Meeting Learning Outcomes in the Tri-Generational Classroom

Lynette TAN Yuen Ling1,* and Darryl ANG Si Wei2

1Residential College 4, NUS
2NUS Business School

*rc4tyll@nus.edu.sg

Tan, L. Y. L., & Ang, D. S. W. (2024). Meeting learning outcomes in the tri-generational classroom [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-lyltan-dswang/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities; Opportunities from Wellbeing

KEYWORDS

Ageism, Intergenerational, Co-creation, Relationship-rich, Experiential

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation

 

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

In 2021, the National University of Singapore (NUS) introduced a new pillar to the General Education curriculum, Communities and Engagement (NUS News, 2021). The aim was to scale the university’s efforts in the community, enabling more undergraduates to be involved in community projects and “gain a deeper appreciation of social issues”. Professor Bernard Tan, NUS Senior Vice Provost (Undergraduate Education), observed that the new pillar formalises the learning process in community engagement so that “students can contextualise their efforts based on the learning objectives”.

 

Using the frameworks of service learning (Butin, 2010), intergenerational relationships (Thang et al., 2003), Needs Assessment and Asset Based Community Development from NUS Office of Student Affairs (OSA) Community Skills training platform (NUS OSA, 2020) and Systems Thinking (Senge, 2006), two new courses were launched at Residential College 4 (RC4) that would lead to the contextualisation of students’ community engagement efforts based on several learning objectives. The following is the set of objectives from the tri-generational course:

  1. Reflect on what defines service learning, its possibilities and limitations
  2. Explore the field of intergenerational engagements and relationships in Asia and Singapore
  3. Understand the broad issues faced by youth in Singapore and, with respect to intergenerational bonding, including ageism and familial conflict
  4. Identify and contextualise the problems faced by youths on a local (Queenstown) scale through primary research with the youth that includes their ability to connect with the older adults.
  5. Expand on their interpersonal capacities through an intergenerational bonding programme where they will interact with school children and the elders of Queenstown
  6. Develop intergenerational bonding activities together with the youth and older adults as viable solutions to address the problems and gaps in community programmes through the approach of Systems Thinking.
  7. Demonstrate an active citizenry that connects theory with ethical behaviour.


Over one semester that included 7 tri-generational sessions, 18 undergraduates met with 12 elders from FaithActs and Esther Active Ageing Centre as well as 35 Secondary 2 students from Queenstown Secondary School. Teaching activities as well as assessments were aligned with the learning objectives so that the latter could be effectively attained. The courses were also nestled within the umbrella of the Health District @Queenstown (HD@QT), a multi-stakeholder collaboration including the Housing Development Board (HDB), the National University Health System (NUHS), and NUS, which seeks to prepare Singapore for 2026 when our population will reach super-aged status (Teo, 2023) with initiatives that promote health and wellness for all ages. An aspect of its strategies is intergenerational bonding, the focus of the course in this paper.

 

Through a reflection of the teaching activities, evidence from student work, and student feedback, this paper considers the effectiveness of teaching strategies employed and the challenges of mounting a tri-generational community engagement course in the university classroom. While evidence from student work showed that learning objectives were met, the reflection of teaching activities and student feedback suggested that the pedagogical approach could be calibrated so that the tri-generational experience in the classroom can be improved.

 

The significance of this paper is twofold. Firstly, as NUS scales up community engagement through credit-bearing courses, it is beneficial to understand how learning objectives can be met via the teaching strategies employed in these courses. Secondly, as over 21% of our Singapore population reaches 65 and over in age by 2026, increasing our undergraduates’ capacity to create effective intergenerational bonding strategies and cultivate a mindset of inclusiveness will help us achieve social cohesion and healthy longevity.

 

REFERENCES

Butin, D. (2010). Service-Learning in Theory and Practice: The Future of Community Engagement in Higher Education (1st 2010.). Palgrave Macmillan US.

Curriculum changes to enhance focus on interdisciplinary learning and community projects. (2021, February 22). NUS News. https://news.nus.edu.sg/curriculum-changes-to-enhance-focus-on-interdisciplinary-learning-and-community-projects/

NUS Office of Student Affairs. (n.d.). https://www.youtube.com/@NUSOfficeofStudentAffairs

Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization (First, revised and updated). Currency.

Teo, J. (2023, April 20). Initiatives in place to tackle ageing issues as Spore hits ‘super-aged’ status in 2026: Health Minister. The Straits Times. https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/initiatives-in-place-to-help-tackle-ageing-as-s-pore-nears-super-aged-status-in-2026-ong-ye-kung

Thang, L. L., Kaplan, M. S., & Henkin, N. Z. (2003). Intergenerational programming in Asia: Converging diversities toward a common goal. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 1(1), 49–69. https://doi.org/10.1300/J194v01n01_06

Student-generated Questions: A Novel Approach For Encouraging Cognitive Engagement

Amanda Huee-Ping WONG1,*, WONG Lik Wei1, HOOI Shing Chuan1, and LEE Shuh Shing2

1Department of Physiology, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine (YLLSOM)
2Centre for Medical Education (CENMED), YLLSOM

*phswhpa@nus.edu.sg 

Wong, A., Wong, L. W., Hooi, S. C., & Lee, S. S. (2024). Student-generated questions: A novel approach for encouraging cognitive engagement [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-ahpwong-et-al-2/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Wellbeing 

KEYWORDS

Students’ questions, student-generated questions, Bloom’s taxonomy, cognitive engagement, supportive learning environment. 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

 

INTRODUCTION 

Question-asking is a crucial process in fostering critical and reflective thinking across different education levels (Aflalo, 2021; Cuccio-Schirripa & Steiner, 2000), yet its role in medical education is often overlooked. Encouraging students to generate their own questions can help them uncover gaps in their understanding, stimulate their curiosity, and engage more deeply with the material (Schmidt, 1993). This practice also provides teachers with valuable insights into students’ learning processes and difficulties. While previous studies have largely focused on using student-generated multiple-choice questions for self-assessment (Gooi & Sommerfeld, 2015; Lahti et al., 2023), this study offers an alternative method utilising students’ questions, specifically queries that students submitted based on self-directed learning materials. Systematic categorisation of these questions according to topic and cognitive level allows educators to not only identify problem areas and explore cognitive engagement with course content, but also tailor their educational strategies according to learner needs. This anonymous platform offers students a safe environment that encourages reflection and peer learning, and has the potential to enhance cognitive engagement, which has been shown to positively influence student achievement and wellbeing (Ng et al., 2022; Pietarinen et al., 2014). 

