Paper Presentations

Community Engagement in Higher Music Education

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , ,

Xavier TAN, HO Chee Kong, CHAN Tze Law, and NG Wei Jie, Benedict* 

Career Orientation and Community Engagement, YST Conservatory of Music (YSTCOM)

* ngwjben@nus.edu.sg

Tan, X., Ho, C. K., Chan, T. L., & Ng, B. (2024). Community engagement in higher music education [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-tanx-et-al/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities 

KEYWORDS

Community Engagement, Music, Interdisciplinary Learning 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation

 

INTRODUCTION 

In the National Arts Council’s SG Arts Plan 2.0 (2023-2027), a key strategic thrust lies in creating strong community bonds through the arts (National Arts Council, 2023). While it is well-noted that music has the power to build and foster wellness within communities (Rodwin et al., 2023, Paolantonio, 2023), it is notable that higher music education institutes are also harnessing their substantial influence to promote artistic citizenship and engaging with the community (Tregear, et al. 2016, Turino, 2016, Gaunt et al., 2020). 

 

As one of the Yong Siew Toh Conservatory of Music (YSTCOM)’s curricular ethos includes community engagement, this paper seeks to share the pedagogical approaches that scaffold the learning of social responsibility among students as well as opportunities for community engagement through higher music education, particularly within the context of the Bachelor of Music (BMus) in Music & Society, and Music Collaboration & Production (MS/MCP) programmes.  

 

MS/MCP CURRICULUM 

Introduced in 2018, the BMus in MS/MCP is an innovative programme designed to enable aspiring artists to ‘realise their leadership potential in a range of different emerging contexts’ (Yong Siew Toh Conservatory of Music, n.d.). In these majors, higher music education is redefined from one that focuses on discrete musical skills to emphasising the practical application of music, aiming to achieve significant societal impact. This necessitated a change in pedagogy to focus on the impact of musical practices within its surrounding context.  

 

Firstly, the curriculum incorporates seminar-style learning, introducing various literature and encouraging students to think critically about issues in music and society. Space is also created for collaborative learning, where students work on projects together to use music to explore societal issues. These provide the academic framing for them to have a stronger concept on the impact of their projects on the community. 

 

Alongside other courses offered at the conservatory such as MUA2163 “Leading and Guiding through Music”, which develops facilitation skills for community engagement projects, the curriculum prepares students both conceptually and technically to implement their individual projects successfully. These self-directed projects give students hands-on practice in developing projects that are centered around societal impact.  The focus on self-directed projects encourages to students take ownership over their projects, fostering social responsibility in them. 

 

Such projects include Tan Wei Yang’s (MCP 2025) 3rd Year Project ‘Strategies for Creative Placemaking Efforts in Singapore: Case Study of Joo Chiat’, which produced an art and music jam session in Joo Chiat, highlighting the effectiveness of music in supporting placemaking efforts through engaging the community. Benjamin Harris’ (MS 2023) capstone project ‘Phenomenologies of Transient Migrant Music-Making in Singapore’ also captured the community-building experiences through music among transient migrant workers. 

 

Inculcating social responsibility among musicians is an ongoing process and the curricular aims of the conservatory play a significant role in shifting mindsets towards community-centric musical practices in the industry through programmes such as the BMus in MS and MCP. Beyond this, musicians also further hone their leadership potential in driving change in society through the Master of Music Leadership (MMusL) programme.  

 

While relatively new, the MMusL programme has demonstrated its impact on the wider music ecosystem with its community-centric focus. Joseph Teo’s (MMusL 2024) capstone project, the ASEAN Tuba and Euphonium Conference brought together the community of practitioners around the region for a session of learning. Additionally, to provide opportunities for Chinese music enthusiasts to stay engaged with their musical interests beyond their formal education, Jonathan Ngeow (MMusL 2024) set up the MoJo orchestra as part of his capstone project. 

 

Amongst the faculty, these new pedagogical structures are strengthened through continuous professional development. This included a staff exchange opportunity with Princess Galyani Vadhana Institute of Music to observe community engagement projects, supported by Centre for Development of Teaching and Learning Teaching Enhancement Grant in 2023. We are also expanding the possibilities to create impact through music and networks through interdisciplinary collaboration with other faculties and partners. 

 

REFERENCES

Elliott, D. J., Silverman, M., & Bowman, W. D. (2016). Artistic citizenship: Artistry, social responsibility, and ethical praxis. Oxford University Press. 

Gaunt, H., Duffy, C., Coric, A., González Delgado, I. R., Messas, L., Pryimenko, O., & Sveidahl, H. (2021). Musicians as “makers in society”: A conceptual foundation for contemporary professional higher music education. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 713648. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.713648 

National Arts Council. (2023-2027). Our SG Arts Plan 2.0 (2023-2027). https://www.nac.gov.sg/docs/default-source/our-sg-arts-plan-(2023—2027)/our-sg-arts-plan-2023—2027—executive-summary.pdf 

Paolantonio, P., Cavalli, S., Biasutti, M., Eiholzer, H., & Williamon, A. (2023). Building community through higher music education: A training program for facilitating musical engagement among older adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1102446. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1102446 

Rodwin, A. H., Shimizu, R., Travis, R., James, K. J., Banya, M., & Munson, M. R. (2023). A systematic review of music-based interventions to improve treatment engagement and mental health outcomes for adolescents and young adults. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 40(4), 537-566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-022-00893-x 

Tregear, P., Johansen, G., Jørgensen, H., Sloboda, J., Tulve, H., & Wistreich, R. (2016). Conservatoires in society: Institutional challenges and possibilities for change. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 15(3–4), 276-292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022216647379 

Turino, T. (2016). Music, social change, and alternative forms of citizenship. In D. J. Elliott, M. Silverman, & W. Bowman (Eds.), Artistic citizenship: Artistry, social responsibility, and ethical praxis (pp. 297–311). Oxford University Press. 

