English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Several studies have shown that laboratories that implement interactive learning and cooperative group exercises lead to an improvement in student outcomes as compared to the passive listening characteristic of traditional lectures. The disparity in these experiences is one of many reasons that several undergraduate engineering subjects are taught with both lecture and lab sessions in parallel. At the University of Delaware, Vibrations and Controls is a junior level class in mechanical engineering that has a 3 credit lecture and 1 credit lab that are co-requisites, but are not required to be taken in the same semester. This offers a unique opportunity to analyze student performance for the three distinct groups of students enrolled in lab only, lecture only, and lecture plus lab. We hypothesized that students in the lecture plus lab group would have higher grades in the lecture course than the students enrolled only in the lecture. Our results support this hypothesis. Introduction Engineering educators have many concerns regarding the most impactful methods for teaching their students. One of the most prevalent considerations among instructors is whether the pedagogies implemented improve students’ engagement with their own learning process.1 Such learner-centered teaching methods are antithetical to the traditional passive learning lecture. Due to this, progressive instructional methods utilize active learning exercises that have students conduct meaningful activities requiring them to think through their actions. Although active learning encompasses a wide range of teaching methods, a review of studies has shown a trend of increasing students’ engagement and improving educational outcomes.2 In many university engineering programs, laboratory courses are designated for active learning through hands-on exercises involving object manipulation and practical skill building. For control systems courses, laboratories are often considered an important opportunity to apply the lecture knowledge, bridging theory and application.3–5 In addition, having students work on tangible, real-world problems can more strongly motivate students to learn information they perceive important.6 Engineering laboratories in particular typically task students with team-based exercises requiring collaborative participation, as is the case in this study. The benefits of such active learning lab exercises as compared to passive learning in lecture can include improving knowledge absorption and retention.7 However, many of these studies are conducted as short in-class activities because these laboratories are most often paired with a lecture taught in parallel, which makes it difficult to distinguish the impact of passive versus active learning methods on student outcomes. However, the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Delaware offers a junior-level Vibrations and Controls class as a 3-credit lecture course and 1-credit lab that are co-requisites but not required to be taken in the same semester. This presents a unique opportunity to evaluate student performance in three distinct groups: lab only, lecture only, and

Manipulation Matters: Isolating the Impact of Lecture vs. Lab Experience in an Undergraduate Engineering Controls Class