 

METHODS 

This study utilises a content analysis approach to evaluate the questions submitted anonymously by first-year undergraduate medical students within the Cardiovascular Physiology blended learning series. The shared question and answer (Q&A) document, integrated into the self-directed learning segment, was accessible alongside other educational resources such as online lecture videos, eBooks, and quizzes. During this segment, the teaching team monitored the document and provided timely feedback to the submitted questions. Students subsequently attended in-person case-based discussions to reinforce knowledge and enhance interactive learning. The questions were categorised by two independent raters according to the revised Bloom’s taxonomy to assess cognitive engagement (Anderson et al., 2001; Chin & Osborne, 2008), specifically into the following cognitive levels: Remember, Understand, Apply, and Analyse. Inter-rater reliability was measured to ensure consistency in the classification process.

 

RESULTS

A total of 298 questions were collected and analysed over four academic years. The distribution of these questions, categorised according to Bloom’s taxonomy, revealed that the majority were classified as ‘Understand’ (56%) and ‘Apply’ (29%), followed by the ‘Remember’ (4%) and ‘Analyze‘ (11%) categories (Figure 1). When examined by topic, the highest frequency of questions pertained to the ‘Electrical Basis of Electrocardiogram’ and ‘Cardiac Output and Cardiac Failure’ chapters. A detailed analysis demonstrated that student questions were predominantly within the ‘Understand’ and ‘Apply’ categories across most chapters. Notably, the ‘Cardiac Contraction and Cardiac Cycle’ chapter was unique in that it had a higher number of ‘Apply’ questions compared to ‘Understand’ questions. The overall inter-rater reliability for categorising the questions was 83.2%, underscoring the robustness of the classification process. 

Figure 1. Overall students’ questions according to cognitive levels. 

 

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the utility of student-generated questions in promoting cognitive engagement with course content and providing learners with a safe environment to express uncertainties and receive timely feedback from the teaching team. The predominance of questions in the ‘Understand’ and ‘Apply’ categories aligns with educational goals that prioritise comprehension and practical application in foundational medical education. This approach not only offers educators insights to refine teaching strategies and better address cohort-specific needs but also offers another opportunity to foster a supportive learning environment. By creating a psychologically safe platform for students to engage and reflect, this approach could enhance their overall educational experience. Integrating such practices can contribute to improved academic achievement and student wellbeing, supporting the ongoing advancement of pedagogical practices in medical education. 

 

REFERENCES

Aflalo, E. (2021). Students generating questions as a way of learning. Active Learning in Higher Education, 22(1), 63-75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787418769120  

Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Complete ed.). Longman.  

Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Students’ questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260701828101  

Cuccio-Schirripa, S., & Steiner, H. E. (2000). Enhancement and analysis of science question level for middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 210-224. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200002)37:2<210::AID-TEA7>3.0.CO;2-I  

Gooi, A. C. C., & Sommerfeld, C. S. (2015). Medical school 2.0: How we developed a student-generated question bank using small group learning. Med Teach, 37(10), 892-896. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.970624  

Lahti, J., Salamon, M., Farhat, J., & Varkey, T. (2023). Multiple choice question writing and medical students: a systematic literature review. In: MedEdPublish. 

Ng, B. J. M., Han, J. Y., Kim, Y., Togo, K. A., Chew, J. Y., Lam, Y., & Fung, F. M. (2022). Supporting Social and Learning Presence in the Revised Community of Inquiry Framework for Hybrid Learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(2), 708-714. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00842  

Pietarinen, J., Soini, T., & Pyhältö, K. (2014). Students’ emotional and cognitive engagement as the determinants of well-being and achievement in school. International Journal of Educational Research, 67, 40-51. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.05.001  

Schmidt, H. G. (1993). Foundations of problem-based learning: some explanatory notes. Med Educ, 27(5), 422-432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1993.tb00296.x  

Multi-stakeholder Experiential Learning For Adult Learners

Weina ZHANG1,2,* and Ruth TAN1 

1Department of Finance, NUS Business School
2Sustainable and Green Finance Institute, NUS

*bizzwn@nus.edu.sg 

Zhang, W., & Tan, R. S. K. (2024). Multi-stakeholder experiential learning for adult learners [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-wzhang-rtan/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities 

KEYWORDS

Experiential Learning, Interdisciplinary, Multi-stakeholder Pedagogy, Sustainable solutions, Sustainable Development Goals 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

 

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

The Masters in Sustainable and Green Finance (SGFIN) at the National University of Singapore (NUS) is an Asia-first Masters degree programme.  

 

In terms of pedagogical contribution, we have adopted the transformative multi-stakeholder educational approach proposed in UNESCO (2020). Figure 1 presents the key stakeholders involved in the programme and the different strategies designed to nurture a new generation of talents in the fast-paced field of sustainable finance. The curriculum has intentionally weaved in various experiential learning components for students to engage with the community and provide practical solutions.  

Figure 1. Multi-stakeholder pedagogy for MSGF Programme

 

Firstly, weekly industry talks featuring various experts exposed our students to the best practices and current trends in the financial and business world. These talks provide students with the latest insights from the industry. They are deliberately curated for students to learn about the multi-faceted challenges in the field of sustainable development.  

 

Secondly, to help students understand the cutting-edge technological and scientific advancements and the interdisciplinary nature of sustainability innovations, we have also invited many renowned NUS professors to deliver their research seminars to our students. The academic speakers came from Faculty of Science, College of Design and Engineering, and the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, covering a wide range of topics such as renewable energy solutions, nature-based climate solutions, electrical vehicles, urban heat and data analytics, biodiversity, and green hydrogen, and more.  

 

Thirdly, we also organised yearly case competitions for our students to tackle widespread and systematic challenges faced by businesses in the entire country. In the first year, we focused on the new energy transition by the local small and medium enterprises. In the second year, we asked students to conduct interviews with local business people to understand their sustainability journeys. Through the competition, hundreds of students from various disciplines have had close encounters with entrepreneurs and business owners to understand the challenges faced and provide ground-up solutions for the case challenge.   

 

Fourthly, as part of their graduating requirement, students work in teams to consult with industry partners on diverse issues. They were guided by academics from various departments of NUS.  

 

These engagements with the community of guest speakers and industry partners are opportunities for our students to (1) become more conscious of sustainable solutions to real-world challenges, and (2) to be more conscious of concrete ways to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.  