Yong Siew Toh Conservatory of Music. (n.d.). Majors. National University of Singapore. Retrieved July 3, 2024, from https://www.ystmusic.nus.edu.sg/majors-msmcp/s 

Engaging Persons with Disabilities Through Systems Engineering Projects

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , , ,

Aaron Eng Seng CHIA 

Department of Industrial Systems Engineering and Management, 
College of Design and Engineering (CDE) 

aaron_chia@nus.edu.sg  

Chia, A. E. S. (2024). Engaging persons with disabilities through systems engineering projects [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-aeschia/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities 

KEYWORDS

Engaging communities, systems engineering projects, person with disabilities, social responsibility 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation

 

INTRODUCTION 

Universities have social responsibilities manifested as community engagement, community outreach programmes, civic engagement, and public engagement (Esfijani et al., 2012). Since Generation Z placed greater emphasis on their role in the world and considered it part of their social responsibility to improve it (Ernst & Young, 2023), universities can play a greater role in this. However, in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, there are not many intervention programmes to enhance social responsibility (specifically engaging communities). One example is the ENACT (engage, navigate, anticipate, conduct, and take action) programme by Hwang et al. (2023).  

 

In a systems engineering course taught, students design and build products through a system development life cycle as shown in Figure 1.  In each stage, there is a need to engage relevant stakeholders. 

 

This study aims to study the impact of engaging real stakeholders (communities) for engineering projects on students’ learning and thereby also foster social responsibility. The projects of past students (first group) usually did not engage communities. Students carried out literature reviews and assumed themselves to be the stakeholders of the system. Examples of such products include multifunctional baby bottles, safe chopping boards etc. In the second group of students, they were required to engage persons with disabilities (PwD) to design systems to, for example, enable persons living with dementia (PLD) to travel independently, or help the elderly with hearing impairments to work in cafes.  

Figure 1. System Development Lifecycle (Source: Eby (2017)

 

METHODOLOGY 

After completion of each group project, students were interviewed on the challenges of the project and possible improvements. A semi-structured interview was employed based on its suitability (Ruslin et al, 2022). One of the students in the group was tasked to record and transcribe the interview for inclusion in their report. As an instructor, the author also observed how well the project was carried out. 

 

FINDINGS 

The first group of students found that it was challenging to gather actual requirements since they might not be the users of the products. The requirements were obtained from third parties such as the Internet or themselves. One suggested improvement was to have projects which involved real stakeholders. It was observed by the instructor that students often missed out the needs of the other stakeholders in the system. For example, the requirements of a baby bottle should not focus just on the baby but also the needs of the parents.  

 

In the second group, some students found difficulty in having direct access to PwDs. While SG Enable supports such projects, they were reluctant to give direct access to some types of PwDs (with good reasons). They often served as intermediaries instead. Sometimes the students resorted to finding such stakeholders from their circle of friends. Students also faced difficulties in trying to communicate with some PwDs, for example, communicating with the deaf. Moreover, the challenges faced by the PwDs might not be articulated clearly as their perceptions of their environments were often different. The students also found that the product did not exist in isolation with the user— often other stakeholders need to be consulted—they could provide additional insights to the design of the product. The instructor found that the students produced better outcomes and learnings via such engagements.  

 

CONCLUSIONS 

The systems engineering projects with PwDs help students to engage communities. They were able to elicit real needs and foster social responsibility to become better citizens and engineers. They learnt the challenges of engaging certain types of stakeholders and found it meaningful that their projects could benefit such communities. However, it requires more effort on the instructor’s part to find such projects, spend time with external organisations, and help students to engage the communities. 

 

REFERENCES

Ali, M., Mustapha, I., Osman, S., & Hassan, U. (2021). University Social Responsibility: A review of conceptual evolution and its thematic analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 286, 124931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124931 

Eby, K. (2017, June 27) The ultimate guide to understanding and using a system development life cycle, Retrieved from: https://www.smartsheet.com/system-development-life-cycle-guide 

Ernst & Young LLP (2023) How can understanding the influence of Gen Z today empower your tomorrow? Retrieved from https://www.ey.com/en_us/consulting/2023-gen-z-study 

Esfijani, A., Hussain, F.K., Chang, E. (2012). An approach to university social responsibility ontology development through text analyses, International Conference on Human System Interaction. pp. 1e7. https://doi.org/10.1109/HSI.2012.10 

Hwang, Y., Ko, Y., Shim, S. S., Ok, S., Lee, H. (2023), International Journal of STEM Education (2023) 10:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00402-1 

Ruslin, R., Mashuri, S., Sarib, M., Alhabsyi, F. and Syam, H. (2022) Semi-structured Interview: A Methodological Reflection on the Development of a Qualitative Research Instrument, Educational Studies, Vol. 12. 22-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.9790/7388-1201052229. 

Yin, R. K. (2011). Applications of case study research. Sage. 

Abolishing 11:59PM Deadlines or: How Students Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Assignments

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , , ,

Prasanna Karthik Vairam

Department of Computer Science, School of Computing, NUS

prasanna@comp.nus.edu.sg

Vairam, P. K. (2024). Abolishing 11:59PM deadlines or: How students learned to stop worrying and love the assignments [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-pkvairam/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Wellbeing

KEYWORDS

Assignment deadlines, mental health, github classrooms, version control

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

University courses typically have many assignments, and the deadlines are predominantly set at a fixed time (e.g., 11:59 PM on Friday). While we know that students despise deadlines through anecdotal evidence, contemporary research also agrees (Capelle, 2023). Fixed deadlines result in anxiety, stress, and induce last-minute mishaps (e.g., accidental deletion). Inability to perform well in an assignment can result in frustration and shame, negatively affecting the student’s learning journey through the rest of the course. Some university teachers have experimented with suggested deadlines, wherein, students are allowed to submit late for a penalty. However, such solutions do little to alleviate the problems, considering that students often work last-minute and submit sub-par works (Castro, 2022). Therefore, there is a need for a solution that promotes student wellness without compromising on submission quality.

 

In this paper, we describe a continuous submission methodology that eliminates the need for a fixed Assignment deadline in a computer programming course, promoting student wellness without compromising learning outcomes.

 

We achieve this through a combination of i) Github Classroom, a cloud-based education technology platform from Microsoft, ii) code templates, a technique that we propose to transform assignments into fill-in puzzles, and iii) Conferring, a known pedagogical technique. Github classroom uses git to maintain versions of the files in the project. This means that students can incrementally save (or commit) their work to the platform. Every save is a submission. Next, to make the process of solving assignments interesting and learning outcome-focused, we provide code templates, which is a pre-written code given by the instructor, with blanks that the student is required to fill. Pre-written code is the boring piece of code that must be written for the program to run, while it does not contribute to the learning outcome. Last, the instructor confers with students to monitor their progress continuously. The saves (or commits) on Github classroom allows the instructor to identify individual students progress over time, providing an opportunity to intervene (and confer) if necessary. Conferring can be done either face-to-face or through Github Issues. Github Issues is a feature typically used to file software bugs, but they come in handy as a non-intrusive and less-intimidating way of reminding students that they are falling behind on the assignment.

