is often seen as a key factor in student engagement. Savage et al. (2011) examined the different factors that affect student motivation within higher education. By considering both intrinsic factors (for example, where the student is driven by an interest or enjoyment in an assignment) and extrinsic factors (for example, where the student is driven by success or summative marks) they showed, through the use of a bespoke questionnaire, that students were motivated by both. However, further in-depth research through the use of semi-structured interviews showed that most students, in reality, operated extrinsically.

High motivation and engagement in learning have consistently been linked to reduced dropout rates and increased levels of student success (Brewster and Fager, 2000). Even more recently, Yorke and Longden (2008) identified poor teaching quality as one of the main reasons why students withdrew early from UK universities, though the transition from school to university has also been identified as an issue. In addition, there is often a gulf between a student’s expectation of what an engineering degree encompasses and the reality (Shobrook, 2003), and if students are to remain engaged with their studies it is important that this gulf is bridged.

One way to bridge this gap would be to run activities prior to students enrolling on a degree programme to ensure that new students arrived with a better understanding of university life. This approach has been adopted by staff at Coventry University (Glendinning, 2011) who have developed an interactive pre-induction website to support their new students as they make the transition to university. The success of this initiative lies in the fact that the university recognises the importance of student involvement in the activities and engages current students in, amongst other activities, the development and running of the website. As a result a “friendly” interface has been developed which allows the new students to communicate easily with existing students or appropriate staff.

The problems associated with student transition to higher education also inspired Loughborough University to introduce a new first year module aimed primarily at improving student engagement (Willmot and Perkin, 2011). The year-long module is based on the ethos of enquiry based learning. The students work as part of a team under the stewardship of an academic member of staff, supported by skills workshops. As a result of the positive effect on student engagement that this initiative engendered, the staff and students viewed the module as a success. This success is echoed by the work of Brint et al. (2008), who stated that engineering students are collaborative in their study and like to learn from each other within a small group, even outside timetabled activities. Perhaps the approach adopted at Loughborough University could provide the answer to the question posed by Savage et al. (2011): ’What might be done to promote active learning whilst ensuring that necessary academic standards are maintained?’

The concept of engineering students learning from each other was taken a step further at the University of Sheffield where work has been undertaken over the past four years to try to engage students with the multicultural aspects of engineering projects (Rodriguez-Falcon et al., 2011). Through lectures and an interactive exercise the students examine the perceptions they hold about the cultures of their peers and discuss the factors that are required to run a successful engineering company in various countries. This approach to peer learning has been well received by the students, who enjoy the lecture and interactive exercise, as well as enhancing their cross-cultural knowledge and skills. A very different method of peer learning, though just as successful, has been adopted by the University of Ulster in their teaching of health and safety (McCormac et al., 2011), where the traditional skills associated with storytelling are used to engage the students with the subject matter. The students have to construct the story based around a set theme that is presented as a cartoon. Both of these studies have been a success since students who are actively involved in their own learning are more engaged and better motivated.

If students are to continue engaging with their studies, then different modules and teaching activities must be supported in different ways. One of the major elements of an undergraduate engineering degree is project work, either as an individual or team activity. Although students often engage with project work and can be highly motivated to succeed, some find this aspect of their degree challenging. Loughborough University has consequently been developing an interactive support system, run through its virtual learning environment, designed to help students manage their group projects (Hubbard and Gregory, 2011). An initial set of requirements have now been identified and work is now being undertaken to develop and implement the system. If successful, such a system will fully engage the students with the project, enabling them to become more independent and reflective and thus deepening their learning — an aim for which we all strive.

There is an argument that, in order to maximise engagement and motivation, students should be an integral part of any team which is considering curriculum development or programme design. As part of tackling the challenges posed by the Bologna Process, a consortium of German universities has looked at this scenario, setting up “OpenBologna” to gather student views (Schuster et al., 2011). They have, most importantly, viewed the students as equal partners with all of the other stakeholders interested in improving the education of engineers. “OpenBologna” was trialled last year and the students responded positively to the initiative, giving valuable input into various aspects of programme design, curriculum and delivery and showing that they were indeed partners in the movement to improve engineering education.

The ideal scenario must be to teach a group of motivated students who then engage with the teaching activities. By involving students with all aspects of teaching, from the design of the degree programme through to activities based on peer learning and team work, student engagement and student motivation will continue to improve. As a consequence, learning and teaching will become more enjoyable and rewarding for all.