 

For example, the capstone projects include studies into  

  • Energy transition (SDG13 Climate Action),  
  • Investment in renewable energy (SDG7 Affordable and Green Energy),  
  • Integration of biodiversity risk (SDG14 Life Below Water, SDG15 Life on Land), commercialisation of biofuels (SDG7 Affordable and Green Energy),  
  • Relationship between corporate diversity and financial performance (SDG5 Gender Equality), reduction of methane emissions (SDG13 Climate Action),  
  • Green buildings (SDG11 Sustainable Cities and Communities),  
  • Divestment strategy for coal exposure (SDG13 Climate Action),  
  • ESG Investing of Family Offices,  
  • Transition risk factors and physical risk factors (SDG13 Climate Action).  

 

In summary, we have summarised the motivation, rationale, strategies of curriculum design to help adult students acquire experiential learning experiences, and the hard and soft skills needed to thrive in the field of sustainability. We also present the learning outcomes of the students based on the feedback from surveys, learning journals, and job statistics.  

 

REFERENCES

Bridgstock, R. (2009). The graduate attributes we’ve overlooked: enhancing graduate employability through career management skills. Higher Education Research & Development, 28(1), 31-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360802444347

Carless, D. (2015). Excellence in university assessment: Learning from award-winning practice. Routledge. 

Cheng, L. T. W., Armatas, C. A., & Wang, J. W. (2020). The impact of diversity, prior academic achievement and goal orientation on learning performance in group capstone projects. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(5), 913-925. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2019.1699028

Clifford, V. A. (1999). Development of autonomous learners in a university setting. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(1), 115-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180109

Colet, R. N. M. (2017). From content-centred to learning-centred approaches: shifting educational paradigm in higher education. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 49(1), 72-86. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2017.1252737

Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences; an integrated approach to designing colleague courses. Jossey-Bass. 

Hsu, T. C., Hwang,  G.-J., Chuang, C.-W. , & Chang, C.-K. (2012). Effects on learners’ performance of using selected and open network resources in a problem-based learning activity. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 606-623. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01235.x 

Johnson, L. A., & Helms, M. M. (2008). Keeping it local: Incorporating a local case study in the business curriculum. Education + Training. 50(4), 315-328. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910810880551

Jorre de St Jorre, T., & Oliver, B. (2018). Want students to engage? Contextualise graduate learning outcomes and assess for employability. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(1), 44-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1339183

Knewtson, H. (2018). Paying attention to student learning in principles of finance. Journal of Financial Education, 44(2), 246-261. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26775506  

Thomas, K., Wong, K.-C., & Li, Y.-C. (2014). The capstone experience: student and academic experience. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(3), 580-594. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.841646

UNESCO (2020). Multi-stakeholder Approaches to Education for Sustainable Development in Local Communities: Towards Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in Asia.  

Integrating Design Competitions In Civil Engineering Education: Case Studies From Singapore And China

DU Hongjian1,* and LIANG Yan2 

1Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, NUS
2School of Civil Engineering, Zhengzhou University, China

*ceedhj@nus.edu.sg

Du, H., & Liang, Y. (2024). Integrating design competitions in civil engineering education: Case studies from Singapore and China [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-hjdu-lyan/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities 

KEYWORDS

Design competition, professional engineers, assessment, sustainability real-life problem 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

 

INTRODUCTION

Previous literature has shown that design competition can have tremendous educational value in developing desired skills and competencies in students, provided ideal conditions are identified and maintained (Bunchal, 2004). The Royal Academy of Engineering’s report on Educating Engineers for the 21st century concluded that engineering courses must align better with the evolving needs of business and industry (2006). More high-quality project work is needed, centred around real-life problems and ideally delivered in collaboration with industry (Davies, 2013). In addition to technical skills, enabling skills are crucial, allowing engineer to operate effectively in a commercial environment (Gadola & Chindamo, 2019).  

 

Despite these recognised benefits, there is limited research on the use of design competition in civil engineering education. This paper explores how a design competition in structural concrete design impacts student learning at both the National University of Singapore (NUS) and Zhengzhou University (ZZU), China. The framework of this innovative teaching method is illustrated in Figure 1, showcasing its application in diverse educational contexts.  

Figure 1. Proposed teaching frameworks based on design competition. 

 

METHODOLOGY

The method was initially implemented in the course CE3165 “Structural Concrete Design” in AY2023/24, a core course in the Civil Engineering Programme at NUS. In the past, conventional design projects within CE3165 failed to evoke significant interest among students, who often found them to be labour intensive with minimal returns. Recognising the need for a paradigm shift, I sought to reimagine the design project as a dynamic and competitive endeavour. The design competition was introduced in collaboration with the Institution of Structural Engineers Singapore Regional Group, challenging teams to design the structural frame for Singapore’s first net-zero building. By providing clear assessment guidelines, the marking rubric facilitated an objective and transparent evaluation process, allowing judges to assess the merits of each design comprehensively (Table 1). The competition involved presentations evaluated by professionals from the construction industry (Figure 2). The design competition method was subsequently introduced in a similar course in the School of Civil Engineering, Zhengzhou University. During a visit to NUS between 2022 and 2023, the lecturer (co-author of this paper) identified similar challenges faced in his course: lack of student motivation and a disconnection between theory and real-life design. After observing the implementation of this design competition at NUS, the lecturer decided to adopt it at his home university.  

 

I was involved in the planning of the course and was invited to serve as an external judge in the design competition in 2024. The same format and marking rubrics were used. At Zhengzhou University, due to course requirements, students participated in the design competition individually, with a total of 15 students. I attended the presentation online (refer to Figure 3). An anonymous student survey was conducted to evaluate their feedback on the design competition.  

Table 1
Marking rubrics of reports and presentations of the design competition

 

Figure 2. Judge commenting on the design solution at NUS. 

 

Figure 3. Judge commenting on the design solution at ZZU. 

 

RESULTS

The design competition has yielded tangible evidence of its effusiveness in enhancing student learning outcomes and fostering a deeper understanding of sustainability in structural engineering. Quantitative scores from student evaluations corroborate the effectiveness of the competition, with high ratings indicating satisfaction with the learning outcomes and overall experience on their learning of structural design (Figure 4) and sustainability (Figure 5). Qualitative feedback from students highlights the positive impact of the design competition on their learning experience, with many expressing increasing motivation, engagement, and enthusiasm in structural engineering and sustainability (Table 2).  

Figure 4. Feedback from NUS and ZZU students on the question “Do you think the design competition has helped your learning of structural concrete design?” (1 represents “Not at all”, 5 represents “Very much”). 

 

Figure 5. Feedback from NUS and ZZU students on the question “Do you think the design competition has motivated your thinking and learning of sustainability?” (1 represents “Not at all”, 5 represents “Very much”). 