 

The process of coding and submitting assignments could be as follows:

  1. Day 0: Students accept the assignment through the Github classroom link created by the instructor.
  2. Day 1: Download the code template (i.e., the starter code) from Github classroom.
  3. Day 1: Fill in the missing piece of code. For instance, the code corresponding to Q1 of Assignment.
  4. Day 3: After finishing Q1, perform a git commit (save and submit).
  5. Day 5: Instructor looks at student progress across class and identifies those falling behind. Instructor files Github Issues for these students. This feedback can either be a gentle reminder or could be little hints to guide them in the correct direction.
  6. Day 7: Student continues to code Q2 and performs git commit.
  7. Eventually, the student finishes Q3 and Q4 of student, each with a different git commit.
  8. The instructor does not need to check the deadline since each git commit comes with a timestamp.
  9. No penalties are given as long as the commits are within an acceptable timeline.

The effectiveness of the method can be observed by looking at the commit (or save) distribution over time and the number of commits made by the students (not adding the graph due to pending IRB clearance).

CONCLUSION

The proposed method removes the anxiety that students typically associate with assignments, allowing them to focus on the learning outcomes instead. The method is both a continuous submission and continuous evaluation/monitoring system. Some of the other benefits include including the prevention of accidental deletion, since all data is stored in cloud every time the students execute the git commit. Although we demonstrate our method in the context of a programming course, it can be extended to courses in other domains.

REFERENCES

Capelle, J. D., Senker, K., Fries, S., & Grund, A. (2023). Deadlines make you productive, but what do they do to your motivation? Trajectories in quantity and quality of motivation and study activities among university students as exams approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1224533. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1224533

Castro, F. E. V., Leinonen, J., & Hellas, A. (2022), Experiences with and lessons learned on deadlines and submission behavior, Proceedings of the 22nd Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research, https://doi.org/10.1145/3564721.3564728

From Outreach to Empowerment: Cultivating University-driven Community Engagement

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , , , ,

Julius BAUTISTA

NUS College

*bautista@nus.edu.sg

 

Bautista, J. (2024). From outreach to empowerment: Cultivating university-driven community engagement [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-jbautista/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities

 

KEYWORDS

Service-learning, community engagement, experiential learning, overseas classroom, Southeast Asia

 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

 

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

In the context of tertiary education, Community Engagement (CE) is defined as an inclusive approach to university teaching, research, and scholarship that prioritises the sharing of knowledge, wisdom, and resources with society at large. There are three research areas that constitute the pedagogical foundations of CE. These are (1) Service-learning (Sandaran, 2019), (2) Asset-based community development (ABCD) (Nelson et. al., 2011), and (3) Social impact analysis (Khan, 2020) (see Figure 1). Enhancing capacity in these three research areas will enable educators to build on the principle that working collaboratively with stakeholders outside the academe is the best way for us to “strengthen how we learn, deepen what we know, and have more impact on issues that matter.”

HECS2024-a57-Fig1

Figure 1. The pedagogical foundations of Community Engagement (CE).

 

Community-engaged universities are crucial to a robust economy and society because they cultivate valuable intellectual and physical resources that contribute to addressing national issues and problems. It is for this reason that the principle of CE has been identified by the Singaporean government as a key Student Development Experience. As such, community-aligned educational programs are widely implemented in various forms across the educational landscape in Singapore (NLB, 2014). At the secondary school level, CE is identified as part of students’ holistic educational development, particularly through the Values in Action (VIA) project (Ang, 2018). Similarly, most local Institutes of Higher Learning (IHL) are requiring forms of CE as a key graduation component. At NUS, a diversity of CE platforms are offered, such as the NUS College’s capstone Impact Experience (IEx) Project, or through other modules mapped on to the Communities and Engagement pillar of the NUS General Education Curriculum.


While CE is widely implemented and practiced, however, there are limited opportunities to develop such programs beyond the requirements of the school curriculum. There are a few reasons for this. Firstly, the research literature, particularly in examining qualitative student and community partner experiences, is sparse and underdeveloped (Salam, et. al.. 2019; Choi et. al., 2023). There are few studies conducted on thinking about CE as comprised of the aforementioned three research areas in an integrated and interdisciplinary way, particularly in the Asia Pacific. Secondly, networking opportunities specific to CE in tertiary education are underutilised, in spite of the presence of established programs within most IHLs in the region. The most prominent pedagogy-inclined conferences in Singapore, for example the Redefining Pedagogy International Conference at the National Institute of Education, tend to be broadly conceived, thus precluding a sustained and in-depth discussion on how CE can be cultivated beyond curricular requirements. Thirdly, and most crucially, a majority of the CE platforms in institutes of higher learning (IHLs) are typically offered for a duration of one or two semesters, thereby limiting its focus to providing one-way community ‘outreach’ in the short term.


In view of these limitations, I will discuss the challenges we face in developing a robust CE infrastructure— that is, the intellectual resources, institutional policies, practices, equipment, and buildings that contribute to the facilitation of CE. Using case studies and feedback from the NUS College Impact Experience Program, I argue that overcoming these challenges will require a conceptual and operational transition from a short term “outreach” delivery framework (i.e., the academe shares expertise and practices with the public) to a reciprocal “empowerment” partnership framework (i.e., the university and its community partners co-produce solutions to societal issues in a way that adds value to existing community endeavours).

REFERENCES

Ang, J. (2018, September 18). Values in Action Program: Making lasting impact on students. The Straits Times.  https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/values-in-action-programme-making-lasting-impact-on-students-ministry-of  Accessed 19 June 2024.

Carnegie Foundation Classification of Institutions of Higher Learning (2024). The Elective Classification for Community Engagement. https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/elective-classifications/community-engagement/ Accessed 19 June 2024.

Choi, Y., Han, J. & Kim, H. (2023). “Exploring key service-learning experiences that promote students’ learning in higher education.”  Asia Pacific Education Review.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09833-5

Khan, I. (2020). “Critiquing social impact assessments: Ornamentation or reality in the Bangladeshi electricity infrastructure sector?” Energy Research and Social Science (60).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.101339

Nelson B., Campbell J., & Emanuel J. (2011). Development of a method for asset-based working. NHS North West.

