Research on Improving the Assessment Process of Students' Knowledge in the Field of Materials Processing

Abstract:

The paper presents the research work carried out in order to determine the optimum assessment process in the case of an introductory engineering course, Technology of Materials. This course is taught to the students in the second year of Faculty of Engineering, specializations: Machine Building Technology and Industrial Engineering Economics. The relation between the assessment process and the students results for the last six academic years has been carefully analyzed. In the last three years the author had an innovative approach that involves the use of blogs and social media in the process of students learning. Also a significant change in the assessment process has been established. The students were encouraged to make a more active contribution in their technical training path, by preparing individual essays on topics related to advanced materials and technologies. Also their involvement in practical activities was encouraged and rewarded in the grading process. As a result the distribution of students final grades had a significant change, becoming now a Gaussian distribution.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volume 371)
• Pages: 729-733
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.371.729
• Online since: August 2013
• Authors: Gabriela Strnad
• Keywords: Academic Grading, Blog, Engineering Training, Knowledge Assessment

References

[1] G. Kulik, R. Wright, The impact of grading on the curve: a simulation analysis, International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2 (2008) 1-17.

[2] E. van Niekerk, P. Ankiewicz, E. de Swardt, A process-based assessment framework for technology education: a case study, Int J Technol Des Educ. 20 (2010) 191–215.

DOI: 10.1007/s10798-008-9070-8

[3] E. Tempelman, A. Pilot, Strengthening the link between theory and practice in teaching design engineering: an empirical study on a new approach, Int J Technol Des Educ. 21 (2011) 261–275.

DOI: 10.1007/s10798-010-9118-4

[4] S.I. Green, Student Assessment precision in mechanical engineering courses, Journal of Engineering Education. April (2005) 273-278.

[5] A. Pollitt, Comparative judgement for assessment, Int J Technol Des Educ, 22 (2012) 157–170.

[6] P.G. Williams, Investigating the feasibility of using digital representations of work for performance assessment in engineering, Int J Technol Des Educ. 22 (2012) 187–203.

DOI: 10.1007/s10798-011-9192-2

[7] R.J. Roselli, S.P. Bropfy, Experiences with formative assessment in engineering classrooms, Journal of Engineering Education. October (2006) 325-333.

[8] J.A. Leydens, B.M. Moskal, M.J. Pavelich, Qualitative methods used in the assessment of Engineering Education, Journal of Engineering Education. January (2004) 65-72.

DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00789.x

[9] C. Charyton, R.J. Jagacinski, J.A. Merrill, W. Clifton, S. Dedios, Assessing creativity specific to engineering with the revised Creative Engineering Design Assessment, Journal of Engineering Education. 100 (4) (2011) 778–799.

DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00036.x

[10] R.M. Felder, R. Brent, Understanding student differences, Journal of Engineering Education. January (2005) 57-72.

[11] J.A. Shaeiwitz, Outcomes assessment in engineering education, Journal of Engineering Education. July (1996) 239-246.

[12] G. Strnad, The use of blogs and social media for technical education in specific field of materials processing, Procedia Economics and Finance. 3 (2012) 337–342.

DOI: 10.1016/s2212-5671(12)00161-x