 

Table 2
Qualitative comments from students on the design competition 

 

CONCLUSIONS

This study compares the effectiveness of using design competition in two universities for similar courses. Results consistently demonstrated that design competitions lead to higher student learning motivation and a deeper understanding of structural design. The positive outcomes indicate the potential for broader adoption of this teaching method in engineering curricula, paving the way for more engaged and practically skilled engineering graduates.  

 

REFERENCES

Buchal, R. O. (2004). The educational value of student design competitions. In Proceedings of the inaugural CDEN design conference, Montreal, Canada. 

Davies, H. C. (2013). Integrating a multi-university design competition into a mechanical engineering design curriculum using modern design pedagogy. Journal of Engineering Education, 24(5), 383-396. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2012.761679  

Gadola, M., & Chindamo, D. (2019). Experiential learning in engineering education: The role of student design competitions and a case study. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 47(1), 3-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306419017749580 

Royal Academy of Engineering. (2006). Educating engineers for the 21st century: The industry view. A commentary on a study carried out by Henley Management College for the Royal Academy of Engineering. London, UK.  

Content Analysis Of Student AI Use In A First-Year Writing Course

Jonathan FROME  

NUS College 

frome@nus.edu.sg

Frome, J. (2024). Content analysis of student AI use in a first-year writing course [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-jfrome/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Generative AI 

KEYWORDS

Generative AI, undergraduate, AI-assisted writing, content analysis 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

 

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

The take-home essay has traditionally served as a reliable proxy for evaluating student writing skills. The rise of Generative AI (GenAI), however, has led to concerns that the take-home essay may no longer be a valid assessment tool. If instructors cannot determine whether a student or GenAI completed an assignment, such assignments may fail to demonstrate whether students have achieved the intended course learning outcomes. This concern is widespread among educators who rely on essays for assessment. For instance, Cardon et al.’s (2023) survey of over 300 communication instructors confirms the widespread concern that GenAI will increase plagiarism, reduce critical thinking, diminish writing skills, and make student assessment difficult. These fears often stem from intuitions about student behavior, such as the belief that “students just want the tool’s output without engaging in the actual [writing] process” (Chang et al. 2023). The speed with which GenAI can produce relatively high-quality essays has led some to suggest that university writing might shift to a model where “young writers will [try] to craft something meaningful and precise from the rough block of generic text that AI has provided them” (Moore 2023). 

 

Yet we cannot determine whether these concerns are justified because of a critical gap in the literature: the lack of research on how students actually use GenAI tools. Although instructors have strong intuitions about the effects of allowing students to use GenAI for writing assignments, few of these intuitions are evidence-based. We simply know very little about how students use GenAI in their coursework. While some instructors are beginning to incorporate GenAI into classroom activities, the primary concerns revolve around its use outside the classroom, which could undermine the effectiveness of essay writing for skill-building and assessment. 

 

This study aims to address this knowledge gap by exploring the following questions: How do students actually use GenAI tools for writing assignments when allowed to do so? How does their use relate to the primary concerns expressed by instructors? And what implications does this relationship have for designing college writing courses? 

 

In this study, students in a first-year writing class were allowed to use ChatGPT freely for their coursework, provided they shared links to their chat transcripts. The chats were downloaded, formatted into a spreadsheet, and analysed as pairs of user prompts and ChatGPT outputs. Over 600 pairs of prompts and outputs were collected and coded to understand how students used ChatGPT to complete their assignments. The coding categories were based on academic writing as a process involving discrete activities: reading and analysing sources, generating ideas, drafting, revising content, and revising form. Additional categories were added inductively during the coding process. 

 

The most serious concerns among instructors included fears that students would “offload” important writing activities (Watkins, 2024) to GenAI, such as active reading, thesis generation, and initial drafting. Such use could undermine the pedagogical value of assignments. Our findings suggest these concerns are supported only to a limited extent. Students were more likely to use GenAI as a reading aid (e.g., clarifying specific sentences) than as a substitute for active reading (e.g., summarising entire texts). Additionally, students used GenAI more often for revising their drafts than for generating initial drafts. 

 

These preliminary results suggest that in the context of take-home essays, the most salient instructor concerns about GenAI use are not entirely borne out. The stereotype that students will use GenAI to write essays for them was not supported, at least for the observed participants (though different students and assignments might yield different results). The findings also underscore the importance of considering specific course learning outcomes when evaluating the disruptive potential of GenAI. 

 

More fundamentally, this study provides an evidence-based account of how students use GenAI for writing assignments, which is crucial for developing more effective teaching strategies. Understanding student use of GenAI allows educators to design assignments that enhance learning and integrate GenAI into courses in ways that support, rather than undermine, critical thinking and writing skills. 

 

REFERENCES

Cardon, P., Fleischmann, C., Aritz, J., Logemann, M., & Heidewald, J. (2023). The challenges and opportunities of AI-assisted writing: Developing AI literacy for the AI age. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 86(3), 257–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294906231176517 

Chang, D. H., Lin, M. P.-C., Hajian, S., & Wang, Q. Q. (2023). Educational design principles of using AI chatbot that supports self-regulated learning in education: Goal setting, feedback, and personalization. Sustainability, 15(17), 12921. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712921  

Moore, A. (2023, June 25). Is there any point still teaching academic writing in the AI age? Times Higher Education. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/blog/there-any-point-still-teaching-academic-writing-ai-age 

Watkins, M. (2024). Automated Aid or Offloading Close Reading? Student Perspectives on AI Reading Assistants. https://uen.pressbooks.pub/teachingandgenerativeai/chapter/automated-aid-or-offloading-close-reading-student-perspectives-on-ai-reading-assistants/ 

Leveraging Chatgpt For Analysing Student Reflections In A Design Thinking Course

Qian HUANG1,*, Ameek Kaur2, Thijs WILLEMS1

1Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities, Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD)
2NUS Business School

*qian_huang@sutd.edu.sg

Huang, Q., Kaur, A., & Willems, T. (2024). Leveraging ChatGPT for analysing student reflections in a design thinking course [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/qhuang-et-al/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Generative AI 

KEYWORDS

Generative AI, ChatGPT, large-scale reflection, qualitative analysis, design education 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

 

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen-AI) is increasingly being integrated into teaching and research methodologies, particularly since the advent of ChatGPT (Albdrani & Al-shargabi, 2023; Hwang & Chen, 2023). As educators navigate this evolving landscape, it becomes crucial to understand how to effectively and critically utilise Gen-AI tools in academic settings. This study explores the application of ChatGPT in analysing student reflections in a design thinking course at a university in Singapore. The course involved 550 first-year students across 11 cohorts, each student required to write four reflections over a semester. The significant volume of reflections presented a unique opportunity to deploy ChatGPT-4.0 for large-scale qualitative analysis. 