Salam, M., Iskandar, D. N. A., Ibrahim, D. H. A., & Farooq, M. S. (2019). “Service learning in higher education: A systematic literature review” Asia Pacific Education Review, 20(4), 573–593.  https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s12564- 019- 09580-6;

Sandaran, S. (2012). Service Learning: Transforming Students, Communities and Universities. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 66(7), 380-390.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.281

Using Generative AI in Design Thinking Courses: Towards Educators’ Guidelines

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , , ,

Kate Sangwon LEE1,* and Jung-Joo LEE2

1Engineering Design and Innovation Centre, College of Design and Engineering (CDE)
2Division of Industrial Design, CDE

*katelee@nus.edu.sg

 

Lee, K. S. W., & Lee, J. J. (2024). Using generative AI in design thinking courses: Towards educators’ guidelines [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-kswlee-jjlee/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Generative AI

KEYWORDS

Generative AI, Design-thinking, UIUX course, students assignment

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

 

INTRODUCTION

Generative AI (GenAI) applications have been extensively used in students’ assignments in design thinking courses (Hsiao & Tang, 2024) to express ideas and complete tasks (Chung et al., 2024), as shown in Figure 1. However, there are few clear guidelines about their usage due to GenAI’s novelty (Sun et al., 2024; Tholander & Jonsson, 2023; Wadinambiarachchi et al., 2024). This lack of guidance may confuse students and instructors regarding assignment guidelines and evaluation (Chung et al., 2024; Wadinambiarachchi et al., 2024). Therefore, this paper shares findings from observations on the current usage of GenAI by students in three design thinking courses at the College of Design and Engineering (CDE) at NUS during 2023-2024, aiming to identify challenges and opportunities. Finally, this paper proposes guidelines outlining students’ usage of GenAI at each stage of the design thinking process.

HECS2024-a39-Fig1Figure 1. Observed GenAI usages on the design thinking process.

METHOD

The three courses of CDE, including CDE3301R “Ideas to Proof-of-Concept”, CDE4301A “Ideas to Start-up”, and CDE5311 “Essential Skills in UI/UX Design”, were observed by instructors in 2023-2024, and students’ assignments served as supplementary material. All three courses were design thinking-based, and students conducted relevant methods in each phase as their projects progressed. They used GenAI in this process, and the lecturer and teaching assistant analysed the submitted assignments in terms of the GenAI usage’s relevance and effectiveness.

FINDINGS

Inspired and restricted at the same time by conceptual images (Discover phase)

  • In CDE3301R, students used the GenAI, Midjourney, to create conceptual images (Figure 2) by inputting project keywords as prompts to get inspiration for prototypes. Though the images helped specify initial ideas, they sometimes restricted students’ imagination boundaries.

HECS2024-a39-Fig2

Figure 2. An example of a GenAI-generated conceptual image.

Ambiguity in AI-generated images for storyboard (Define phase)

  • Students used GenAI to create storyboards in CDE5311 (Figure 3). However, many of the storyboards were abstract and ambiguous, which is not aligned with the method’s purpose. A storyboard as a UX method should convey an accurate environment or facial expressions, which are desired to be shown to describe the exact situations and users’ pain points, such as in a student’s drawing storyboard (Figure 4). Current GenAI applications are not capable enough of generating accurate images. Thus, using GenAI to create a storyboard may not be recommendable.

HECS2024-a39-Fig3

Figure 3. An example of a GenAI-generated storyboard.

 

HECS2024-a39-Fig4

Figure 3. An example of a storyboard drawn by a student.

 

Quality gap in ideation and prototyping (Develop phase)

  • In CDE4301A, students used GenAI for UI ideation in the early stage of UI prototyping as an inspiration tool (Figure 5). When compared to the UI created by the student (Figure 6), he reflected, “It is hard to generate specific UI details with acceptable quality…It is more suitable for ideation or early prototyping.”

HECS2024-a39-Fig5-6

Figure 5. An example of UI created by GenAI (Left),
Figure 6. An example of UI created by a student (Right).

 

Generic draft required refinement (Deliver phase)

  • In CDE5311, students used ChatGPT to generate a user test protocol. GenAI effectively created a draft, but it lacked specificity about the project context; thus, the experienced instructor needed help refining it.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

In the divergent phases (Discover and Develop), GenAI can be used as a supporting tool to get inspiration (Tholander & Jonsson, 2023). However, in the convergent phases (Define and Deliver), GenAI’s ambiguity did not effectively convey the exact ideas needed due to its lack of specificity and accuracy, which are attributes required in those phases (Tholander & Jonsson, 2023). Furthermore, depending on the students’ ability in each phase, the effectiveness of GenAI can differ (Cai et al., 2023). For example, if a student is a design novice, they would not have enough ability to discern the most effective and relevant outcomes from GenAI. Educators must selectively recommend using GenAI regarding students’ expertise and experience in each phase. Our proposal includes a few suggestions for the Usage of GenAI in the design thinking courses as below:

  • In the divergent phases (Discover and Develop), instructors should advise students to use various prompts to generate more diverse outcomes that can support ideation processes.
  • In the convergent phases (Define and Deliver), students can use GenAI to create initial drafts, but experienced instructors should assist in refining them to increase specificity reflecting project context.

REFERENCES

Cai, A., Rick, S. R., Heyman, J. L., Zhang, Y., Filipowicz, A., Hong, M., Klenk, M., & Malone, T. (2023). DesignAID: Using Generative AI and Semantic Diversity for Design Inspiration Proceedings of The ACM Collective Intelligence Conference. https://doi.org/10.1145/3582269.3615596

Chung, A., He, Y. C., Lin, L. F., & Liang, Y. W. (2024). Importance of Different AI-Generated Journey Map Modules from Industrial Design Students’ Perspectives. 2024 IEEE 7th Eurasian Conference on Educational Innovation (ECEI).

Hsiao, H. L., & Tang, H. H. (2024). A Study on the Application of Generative AI Tools in Assisting the User Experience Design Process. In International Conference on Human- Computer Interaction (pp. 175-189). Springer Nature Switzerland.

Sun, Y., Jang, E., Ma, F., & Wang, T. (2024). Generative AI in the Wild: Prospects, Challenges, and Strategies. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-16).

Tholander, J., & Jonsson, M. (2023). Design Ideation with AI – Sketching, Thinking and Talking with Generative Machine Learning Models. Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. https://doi.org/10.1145/3563657.3596014

Wadinambiarachchi, S., Kelly, R. M., Pareek, S., Zhou, Q., & Velloso, E. (2024). The Effects of Generative AI on Design Fixation and Divergent Thinking. Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.

