Using Assignment Choice in Engineering Service Courses
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v24i8.7258Keywords:
higher education, engineering education, CS-1, assignment choiceAbstract
Students taking an introductory engineering class, especially those required to take a “coding class’’ for their non-computer science major, can be very intimidated. This paper explores the implementation of assignment choice in an undergraduate CS-1 course, inspired by the Self-Determination Theory, to alleviate intimidation and enhance student motivation, especially for non-computer science majors. By allowing students to select assignments aligned with course objectives, we cater to diverse interests and learning goals. Preliminary results indicate a decrease in the students that earn a D, F, or withdraw from the course (DFQ rate), with assignment choice compared to traditional delivery methods, in which all students follow a prescribed path. Each assignment is part of their overall grade. We intend to refine this approach and explore its applicability in other engineering service courses. Our goal is to provide instructors with a framework that ensures students learn course objectives while retaining autonomy in their learning journey, thus facilitating continued success in their chosen field of study.
References
Brooks, C.F., & Young, S.L. (2011). Are choice-making opportunities needed in the classroom? Using self-determination theory to consider student motivation and learner empowerment. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 23(1), 48–59.
Bye, R.T. (2018). A flipped classroom approach for teaching a master’s course on artificial intelligence. In Computers supported education: 9th International Conference, CSEDU 2017, Porto, Portugal, April 21–23, 2017, revised selected papers 9 (pp. 246–276). Springer International Publishing.
Ghareb, M.I., & Mohammed, S.A. (2015). The role of e-learning in producing independent students with critical thinking. International Journal of Engineering and Computer Science, 4(12), 15287–15297.
Hobbs, H.T., Singer-Freeman, K.E., & Robinson, C. (2021). Considering the effects of assignment choices on equity gaps. Research & Practice in Assessment, 16(1), 49–62.
Lang, J.M. (2013). Cheating lessons. Harvard University Press.
Lightfoot, R., Anwar, S., & Hammond, T. (2023, March). Grading and retention in CS service courses: A systematic review. In 96th National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) International Conference (pp. 161–162). NARST.
Thibodeaux, T., Harapnuik, D., & Cummings, C. (2019). Student perceptions of the influence of choice, ownership, and voice in learning and the learning environment. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 31(1), 50–62.
Van de Mortel, T.F. (2008). Faking it: Social desirability response bias in self-report research. Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25(4), 40–48.
Williams-Pierce, C.C. (2011). Five key ingredients for improving student motivation. Research in Higher Education Journal, 11. Retrieved from http://aabri.com/manuscripts/11834.pdf