 

Initially, researchers manually analysed the reflections of 50 students from one class to establish a benchmark. These manual analyses were then compared to ChatGPT’s results to verify the reliability of the AI-driven approach. Upon confirming ChatGPT’s reliability, the tool was employed to analyse reflections from the entire cohort through the semester (550 students X four phases). The analysis focused on two primary objectives: first, to assess the impact of pedagogical interventions on students’ Affect, Behavior, and Cognition (ABC); and second, to understand how students applied these interventions and the frequency of their application. 

 

The study aimed to uncover how specific pedagogical interventions influenced students’ emotional responses, behavioural changes, and cognitive developments by using ChatGPT. For instance, it was observed that interventions such as confirmation bias were frequently applied by students during site visits to explore problems from multiple perspectives. This detailed analysis provided insights into the effectiveness of various teaching strategies and highlighted areas for potential improvement. 

 

Key findings from the study revealed several noteworthy trends. Firstly, some interventions, including case studies and activities, did not significantly impact students’ affective responses to the ideas emphasised in these interventions. This suggests that educators may need to refine these interventions to better support students emotionally. Secondly, the analysis highlighted variations in the delivery and emphasis of interventions across different cohorts, attributable to individual teaching styles of different instructors. ChatGPT’s analysis provided a nuanced understanding of how these differences influenced student outcomes. 

 

By leveraging ChatGPT, the research team was able to conduct a comprehensive analysis of a large dataset, providing valuable insights that might not have been feasible through manual analysis alone. The findings underscore the potential of Gen-AI tools in educational research, particularly in scaling qualitative analyses and uncovering patterns that inform pedagogical practices. 

 

In summary, this study demonstrates the utility of ChatGPT in analysing student reflections to gauge the impact of pedagogical interventions on students’ action, emotion, and cognition. The application of Gen-AI in this context not only facilitated the processing of a large volume of qualitative data but also offered educators deeper insights into how classroom interventions can be optimised to achieve desired educational outcomes. This method represents a significant advancement in educational research, providing a scalable and reliable approach to understanding and enhancing student learning experiences. 

 

This study contributes to the growing body of literature on the use of AI in education and offers practical implications for educators seeking to integrate Gen-AI tools into their teaching practices. Future research could expand on these findings by exploring the application of ChatGPT in different educational contexts and with diverse student populations to further validate and refine this approach. 

 

REFERENCES

Albdrani, R., & Al-shargabi, A. (2023). Investigating the effectiveness of ChatGPT for providing personalized learning experience: A case atudy. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications. https://doi.org/10.14569/ijacsa.2023.01411122.  

Hwang, G. J. & Chen., N. S. (2023). Exploring the potential of generative artificial intelligence in education: Applications, challenges, and future research directions. Educational Technology & Society, 26(2). https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202304_26(2).0014

Engaging External Partners in Research: A Longitudinal Case Study Involving Academic and Non-Academic Entities

A.C.M. FONG 

ICT Cluster, Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT)
Department of Computer Science, Western Michigan University 

alvis.fong@singaporetech.edu.sg 

Fong, A. C. M. (2024). Engaging external partners in research: A longitudinal case study involving academic and non-academic entities [Poster presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-acmfong/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities 

KEYWORDS

Industry engagement, government engagement, multipartite research, cybertraining research, AI readiness, workforce development 

CATEGORY

Poster Presentation

 

INTRODUCTION 

Members of the Western Michigan Transformative Interdisciplinary Human+AI Research group, together with external partners, have been engaged in multiyear research aimed at rapidly getting a broad spectrum of STEM learners AI ready. The on-going research has been funded by two consecutive CyberTraining grants from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). As principal investigator of the grants, the author wishes to share experiences and explore potentially transferable knowledge in engaging with academic and non-academic partners. These include faculty members at U.S. and international academic institutions, scientists and engineers in tech companies (e.g., Amazon, Google, and Meta), and other experts in relevant government agencies. These stakeholders collectively steer research directions, shape current debate on safe, secure, and reliable AI, and contribute towards a sustainable ecosystem for advances in AI technologies and workforce development.

 

STUDY BACKGROUND 

The CyberTraining program emphasizes research in both workforce/curricular development and community building (NSF CyberTraining program 2024). The author’s research team was first awarded a CyberTraining grant in 2020 to conduct a pilot study titled “Modular Experiential Learning for Safe, Secure, and Reliable AI from 2020 to 2022 (NSF CyberTraining pilot grant, 2020). The team was subsequently awarded another a 4-year implementation grant titled “Promoting AI Readiness for Machine-Assisted Secure Data Analysis” in 2023 (NSF CyberTraining implementation grant, 2023). President Biden’s subsequent executive order regarding safe, secure, and trustworthy AI in 2023 further underscores the importance of this area of research (The White House, 2023). The study involves training students to development AIready knowledge and skills in both undergraduate and graduate populations. This presentation focuses on the community engagement aspect. In particular, it examines how such engagement can enrich students’ learning experiences. 

 

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT  

Figure 1 summarizes the key stakeholders in the on-going research. The core research team is supported by partners that come from a broad range of academic and non-academic organizations. Together, all these stakeholders aim to achieve collective impact with a shared agenda according to Kania J. and Kramer (2011). 

Figure 1. Key project stakeholders for community building

 

Community engagement with academic partners  

Academic partners that have supported include faculty from other U.S. 4-year universities and 2-year colleges, and universities in Singapore, Canada, and New Zealand. In addition to computer science, other quantitative disciplines represented include branches of engineering (civil, mechanical and aerospace, electrical, etc.), statistics, business analytics, etc. They are current and future users of AI. In addition to providing guidance on research directions, these multidisciplinary experts add relevance to applied AI with realistic examples of AI use cases drawn from their disciplines. Examples: mechanical engineers using AI to optimize vehicle drive cycles for fuel efficiency, civil engineers using AI for smart traffic management, statisticians using AI to visualize complex data, etc. Many have also field tested the new learning materials in their respective settings and helped collected anonymized use data. 

 

Community engagement with non-academic partners  

Though perpetually busy in their lines of work, industry and government experts from several organizations have provided valuable advice to the research team. Their guidance ensures that all curricular development activities and artifacts are relevant, up-to-date, and geared towards achieving optimal learning outcomes. Table 1 summarizes the main non-academic partners. 