Exploring The Potential Of Mentorship Programmes In Supporting Students’ Wellbeing

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , ,

Hui Ting CHNG1, * and Golda Zhizhen WANG2

1Department of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Science, NUS
2Department of Pharmacy, Alexandra Hospital, Singapore

*phacht@nus.edu.sg

Chng, H. T., & Wang, G. Z. (2024). Exploring the potential of mentorship programmes in supporting students’ wellbeing [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-chng-wang/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Wellbeing

KEYWORDS

Mentorship, wellbeing

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

INTRODUCTION

Mentorship plays an important role in the academic and professional development of individuals across various fields. Effective mentorship is not only beneficial for enhancing learning outcomes and career advancement, but could potentially impact the wellbeing of mentees. Burnout, defined by the World Health Organization as a syndrome resulting from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed, is characterised by: (1) Feelings of energy depletion or exhaustion, (2) Increased mental distance from one’s job, or feelings of negativism or cynicism related to one’s job, and (3) Reduced professional efficacy. Health professions students are particularly susceptible to burnout due to intense academic pressures, long hours, and emotional demands (Dyrbye et al., 2006; Hirsch et al., 2009; Ishak et al., 2013). Effective mentorship can mitigate burnout in various ways. Mentors can provide a social support system (Haase, 2020), role-model (Hagemann et al., 2020) and foster resilience among mentees, a quality that protects against burnout (Tan et al., 2022). Mentors can also provide advice on work-life balance (Raub et al., 2015).

 

Since 2021, an alumni mentorship programme (INSPIRxE) for pharmacy and pharmaceutical science undergraduates in the National University of Singapore (NUS) was launched where alumni mentors mentored students for nine months-long in a group format. The aim of the programme is for mentees to enhance their skills and knowledge, seek feedback for personal and professional development, and gain insights about their passion and interests. While it was not formally briefed to mentors and mentees that the mentorship programme could also support mentees’ wellbeing, topics on managing stress, conflicts, and work-life balance were included in the mentor/mentee guidebook as suggested discussion topics.

 

This presentation explores the potential of mentorship programmes in supporting students’ wellbeing. Specifically, we present findings from NUS Academic Year (AY) 2022/23 INSPIRxE, evaluating if the topic of burnout was discussed amongst mentors and mentees.

METHODS

In AY2022/23, 38 mentees were mentored by 22 alumni mentors in 11 groups. Mentors and mentees were invited to participate in a survey to evaluate the impact of INSPIRxE on mentee’s professional development in terms of knowledge, skills and attitude. A subset of five questions related to burnout was included in the survey to assess if mentees and mentors discussed this topic during their interactions.

RESULTS

Thirty-six (95%) mentees and 16 (73%) mentors responded to the survey. After being presented with the WHO definition of burnout, 63.9% of the mentees agreed that they were experiencing burnout in their studies. 47.2% felt that their mentors taught them strategies to prevent burnout. This was comparable to 68.8% of mentors who responded that they taught their mentees strategies to prevent burnout. 52.9% of mentees felt that they were inclined to approach their mentors in times of difficulty. This was consistent with 43.8% of mentors who agreed that their mentees approached them in times of difficulty.

CONCLUSION

The extent of burnout reported by the mentees was alarming. While providing support on wellbeing was never specified in the aims of the mentorship programme, it is heartening to note that mentees sought mentors’ support during challenging times, and mentors provided tips on ways to prevent burnout. In the context of INSPIRxE, the alumni mentors are working adults with rich work and life experiences. These mentors bring in a different dimension of advice which complements that of academic mentors. We posit that students may feel less inhibited to confide with the alumni mentors especially if the concerns are studies related. They may also trust the advice of the alumni mentors given their wealth of experience in the “real-world”. Our findings suggest that mentorship programmes hold a great potential in supporting students’ wellbeing.

REFERENCES

Dyrbye, L. N., Thomas, M. R., & Shanafelt, T. D. (2006). Systematic review of depression, anxiety, and other indicators of psychological distress among U.S. and Canadian medical students. Acad Med, 81(4), 354-373. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200604000-00009

Haase, K. K. (2020). Addressing burnout in clinical pharmacy: What can we learn from other health care disciplines? JACCP: JOURNAL OF THE American College of Clinical Pharmacy, 3(3), 645-654. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.1189

Hagemann, T. M., Reed, B. N., Bradley, B. A., Clements, J. N., Cohen, L. J., Coon, S. A., Derington, C. G., DiScala, S. L., El-Ibiary, S., Lee, K. C., May, A., Oh, S., Phillips, J. A., & Rogers, K. M. (2020). Burnout among clinical pharmacists: Causes, interventions, and a call to action. JACCP: Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy, 3(4), 832-842. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.1256

Hirsch, J. D., Do, A. H., Hollenbach, K. A., Manoguerra, A. S., & Adler, D. S. (2009). Students’ health-related quality of life across the preclinical pharmacy curriculum. Am J Pharm Educ, 73(8), 147. https://doi.org/10.5688/aj7308147

Ishak, W., Nikravesh, R., Lederer, S., Perry, R., Ogunyemi, D., & Bernstein, C. (2013). Burnout in medical students: a systematic review. Clin Teach, 10(4), 242-245. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.12014

Raub, J. N., Thurston, T. M., Fiorvento, A. D., Mynatt, R. P., & Wilson, S. S. (2015). Implementation and outcomes of a pharmacy residency mentorship programme. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 72(11_Supplement_1), S1-S5. https://doi.org/10.2146/ajhp140884

Tan, Y. Z., Chong, J. J., Chew, L. S. T., Tan, K. H., & Wang, A. (2022). Burnout and resilience among pharmacists: A Singapore study. JACCP: Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy, 5(1), 75-84. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.1551

Empowering Student Engagement and Community Impact Through Codesign: A Case Study in Health District

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , , , ,

Bina Rai1,*, Brian R. STONE2, and William SIEW3

1Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Design and Engineering (CDE), NUS
2Division of Industrial Design, CDE, NUS
3Spark-a-life, Singapore

*biebr@nus.edu.sg

 

Rai. B., Stone, B. R., & Siew, W. (2024). Empowering student engagement and community impact through co-design: A case study in health district [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-rai-et-al/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities

 

KEYWORDS

Codesign, empathy mapping, community engagement, health district, student empowerment

 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

 

INTRODUCTION

In the realm of design innovation education, the challenge of instilling empathy among engineering students is pervasive. Conventional methods like persona readings or video observations often fall short in equipping students to truly understand and address user needs effectively. This gap not only impedes innovation but also results in prototypes that remain unutilised, failing to serve their intended communities.

