Using A Structuredness Instrument To Characterize End Of Course Projects

A course culminating project, a popular instructional activity in engineering and engineering technology courses, typically provides students with either a rewarding or a frustrating experience. Many times professors, in order to bring real industry practice into the classroom, ask students to solve problems based on complex cases. Depending on the student's familiarity with the project context, a student’s problem solving skills, and the nature of the problem, student success in solving the problem can be limited. Jonassen (1997) provides a foundational basis for defining a problem's nature using the attributes of structuredness, domain specificity, and complexity [1] . Recent research indicates that ill-structured or messy problems require different meta-cognitive processes and problem solving skills, when compared to well-structured problems. Houdeshell (2004) found that using illstructured transfer activities produced significantly higher student learning than with wellstructured transfer problems using an instructional design that supports a scaffolding environment [2] . Clearly then the use of ill-structured problems is desirable when combined within an appropriate instructional design. However, no instrument had been developed to measure problem structuredness. This paper documents the process of developing and testing a structuredness instrument. The validation procedures utilized instructional materials developed within the scope of National Science Foundation DUE-ATE sponsored projects. The materials provide examples of well and ill-structured transfer activities for testing a proposed structuredness instrument. The instrument, based extensively on work done by Jonassen (1997, 2000), defines a structuredness index [1, 3] . An instrument reliability of 0.82 was demonstrated by the analysis of ten instructional transfer activities by three subject matter experts (SME). The activities evaluated included content materials from mathematics, science, business, and engineering technology. Additionally one of the SMEs applied the instrument to the analysis to twenty-two additional activities to determine the potential relationship between structuredness, and Jonassen’s published problem taxonomy (rule, story, decision, troubleshooting, diagnosis-solution, and design). The data supports the relationship between the structuredness index and the problem taxonomy. The impact of this analysis is the verification of the relationship between problem structuredness and taxonomy, the publication of a structuredness instrument, and the reinforcement of the importance of instructional design to enhance student learning