Table 1
Main non-academic research partners

 

Further outreach for broader impacts  

Since summer 2022, the team has been involved in outreach activities to broaden the research impacts. The general formula entails a) customization of some developed learning materials to make them accessible and b) field testing the customized materials in local area high schools. Informal feedback from affected high schools has been positive. 

 

CONCLUSION

This presentation has highlighted multiparty community engagement by the author over several years of funded cybertraining research. The ongoing research has a strong emphasis on community building. This presentation aims to share experiences in community engagement across a broad spectrum of disciplines and organizations. Opportunities for cross-fertilization likely follow.

 

REFERENCES

Kania J., & Kramer M. (2024). Collective Impact, Stanford Social Innovation Review. 

NSF CyberTraining research program (2024). Available at https://new.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/training-based-workforce-development-advanced 

NSF CyberTraining pilot grant number 2017289 (2020). Available at https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2017289&HistoricalAwards=false 

NSF CyberTraining implementation grant number 2320951 (n.d.). Available at https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2320951&HistoricalAwards=false 

The White House (2023). President Biden’s Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (Oct 2023). Available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/10/30/fact-sheet-president-biden-issues-executive-order-on-safe-secure-and-trustworthy-artificial-intelligence/ 

Student Wellbeing: Perception of Support in Blended Learning Environments

*Netty Haiffaq Binte Zaini MATTAR, Aileen Wanli LAM, and Doreen TAN 

Centre for English Language Communication  (CELC), NUS

*nmattar@nus.edu.sg 

Netty Haiffaq Zaini Mattar, Lam, A. W. L., & Tan, D. (2024). Student wellbeing: Perception of support in blended learning environments [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-nmattar-et-al/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Wellbeing 

KEYWORDS

Blended learning, system-level support, student perception, student wellbeing. 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation

 

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

Blended learning is a potentially transformative approach to education that can result in personalized learning (Kumar et al, 2021) and increased efficiency (Dwiyogo, 2020), thus maximising learning potential (Poon, 2013) through the blending of content and technology (Liu et al., 2024). Blended learning involves various combinations of traditional face-to-face learning with online technologies. This means that students need to toggle between synchronous and asynchronous lectures, materials, activities, and tasks which can include retrieving and viewing content throughout the semester (e.g. readings and videos), collaboration on activities online (e.g. peer review and collaborative writing), and participation in formative and summative assessments on various online platforms. These platforms range from learning management systems like Canvas and Blackboard, collaborative tools like Google Drive and Microsoft Teams, video conferencing tools like Zoom, as well as interactive tools like Slido and Kahoot. Because of the multiple platforms and learning modes involved, students can feel disorientated, overwhelmed, and anxious (Allen & Seaman, 2013), especially if the information and procedures to access online components of the course is unclear or if students need to use sophisticated applications (Vaughan, 2007). This has a negative impact on students’ mental and emotional wellbeing, leading to symptoms like “stress, neck impairment and back disability” (Agarwal & Agarwal, 2022) as students navigate the challenges of blended learning environments (Conwi et al., 2024). When students are unfamiliar with platforms and systems (Kadaer et al., 2022), have not been prepared for the programme (Willging & Johnson, 2009), or feel they “waste time on technical issues” (Sazdovska-Pigulovska, 2021), it can trigger stress, leading to negative impact. One implication is that increased student agency in blended environments must be accompanied by clear expectations and explicit guidance (O’Brien & Freund, 2018) such as instructions on the “primary presentation of course content” (Garrison et al., 2000, p. 90), clear protocols when communicating online, as well as high accessibility of materials.  

 

According to scholars like Salmon (2003) and Moule (2006), clarity of expectations, explicit instruction and high accessibility all relate to initial, system-level support in higher education online learning environments. Support here includes facilitating students’ access to course notes, activities, materials, databases, or platforms, in complex blended learning environments (Salmon, 2003, p. 28; Moule, 2006, p. 377). It also includes clear expectations about how to proceed with, and complete, activities, as well as clear protocols for communication between students and instructors, and for how to obtain technical support. Support at this level aids learning, but is not central to the actual learning process (Moule, 2007, p. 42). However, as mentioned, system-level support is essential to mitigating the emotional and psychological difficulties in blended learning environments, and thus essential to student wellbeing (Lancaster, 2022, p. 48).  

   

We are interested in how students, from a range of undergraduate and postgraduate courses at the National University of Singapore (NUS), perceive this system-level support in their courses. More specifically, we are interested in what aspects they perceive to be important.  

 

We draw our findings from a survey conducted with students from twelve blended courses offered by the Centre for English Language and Communication (CELC), NUS. The quantitative survey items covered course design, delivery, student workload, student engagement, assessments, use of technology, training and support for students and communication and overfall perceptions of the course. Two open-ended questions were also included at the end of the survey, and a thematic analysis was carried out on the qualitative feedback. The questions were:  

  1. What are the strengths and areas for improvement in the blended learning arrangement in my CELC course? 
  2. Overall, how do you feel about being part of a blended learning environment as a student?  

 

Based on the findings, this paper will share aspects of system-level support students perceive as important to bolster their well-being in blended learning environments. We propose that effective support mechanisms—such as thoughtful organisation of resources, streamlining of platforms, and frequent and clear communication—will positively impact the emotional wellbeing of students. Additionally, this paper provides practical recommendations educators can adopt to improve support structures. 

 

REFERENCES

Agarwal, A., & Agarwal, D. (2022). Implication of online learning on the physical and mental well-being of students. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Innovation, 06(05), 366–369. https://doi.org/10.36037/IJREI.2022.6508 

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing Course: Ten Years of Tracking Online Education in the United States. Sloan Consortium (NJ1). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=eD541571 

Conwi, C., Pinar, W., & Destura, M. (2024). Exploring mental wellbeing, distress and adjustment in a blended learning environment. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 2(7), 146-157. https://doi.org/10.69569/jip.2024.0148  

Dwiyogo, W. D. (2020). Effectiveness, efficiency and instruction appeal of blended learning model. 

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2, 87-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6 

Lancaster, M. (2022). Blended learning: impacts on the student experience (pp. 46–56). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. 

Liu, Y., Chen, S., Feng, X., Bai, X., & Ma, Y. (2024). Supporting Students and Instructors in Blended Learning. In: Li, M., Han, X., Cheng, J. (eds) Handbook of Educational Reform Through Blended Learning. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6269-3_5    

Moule, P. (2006). E-learning for healthcare students: developing the communities of practice framework. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 54(3), 370–380. 