PEDAGOGICAL APPROACH

To address these issues, a codesign approach was adopted, augmented by two novel empathy mapping methods: Care Circle (CC), and See and Shoot (SS) (Siew W, et al., 2022; Siew W, et al., 2023). Unlike traditional design processes, codesign involves stakeholders—including those directly impacted by designs—from the outset, fostering joint inquiry and ensuring solutions resonate with real-world needs. Our research questions were:

  1. How does the integration of CC and SS empathy mapping methods in a codesign approach influence engineering students’ understanding and application of inclusive design principles?
  2. Would collaborative experiences with community partners, industry experts, and residents enhance students’ problem-solving skills and innovation in empathic design?

IMPLEMENTATION: CODESIGN WEEK

We organised Codesign Week, which is a design sprint focused on developing transformative technologies for senior communities in a health district precinct. Undergraduate students from the autonomous universities in Singapore collaborated with community partners, industry experts, and senior residents from Queenstown and Whampoa. Guided by the CC and SS empathy mapping methods, interdisciplinary student teams engaged in problem-solving through empathic technology design. Students went on site visits (Figure 1), and engaged in focus group discussions with the community partners and seniors (Figure 2). They were then introduced to insights translation, problem-to-opportunity identification, brainstorming, and validation of solution ideas. The sprint culminated in a pitch and poster presentation by the students for the seniors on the final day.

HECS2024-a14-Fig1

Figure 1. Photographs of students on site visits with community partners at Lion Befrienders, ComSA (Tsao Foundation), and Huawei AI Lab.

 

HECS2024-a14-Fig2

Figure 2. Photographs of students actively engaging with the elderly.

EVIDENCE OF IMPACT

Indirect Measures (Student Perception of Programme)

Based on a 7-point Likert scale, the survey results from Codesign Week 2024 (n=15) revealed a high satisfaction level among participants. The overall experience received a mean rating of 5.73 +/- 1.03, and the programme flow was rated at 5.53 +/- 0.99, demonstrating the event’s well-organised structure. Co-instructors received positive ratings, with a mean of 6.07 +/- 0.88, and community partner engagement was rated similarly high at 6.13 +/- 0.92. Mentors’ support was also positively rated, with a mean score 5.93 +/- 0.96. The venue’s suitability was rated at 5.67 +/- 1.05, showing general satisfaction with the facilities.

 

Indirect Measures (Student Perception of Learning): Pre- and post-programe surveys indicated a notable increase in students’ perceived understanding of inclusive design principles and their confidence in addressing challenges related to the elderly in Singapore. The survey results from Codesign Week 2024 (n=15) revealed that 80% of respondents rated their understanding of design thinking principles at 5 or above, resulting in a mean score of 5.60 +/- 0.99. Similarly, 80% rated their improvement in collaboration skills at 5 or above, with a mean score of 5.93 +/- 1.03. The hands-on activities were valuable for learning about inclusive and empathic design, with 80% rating them at 5 or above and a mean score of 5.40 +/- 1.24. Instructors observed that participants managed challenges effectively, demonstrating resilience and adaptability.

 

Direct Measures (Evidence of Learning): The teams successfully codesigned empathic technology solutions that met community needs, leading to significant recognition. Notably, two teams using CC/SS methods secured second place and runner-up at a national level competition, Tech4City, organised by Huawei. The solutions have been adopted by bGood (https://nusbme.wixsite.com/bgood) for development and deployment into the community.

CONCLUSION

The Codesign Week not only enhanced student learning in empathic design but also catalyzed community impact through innovative solutions. This pedagogical approach yielded academic outputs and garnered community trust and interest, evidenced by invitations to lead further codesign discussions and collaborations. This case study highlights the potential of codesign methodologies to foster meaningful collaborations and innovations that address real-world challenges, offering valuable insights for educators and practitioners seeking to integrate empathy-driven design into educational curricula and community initiatives.

REFERENCES

Siew, W., Rai, B., Stone, B. R., & Ho, D. (2022). Designing for inclusive and engaged communities. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.37074/jalt.2022.5.2.10

Siew, W., Silva, A., & Rai, B. (2023). Using likelihood ratio table and Naïve Bayes classifier method to holistically assess codesign programmes and methods. In Proceedings of the Design Society, 3, 3751–3760. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2023.376

 

AI And Agency: Understanding The Impact of AI on Student Agency

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , ,

Nina L. POWELL

Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS)

nina.powell@nus.edu.sg

Powell, N. L. (2024). AI and agency: Understanding the impact of AI on student agency [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-nlpowell/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Generative AI

KEYWORDS

Agency, generative AI, perspective-driven learning

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

Our increased reliance on automation and operation within a programmable world has consequences for our autonomy and sense of agency as human beings. This has particularly important consequences for the context of higher education and student learning. Agency in student learning is a concept emphasised in the pedagogical literature. Agency refers to students’ ability to take an active role in their learning process by making choices, setting goals, and taking initiative (Stenalt & Lassesen, 2022). Research suggests that when students have a sense of agency, they are more engaged, motivated, and empowered in their learning (Luo et al., 2019). This leads to better academic outcomes, improved critical thinking skills, and increased self-efficacy. When students feel a sense of agency, they are more likely to take ownership of their learning, set meaningful goals, and persist in the face of challenges. This active involvement in the learning process leads to deeper understanding, improved critical thinking skills, and enhanced problem-solving abilities. Encouraging agency in the classroom can be achieved through various strategies such as providing opportunities for student choice, fostering a supportive learning environment, and encouraging reflection. Further, as a mechanism of agency, non-dual thinking is argued to benefit mental health, lead to sustainable progress and goal efficacy, as well as being helpful in navigating uncertainty (Chopra & Castle, 2024). Ultimately, agentic students take control of their respective learning journeys, and develop the confidence to be self-directed in their learning (Gresham, 2019). Generative AI has the potential to impact students’ sense of agency, as perceiving generative AI as having human-like characteristics or a perspective has implications for what we think it means to be human. Our perception of AI can potentially lead to a reduction in our understanding of human agency and what it means to have a human perspective; if we see humans as programmable, this can impact how we learn and reason in the context of higher education.

