Using Technology To Enhance Learning About Construction Materials

Educators are faced with new challenges in teaching, due to the expanding and dynamic methods by which information and data are conveyed. Computers, internet, digital cameras, instant messages, communication software, and distance learning are some of the examples of our new age. These developments have raised the expectations of engineering students. Part of the new culture being formed, that affects us as educators, is the fact that our students are entering our classes with simple but powerful expectations; (a) I can, with reasonable effort, observe (see a visual image of) most complex behaviors and, (b) I should be able to do this at any time that I feel it is suitable for me, at any time I am ready for learning. (c) My time is valuable. Teach me in a way that is most efficient for me. Cut to the most important things I need to know and convince me why I need to know them. Much has been written about distance learning and how degrees can be earned from offices and homes. That is not what this paper is about. It is about optimizing time and learning with a mix of instructional delivery styles. This paper describes the first phase of a project to integrate visual and auditory tools in teaching the details of standard test methods of construction materials. It explains the steps by which a set of videos and text were developed to offer engineering students an opportunity to visualize details of testing materials and assess their knowledge at the time they choose using the internet. The benefits gained by integrating these tools, such as reduced time for laboratory sessions, standardization of the quality of the teaching process, and more effective use of hands-on “Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Education” P ge 8.260.1 learning time, are presented. Assessing the true impact on learning is a more difficult challenge and these challenges are discussed. There are a variety of learning theories that outline how different categorical modes, such as visual, auditory, and kinesthetic (feelings and sensations), play a role in learning. The match of these theories with multiple delivery styles pursued in this project is discussed. New tools could offer an opportunity for us to better teach engineering principles and to make our classes more dynamic for students, regardless of their learning styles. The New Learners and Learning Environments As educators, we are one of the important components of the learning process. Some claim that we are the most important component; we are the engines for learning. After all, we are responsible for the content and the direction that classroom learning takes. To be an effective educator (engine), obviously we need to deal with the other components, which include “the learners”, and the learning environment. Nothing new! What is new is the type of learners coming to our classrooms and the variety of learning environments that these learners are exposed to before they appear in our classroom. Increasingly, our society learns from the convenience of their homes at any time and day that suits the individual. As educators, many of us have observed a significant change in students' learning styles, their classroom expectations, and the classroom dynamics/participation during the past 5 to 10 years. The causes of these changes have not been scientifically quantified to our knowledge, but examining the trends in use of the Internet and electronic media provides indicators about the environments that students are now using to obtain information and to learn. We cannot be left behind and we have no choice but to interact with our learners and to sort through the options for the most effective methods for teaching. In fact, we have a new responsibility to use new methods to enhance the learning process, to make instruction more time efficient for students and teachers, and to be more available to our learners. The model of perceptual biases developed by Bandler and Grinder [1] holds that in our culture we receive and process information using one or more of three modes: Visual (V), Auditory (A), and Kinesthetic (feeling and sensing) (K). This VAK model is recognized by many educators and used in many settings to enhance the understanding of the learning process. We, as learners, vary in our learning styles. Some of us learn better by the V mode, while others need the K mode to fully understand the subject. It has been a continuous challenge for educators to balance the delivery of information to cover all VAK learning modes. There are some aspects of engineering theory that cannot be delivered following the K mode. We cannot sense mathematical equations, for example, but we can, perhaps, show how a mathematical equation fits certain sets of data, and thus, give a sense of the nature of the equation. We can write on the board and thus deliver an equation in the visual mode and ask students to copy it in their notebooks so that they can sense writing it. What action constitutes or qualifies for each mode is not standard and we have our own biases in defining learning modes. The point is that our biases come from our experiences and thus, we need to consider the experiences of our students, our learners. Computer-based learning is becoming a common experience for our students and we need to exploit it to our advantage and their advantage. “Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Education” P ge 8.260.2 Changes in Learning Responsibilities Computer-Based Learning is a teaching advantage because it can cover the visual and the auditory learning modes effectively. The content can be carefully prepared once to the highest standards and then offered to the students continuously over a time span. It can be placed in a secure environment under educator control which avoids confusion or misinformation that can sometimes be generated inside and outside the classroom. More importantly, it can shift the responsibility of learning in a classroom, or a laboratory, toward the learner in a favorable fashion. One of the accepted models of learning is described eloquently by Waldheim [2]. There are three levels of learning: Knowledge recall facts, Comprehension understand and correctly explain, and Application apply facts in new situations. We, as educators, commonly assume the responsibility for all levels. With the new learning tools, it is plausible that the responsibility for the first level (Knowledge) could be shifted to the learner using the A and V tools available on computers. In addition, parts of the second level (Comprehension) could be integrated, such that learners would take the lead responsibility in this learning stage. Classrooms and laboratories would be reserved for the higher levels of learning, including comprehension of complex concepts/phenomena and applications to new situations. These higher levels usually require the K mode, sensing and feelings. This new distribution of responsibilities is to our learners’ advantage, because it allows them to be in charge of the knowledge-stage learning environment. It also allows them to repeat the process as often as they want, to focus selectively on concepts each individual may find difficult. It offers two modes of learning (A and V) and, thus, accommodates their learning biases without educators’ interferences. More importantly, it will challenge educators to focus on higher levels of learning, particularly application to new situations, which is critical for the applied engineering field. These changes are expected to offer a more effective learning experience. The Challenge of Teaching Construction Materials Testing Construction materials technology is a required core subject for civil and environmental engineering education. What is unique about construction materials is that a majority of these materials, such as portland cement concrete and asphalt concrete, are produced locally and constructed on site, which mandates extensive testing for quality control and quality assurance. It is thus important that engineering students acquire knowledge of test methods, comprehend concepts behind these methods, and be able to apply test information in new situations. Traditionally, the teaching of construction materials includes a laboratory component, during which students are shown how these tests are conducted, and are allowed limited hands-on experience. The challenge in teaching a construction materials laboratory is two-fold: (1) it can be difficult to find well-trained teaching assistants or laboratory technicians who are up-to-date on new procedures, due to the specialized nature of the subject and limited financial resources available, “Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2003, American Society for Engineering Education” P ge 8.260.3 and (2) it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain and re-invest in equipment and space for such laboratories. While many universities are willing to invest in research laboratories, researchers cannot afford the interruptions and challenges associated with letting inexperienced undergraduate and graduate students use their equipment. As a result, students are allowed limited time and access to be trained on and qualified to use the equipment. Most of the time required is to become familiar with equipment and procedures. That is mainly knowledge-level learning, a lower level, which could be shifted to be the learner's responsibility and out of the laboratory. There are significant challenges faced by construction materials educators. In some programs, laboratory time continues to be significantly reduced and the teaching of advanced testing protocols is simply eliminated because of cost. In other programs, separa