Moule, P. (2007). Challenging the five-stage model for e-learning: a new approach. ALT-J, 15(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687760601129588 

O’Brien, M., & Freund, K. (2018). Lessons learned from introducing social media use in undergraduate economics research. International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 14(1). https://www.learntech-lib.org/p/183552/ 

Poon, J. (2013). Blended learning: An institutional approach for enhancing students’ learning experiences. Journal of online learning and teaching, 9(2), 271. 

Salmon, G. (2003). E-moderating (2nd ed.). Routledge Falmer. 

Sazdovska-Pigulovska, M. (2021). Impact of online education on student emotional well-being. Educational Role of Language Journal, 2021-2, 6-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.36534/erlj.2021.02.01 

Vaughan, N. (2007). Perspectives on blended learning in higher education. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(1), 81-94. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/6310/

Willging, P. A., & Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students’ decision to dropout of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(3), 115-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v8i4.1814

Leveraging Adult Learners’ Professional Experience Through Scenario-based Student-generated Questions And Answers In Engineering Mechanics

DU Hongjian1 and Stephen En Rong TAY2 

1Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, College of Design and Engineering (CDE), NUS
2Department of the Built Environment, CDE, NUS

ceedhj@nus.edu.sgstephen.tay@nus.edu.sg 

Du, H., & Tay, S. E. R. (2024). Leveraging adult learners’ professional experience through scenario-based student-generated questions and answers in engineering mechanics [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-hdu-sertay/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities 

KEYWORDS

Engineering education, adult learners, relevance, student-generated questions and answers, assessment

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation

 

INTRODUCTION 

Adult learning is crucial for workforce development, ensuring that professionals can adapt to changes and thrive in their careers. Therefore, the Singapore government has implemented various initiatives including lifelong learning through the SkillsFuture Movement to address this challenge. The National University of Singapore (NUS) contributes to these efforts through the Bachelor of Technology (BTech) Programmes designed for polytechnic graduates working in the industry.  

 

Specifically, TCE2155 “Structural Mechanics and Materials”, a core course for BTech (Civil Engineering) received feedback from a control cohort expressing the need for evaluations of real-life structures to better understand course content. This observation agrees with the literature that adult learners are often more motivated by practical and relevant content that directly apply to their personal and professional lives (Merriam & Bierema, 2014). Hence, the use of scenario-based student-generated questions and answers (sb-SGQA) was adopted as the approach allows students to provide scenarios based on their professional experience. In brief, the sb-SGQA approach provides learners the opportunity to develop questions and answers to specific learning objectives within the course (Tay & Tay, 2021). This aligns with the adult learner experience, which is one of the six principles for adult education proposed by Knowles (1992). Hence, there is potential for sb-SGQA to allow the adult learner community to utilise their professional experience for learning. In addition, past experience with implementing sb-SGQA provided confidence and familiarity with the approach (Du & Tay, 2022).  

 

Hence, this paper aims to answer two key questions:  

  1. a) Does sb-SGQA help adult learners link their professional experiences with course content? 
  2. b) How can sb-SGQA impact adult learners’ performance?

 

METHODOLOGY 

TCE2155 is offered for first year BTech (Civil Engineering) undergraduates, who must be at least aged 21 and have two years of full-time work experience. The sb-SGQA approach was introduced in TCE2155, with student feedback compared across three runs: the initial run without sb-SGQA (control in AY2020/21) and two subsequent runs with sb-SGQA (intervention in AY2022/23 and AY2023/24). Data collected included student assignments, final exam grade, feedback, and module scores. Detailed methodology of the sb-SGQA implementation follows a previous work by the authors (Du and Tay, 2022). In the initial run without sb-SGQA, a conventional teaching approach was employed. Students were given a pre-defined structural analysis question, and they were required to calculate the force and stress in the structure. This approach focused on the application of formulae and calculations, without involving real-life scenarios or encouraging students to generate their own questions and solutions.

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

The number of enrolled students in TCE215 and those that responded to the survey are:  

AY2020/21 (control cohort): 33 enrolled and 17 responded 

AY2022/23 (intervention cohort): 28 enrolled and 16 responded 

AY2023/24 (intervention cohort): 29 enrolled and 8 responded  

 

As displayed in Figure 1, the feedback score for the course and teacher improved in the intervention runs. One limitation lies in the limited sample size of less than 40 for the cohorts, which may need additional control and intervention cohorts in subsequent academic years to further validate the promising results. For example, the dip in score for “Course” and “Thinking ability” could be attributed to academic abilities of the intervention cohorts. Nevertheless, it is interesting that despite the plausible difference in academic abilities of the intervention cohorts, the score for “Teacher” and “Interest” remains high. Students gave higher ratings to the module and the lecturer. Reports also revealed higher ratings in areas such as “The teacher has enhanced my thinking ability” and “The teacher has increased my interest in the subject.” Qualitative feedback included comments such as “This module is very interesting and can relate to my working life” and “Able to apply it to daily work” indicating the practical benefits of sb-SGQA. 

Figure 1. Teaching score from students regarding the course, teacher, increased interest in the subject, and thinking ability in control (AY2020/21) and intervention (AY2022/23 and AY2023/24) cohorts. 

 

Figure 2 shows the final exam grade distributions of TCE2155 in the three runs. Note that no students in the intervention cohort scored 0-15 and no students in the control cohort scored 90-100. This demonstrates that sb-SGQA can encourage all adult learners, especially the weaker students, to perform better in the final exam. Furthermore, an analysis of the submitted assignments in the intervention cohort highlighted how many students were able to use their professional experience to design the questions and answers (refer to Figure 3). In the control cohort, adult learners would not be able to draw upon their professional experience to contextualise the learning objectives in the course.  

Figure 2. Final exam grade distributions of the final exam in control (AY2020/21) and intervention (AY2022/23 and AY2023/24) cohorts.  

 

Figure 3. Sample of submitted assignment from AY2023/24 (intervention cohort). 

 

CONCLUSION 

The sb-SGQA approach was implemented in TCE2155 within the BTech (Civil Engineering) programme. As a result, adult learners were able to link their professional experience with the course content, which was shown to impact adult learners’ performance in the assignments submitted. With no additional hardware or software required, the sb-SGQA presents itself as a cost-effective method for improving engineering education for adult learners. 

 

REFERENCES

Chin, C. C., & Brown, D. E., (2013). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science, International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 521-549. http://dx.DOI.org/10.1080/09500690110095249   

Du, H. J., & Tay, S. E. R. (2022). Using scenario-based student-generated questions to improve the learning of engineering mechanics: A case study in civil engineering [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Campus Conference (HECC) 2022, 7-8 December, National University of Singapore. https://ctlt.nus.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/ebooklet-i.pdf  

Merriam, S. B., & Bierema, L. L., (2013). Adult Learning: Linking Theory and Practice [eBook]. Jossey-Bass. 