 

Automation and generative AI deliver fast and convenient solutions to many of our modern problems, yet reliance on automation and generative AI has the potential to reduce our sense of control and efficacy by removing the human being from the equation, and further reducing the uniquely human qualities that we may confuse with what is programmed to look human. Further, our view of human exceptionalism may be compromised by the parallels between human and machine in that we see ourselves as analogous to the determined machine. This challenges our sense of freedom and involvement in decision-making and choice and leads us to an endlessly predictable and programmable person rather than an autonomous and agentic person. This paper presentation will focus on my theoretical and empirical work that speaks to the following questions: when using the machine mind to understand the human mind in education, do students maintain value and belief in autonomy and agency, and as students see potentially less need for human involvement in scholarship, industry, and overall decision-making. do they see themselves as capable agents of change and influence? Are there ways that we can use generative AI in the classroom that offers a clear distinction between what is truly human and agentic or perspective-driven versus programmed and without perspective? I offer some ideas for ways that we can integrate generative AI into our teaching practices that retains and even emphasises the uniquely human qualities of agency and perspective-driven higher-order thinking and scholarship.

 

REFERENCES

 Chopra, D., & Castle, R. D. (2024). Non-duality and mental health. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 10, 100934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.100934

Gresham, J. D. (2019). Self-directed learning: Empowering authentic learner autonomy through self-agency in the secondary school learning environment. California Institute of Integral Studies.

Luo, H., Yang, T., Xue, J., & Zuo, M. (2019). Impact of student agency on learning performance and learning experience in a flipped classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 819-831. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12604

Stenalt, M. H., & Lassesen, B. (2022). Does student agency benefit student learning? A systematic review of higher education research. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(5), 653- 669. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1967874.

 

Does Grading an Assignment Matter for Student Engagement – A Case Study in an Interdisciplinary Course with Science and Humanities

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , , , ,

LIU Mei Hui1 and Stephen En Rong TAY2

1Department of Food Science and Technology, College of Humanities and Sciences, NUS
2Department of the Built Environment, College of Design and Engineering (CDE), NUS

fstlmh@nus.edu.sg; stephen.tay@nus.edu.sg

 

Liu, M. H., & Tay, S. E. R. (2024). Does grading an assignment matter for student engagement: A case study in an interdisciplinary course with science and humanities [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-liu-tay/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities

 

KEYWORDS

Interdisciplinarity, peer learning, student-generated questions, assessment, feedback

 

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

 

INTRODUCTION

The Scientific Inquiry II (SI2) course – HSI2007 “Deconstructing Food” – employed scenario-based student-generated questions and answers (sb-SGQA) previously to encourage interdisciplinary learning (Tay & Liu, 2023). In the activity, students were tasked to develop questions and answers based on the learning objectives that are contextualised to community examples beyond the classroom. This contextualisation to a scenario helps develop authentic assessment (Wiggins, 1990). To further increase student engagement with the sb-SGQA activity, the sb-SGQA activity changed to a graded assignment in AY2023/24 Semester 1. This was motivated by literature that reports how a graded assignment motivates students in their learning, specifically as an extrinsic motivator, in which students are incentivised to work towards a reward (i.e. good grade) (Docan, 2006; Harlen et al., 2002; Schinske & Tanner, 2014). Hence, this study aims to answer the following questions:

  1. Does the graded sb-SGQA improve student performance, evidenced through a comparison of the continual assessment marks between the graded and ungraded cohorts?
  2. What are students’ perceptions of the sb-SGQA approach from both the graded and ungraded cohorts?

METHODOLOGY

The graded sb-SGQA (20% weightage) was adopted in AY2023/24 Semester 1, and results were compared with data from AY2022/23 Semester 2, when the sb-SGQA was not graded. Across both cohorts, two continual assessment (CA) components, a MCQ Quiz (20% weightage) and Individual Essay (20% weightage) were analysed as these two components were present in both cohorts. Numerical data was analysed with JASP, an open-source statistical package (Love et al., 2019).

RESULTS

In Figure 1, students analysed and discussed differences between meals served to students in the East and West differ, and Figure 2 demonstrates how students employed content materials from the online community for a case study. Through these questions, students demonstrated concepts of nutrition, food microbiology (e.g., fermented foods), and health-related information.

HECS2024-a20-Fig1

Figure 1. Example of students’ work analysing meals in other communities

 

HECS2024-a20-Fig2

Figure 2. Student work in question-and-answer generation through engaging the digital community.

Though formal evidence has not been collected, we believe the project is impactful based on several observations. Participants demonstrate increased confidence and curiosity as they develop coding and robotics skills, particularly after successfully completing projects or engaging in hackathons. Exposure to tech fairs broadens their understanding of technology’s potential and encourages further exploration. These activities are designed to spark interest in technology and create a positive learning environment, which we believe is key to fostering long-term engagement in the field.

 

When the CA scores were analysed, a statistically significant difference was observed for the MCQ Quiz but not for the Individual Essay (refer to Table 1). This could be attributed to the open-ended nature of the Individual Essay assessment component, which requires student competencies in articulation of ideas and positioning their views, which may have masked the effect.

Table 1
Score comparisons for MCQ Quiz, Individual Essay, and CA across the graded (n=102) and ungraded (n=184) cohorts

HECS2024-a20-Table1

 

Table 2 represents student feedback on the sb-SGQA approach. Majority of the students in both the graded and ungraded cohorts shared that the sb-SGQA has helped with their learning. Though the activity was challenging, the students enjoyed it and recommended it for future courses. The qualitative feedback (refer to Table 3) revealed how Humanities and Sciences students appreciated how their diverse views could be incorporated through the sb-SGQA (Humanities 1, Humanities 3, Science 3). The sb-SGQA also forces students to reflect deeper on the course materials to develop meaningful questions and answers, thus aiding their learning (Humanities 2, Science 1). The contextualisation of the learning objectives to community examples was appreciated by students (Humanities 4, Science 2). The approach was also utilised by students to integrate topics taught through the entire course, thus allowing students to appreciate the course as a whole (Science 4). The themes were similar in the ungraded cohorts.