Knowles, M. S. (1992). Applying principles of adult learning in conference presentations. Adult Learning, 4(1), 11-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/104515959200400105

Tay, M. X. Y., & Tay, S. E. R. (2021). Scenario-Based Student-generated Questions for Students to Develop and Attempt for Authentic Assessments [Workshop]. In International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 27th October 2021. 

Fostering Higher Order Learning in a Core Curriculum Module at Singapore Polytechnic

Kin Guan WEE1, Stephen En Rong TAY2

1School of Mathematics and Science, Singapore Polytechnic
2Department of the Built Environment, College of Design and Engineering (CDE), NUS 

wee_kin_guan@sp.edu.sg; stephen.tay@nus.edu.sg

Wee. K. G., & Tay, S. E. R. (2024). Fostering higher order learning in a core curriculum module at Singapore Polytechnic [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-kgwee-sertay/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities 

KEYWORDS

Service-learning, general education, communities, volunteering, social services 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation

 

BACKGROUND 

Singapore Polytechnic (SP) adopted interdisciplinary education through the SP Common Core Curriculum (CCC) in 2021 (SP Common Core Curriculum, n.d.). Within the SP CCC, the Data Fluency (DF) module aims to equip students with skills to employ data-handling processes. The assessments require students to demonstrate competency to use data to examine one aspect of a UN SDG (United Nations Sustainable Development Goals)1 and generate insights to support a theoretical solution to a UN SDG.  

 

The motivation to use scenario-based student-generated questions and answers (sb-SGQA) arose from the lack of understanding and application of the module content by some students even after Bigg’s Constructive Alignment (Biggs, 1996) and Michaelsen’s Team-based Learning (TBL) (Michaelsen & Sweet, 2008) framework were employed for DF in the previous academic years, evidenced by the low assessment scores in the submitted assignment CA2.  

 

The sb-SGQA pedagogy builds upon student-generated questions (SGQ) (Rosenshine et al., 1996), which leads to active engagement of higher domains in Bloom’s taxonomy (Bates et al., 2014). The positive outcomes of the sb-SGQA implementation in other university courses (Du & Tay, 2022; Tay & Liu, 2023) provided confidence for its implementation for DF in SP. 

Hence, our research questions are: 

  1. How does sb-SGQA help with students’ learning, as measured by the scores and the students’ artefacts in CA2?
  2. How do students perceive the implementation of sb-SGQA in CA2, as measured by a post-module survey questionnaire? 

 

METHODOLOGY 

In Academic Year 2024/25 Semester 1, the sb-SGQA (termed as Data Q&A) was implemented at the middle of the module. Students are tasked to collect data from the community and develop a dashboard in a team. Subsequently, findings are summarised in five questions and answers. A post-module survey was administered at the end of the term. After data cleaning, a sample size of 475 CA2 submissions and 16 survey responses were obtained. The study was approved by SP’s Institutional Review Board. 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

1. Students’ mark distribution 

A histogram of students’ CA2 mark distribution (n = 475) is illustrated in Figure 1. The distribution is slightly left-skewed, which signifies a higher mean than median mark. While a comparison with the control group was not possible due to changes in the assessment modes, an analysis of students’ artefacts revealed an improvement in the quality of assignments. 

Figure 1. Histogram of students’ CA2 mark distribution (n = 475)

 

2. Survey result 

Students perceived the implementation of sb-SGQA in the module as helpful and constructive, as evident in the positive responses (“Agree” and “Strongly Agree” options) to Questions (1), (2), and (3) (refer to Table 1). In addition, the students agreed that the skills learnt in the sb-SGQA process are transferrable for their future, as shown in Questions (4) and (5). Qualitative feedback will be discussed during the conference due to the abstract word limit. 

Table 1
Sb-SGQA survey result (n = 16, bracketed numbers indicate the percentage across the row)

 

3. Students’ artefacts 

Based on the dashboard (Figure 2), it was noted that the students were able to address questions and develop answers that incorporate thinking skills of varying orders (level 1 in Q1, level 2 in Q2 and Q3, and level 3 in Q4 and Q5 in Figure 3). Specifically, students demonstrated how the skills taught in DF were able to provide them insights into the community’s use of energy and water.

Figure 2. Student team’s Dashboard

 

Figure 3. Student team’s Data Q&A

 

CONCLUSION AND SIGNIFICANCE 

The sb-SGQA was successfully implemented in the DF module, which is part of the SP CCC. Though a comparison with a control cohort that has the same assessments was not possible, initial results were positive, indicating increased student engagement and learning in interdisciplinary subjects. Students appreciate the approach’s utility in their learning and professional development. The lack of hardware and software costs greatly aided with implementing sb-SGQA. The authors hope that this collaboration between IHLs could support and motivate similar efforts in the future. 

 

ENDNOTE

  1. The UN SDGs are 17 global goals established in 2015 to address challenges such as poverty, inequality, and climate change. Further details about the goals can be found on the official website: https://sdgs.un.org/. 

 

REFERENCES

Bates, S. P., Galloway, R. K., Riise, J., & Homer, D. (2014). Assessing the quality of a student-generated question repository. Physical Review Special Topics – Physics Education Research, 10(2), 020105. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.020105  

Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871 

Du, H., & Tay, E. R. S. (2022). Using scenario-based student-generated questions to improve the learning of engineering mechanics: A case study in civil engineering. In Higher Education Campus Conference (HECC) 2022, 7-8 December, National University of Singapore 

Michaelsen, L. K., & Sweet, M. (2008). The essential elements of team‐based learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2008(116), 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.330  

Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1  

Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181–221. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066002181  

SP Common Core Curriculum. (n.d.). Retrieved 3 July 2024, from https://www.sp.edu.sg/sp/education/common-core-curriculum/about-the-ccc 

Tay, E. R. S., & Liu, M. H. (2023, 7 December 2023). Exploratory implementation of scenario-based student-generated questions for students from the humanities and sciences in a scientific inquiry course. In Higher Education Campus Conference (HECC) 2023, Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecc2023proceedings/exploratory-implementation-of-scenario-based-student-generated-questions-for-students-from-the-humanities-and-sciences-in-a-scientific-inquiry-course/ 

Viewing Message: 1 of 1.
Warning

Blog.nus accounts will move to SSO login, tentatively before the start of AY24/25 Sem 2. Once implemented, only current NUS staff and students will be able to log in to Blog.nus. Public blogs remain readable to non-logged in users. (More information.)