 

Table 2
Student feedback from the graded (left) and ungraded (right) cohorts separated by “/”. Responses represented as a percentage, and were obtained from 102 respondents in the graded cohort and 120 respondents in the ungraded cohort. The modes are bolded for highlight

HECS2024-a20-Table2

 

Table 3
Qualitative feedback from Humanities and Science students in the graded cohort

HECS2024-a20-Table3

CONCLUSION AND SIGNIFICANCE

The change to a graded assignment increased students’ performance in the MCQ Quiz segment but not the Individual Essay segment. Student perceptions to the approach were generally positive across both the graded and ungraded cohorts. The results suggest that students’ perceived value of a learning activity may not be solely dependent on whether the learning activity is graded or not. The significance of this study lies in how the use of sb-SGQA could aid with community engagement in the creation of case studies without software and hardware costs involved.

REFERENCES

Docan, T. N. (2006). Positive and negative incentives in the classroom: An analysis of grading systems and student motivation. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6, 21-40. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/1668/1666

Harlen, W., Crick, R. D., Broadfoot, P., Daugherty, R., Gardner, J., James, M., & Stobart, G. (2002). A systematic review of the impact of summative assessment and tests on students’ motivation for learning. https://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/19607/1/SysRevImpSummativeAssessment2002.pdf

Love, J., Selker, R., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Dropmann, D., Verhagen, J., Ly, A., Gronau, Q. F., Šmíra, M., Epskamp, S., Matzke, D., Wild, A., Knight, P., Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2019). JASP: Graphical Statistical Software for Common Statistical Designs. Journal of Statistical Software, 88(2), 1 – 17. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v088.i02

Schinske, J., & Tanner, K. (2014). Teaching more by grading less (or differently). CBE Life Sci Educ, 13(2), 159-166. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.cbe-14-03-0054

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. 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/

Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 2, 1-3. https://doi.org/10.7275/ffb1-mm19

Community Engagement: Validation of Assessment Tools (NUSTA C&E Project Team)

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , , ,

Misty So-Sum Wai COOK1,*, Peace WONG Yuh Ju2,*, Lydia LAU3, ZHENG Liren2, and Reuben WONG4

1Centre for English Language Communication (CELC)
2Department of Social Work, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS)
3Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine (YLLSOM)
4Department of Political Science, FASS

*elcmsw@nus.edu.sg; swkwyj@nus.edu.sg

Wai-Cook, M. S. S., NUSTA Community Engagement Team, Wong, P. Y. J., Lau, L. S. T., Zheng, L., & Wong, R. (2024). Community engagement: Validation of assessment tools (NUSTA C&E Project Team) [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-waicook-et-al/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities

KEYWORDS

Assessment tools, assessment tool evaluation and validation, communities and engagement, socio-emotional competencies

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

EXTENDED ABSTRACT

The Ministry of Education (MOE) Singapore implemented the 21st Century Competencies framework to nurture Singaporeans into citizens capable of living in the 21st Century (MOE, 2023). In this model, socio-emotional competencies such as communication, civic-mindedness, tolerance towards others, relationship management, and social awareness have been identified as essential for a person to be able to live in harmony with the people around them (Graham, 2015; Soffel, 2016). In Singapore, service learning has been identified as the means to achieve and inculcate these essential socio-emotional competencies in students (Shumer et al., 2012).

 

Service-learning has been described as experiential learning through performing community service and reflecting on the service experience (Anderson, et al., 2001; Daniels et al., 2010). Educational institutes have implemented it to inculcate civic-mindedness and social responsibility in their students (Battistoni, 2002). Literature has shown that the service- learning curriculum has reared positive learning outcomes for building socio-emotional competencies in students. For instance, Hale (2005) found that service-learning motivated students to improve their communication skills to better engage community partners. In Indonesia, the service-learning curriculum has also reared positive results in inculcating positive pro-social characteristics like tolerance for others and caring for the community (Casmana et al., 2023).

 

In alignment with the NUS Communities and Engagement (CE) pillar, the objectives of this project are to measure the effectiveness of the course by measuring students’ ability to show empathy and communication skills, and exploring ways to assist the tutors on the ground with the best practices in teaching a CE course. We began the project by providing a landscape survey on seven CE courses to understand the challenges faced by the course coordinators and validated our proposed assessment tools with the course coordinators.

 

In our landscape survey, we aimed to ascertain: (a) the nature of CE courses being offered by different faculties, such as learning objectives, duration of the course, course credits, assessment components, and type of communities being engaged, and (b) the challenges faced by course coordinators and students. Snowball sampling was utilised and a total of 7 faculty members responded. Findings suggested that the nature of CE courses is varied and the challenges faced by course coordinators include:

a. Establishing a partnership to ensure a win-win approach.
b. Managing real-world problems: finding suitable placements for quality projects.
c. Supporting a large number of students in placements.
d. Attitudes towards service learning: ensure students are serious about learning.
e. Faculty development: teaching students how to be reflective and apply knowledge/skills confidently.

 

The relevant scales that could be used or adapted include (i) Common Outcome Measurement (COM); Service-Learning Outcomes Measurement Scale (S-LOMS); Personal- interpersonal competence assessment (PICA); Community Service Attitude Test, and Civic- minded Graduate Scale (CMGS). Each of the scales was looked at individually and their domains were compared to the learning objectives of NUS CE courses to determine the suitability in measuring the effectiveness of the course. In addition to considering validated tools, other forms of assessment were considered, such as the use of scenario-based questions.

 

Having done the literature review, the team deliberated on using validated tools to measure the effectiveness of CE courses as compared to developing assessment tools to support course coordinators, as well as evaluate the effectiveness of CE courses. As such, the following assessment tools were developed, namely, (a) reflection paper assessment rubric on empathy for use by course coordinators; (b) assessment rubric on collaboration and communication, and (c) scenario-based situations to assess students’ empathy.

 

Below are our assessment tools with feedback and recommendations shared by the course coordinators, stakeholders, and students.

Assessment tools and feedback:

  1. Reflection paper assessment rubric on empathy for use by course coordinators
    Feedback: Difficulty in developing empathy for the CE courses as there are various factors which impact their learning
  2. Assessment rubric on collaboration and communication for use by onsite supervisors
    Feedback: Onsite supervisors are mainly involved in administrative work, and generally do not have the bandwidth to support students’ learning. Students are sometimes being matched to volunteers who will co-work with them on the programme. It is hard for them to be able to make an assessment of our students’ development of personal and interpersonal skills.
  3. Scenario-based situations to assess students’ empathy
    May be helpful to elicit an understanding of students’ level of empathy or development of interpersonal skills.

 

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.)