course design

Interdisciplinary Education In NUS: A Scan Of Current Courses And Development Of An Evaluation Framework

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , , ,

Olivier LEFEBVRE1,*, Alex MITCHELL2, Marissa Kwan Lin E3, Stephen En Rong TAY4, Li Neng LEE5 

1Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, College of Design and Engineering (CDE), NUS
2Department of Communications and New Media, College of Humanities and Sciences, NUS
3Centre for English Language Communication, NUS
4Department of the Built Environment, CDE, NUS
5Department of Psychology, College of Humanities and Sciences, NUS 

*ceelop@nus.edu.sg

Lefebvre, O. P., Mitchell, A., E, M. K. L., Tay, S. E. R., & Lee, L. N. (2024). Interdisciplinary education in NUS: A scan of current courses and development of an evaluation framework [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/olefebvre-et-al/

SUB-THEME

Others – Interdisciplinary Education 

KEYWORDS

Interdisciplinary learning, course design, course evaluation, community engagement  

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation

 

CONTEXT

The establishment of the College of Humanities and Sciences (CHS) in 2020 and the College of Design and Engineering (CDE) in 2022 exemplifies the efforts towards interdisciplinary education in the National University of Singapore (NUS) in response to current problems that require various disciplines to work together (National University of Singapore, 2021). These efforts have produced courses that look beyond the classroom to engage with the wider community.  

 

For example, in the CHS, the course HS2911 “Social Media and Mental Health” provides students with interdisciplinary training to analyse the impact of social media in real-world scenarios. Similarly, in the CDE, the course CDE2501 “Liveable Cities” provides students the opportunity to approach community development through the lens of urban policymakers, planners, architects, engineers, real estate consultants and managers. 

 

While these efforts provide students with an interdisciplinary learning experience, the diverse nature of the courses, along with the lack of a common yardstick in evaluating interdisciplinary education makes it challenging to determine if these efforts have been fruitful, especially in terms of real-world applicability that impacts our communities. Hence, the NUS Teaching Academy (NUSTA) has developed the following research questions: 

  1. What is the current state of interdisciplinary studies at NUS?  
  2. What evaluation metrics could be used to support interdisciplinary courses? 
  3. How can interdisciplinary education in NUS be refined? 

 

METHODOLOGY

An interdisciplinary team within the NUSTA was formed to include views from CHS and CDE. In this study, the operational definition of interdisciplinary learning from the NUS Board of Undergraduate Studies (BUS) was adopted:  

Interdisciplinary courses integrate perspectives, theoretic frameworks, concepts, tools, and techniques and approaches from two or more conventional disciplines to understand the chosen theme, its challenges, and potential solutions. 

A scan of interdisciplinary courses in both colleges was conducted. Subsequently, the NUS Futures Office was engaged to better develop the study, from which the findings were presented to the NUSTA for feedback and refinement. In developing an evaluation framework, the Accreditation Manual from the Institution of Engineers Singapore was referenced (Institution of Engineers Singapore, n.d.). 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The scan reveals that interdisciplinary courses can be predominantly categorised as either knowledge-/application-focused and adjacent/orthogonal (refer to Figure 1).

Figure 1. Dimensions describing interdisciplinary courses in NUS. 

 

Subsequently, an evaluation framework inspired by the engineering accreditation board (EAB) was developed. The proposed framework consists of 1) interdisciplinary educational objectives (IEOs), and 2) interdisciplinary learning outcomes (ILOs). The former describes the objectives at the programme level, while the latter describes attributes that students should achieve. A total of six ILOs were developed, which are presented in Table 1. Note that courses need not fulfil all the ILOs as courses within the same programme can complement each other to cover the ILOs. 

 

Next, the Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs) in the proposed framework would describe how the specific course maps to the ILOs. An example for CDE2501 “Liveable Cities” is presented in Table 2 as an example. 

 Table 1 
List of interdisciplinary learning outcomes developed in the study 

 

Table 2 
List of interdisciplinary learning outcomes developed in the study 

 

CONCLUSION AND SIGNIFICANCE

With these findings, a suggestion towards more application-focused courses is made to provide students to create and test solutions for the community at large. In addition, the proposed framework could be used by faculty members to develop interdisciplinary courses and education programmes, and provide a tool for reflection on current interdisciplinary courses. Finally, the framework could be utilised at the programme level, coupled with alumni and employer surveys and engagements, to assess if the ILOs have been achieved. These suggestions are provided to enhance the interdisciplinary education within NUS on community impact. 

 

REFERENCES

Institution of Engineers Singapore. (n.d) Engineering Accreditation Board Accreditation Manual. https://www.ies.org.sg/Accreditation/EAB10249  

National University of Singapore (2021, 27 August). Two new colleges at NUS to deliver flexible, interdisciplinary education more accessibly, and at greater scale https://news.nus.edu.sg/two-new-colleges-at-nus-to-deliver-flexible-interdisciplinary-education-more-accessibly-and-at-greater-scale/ 

Planting the Seeds for Meaningful and Effective Community Engagement Experiences through University Overseas Study Trips

cdtlsd Paper Presentations , , , , ,

Corinne ONG*, WONG Soon Fen, Eunice NG, and LIM Cheng Puay
Ridge View Residential College (RVRC)

*corinne@nus.edu.sg 

Ong, C. P. P., Wong, S. F., Ng, E. S. Q., & Lim, C. P. (2024). Planting the seeds for meaningful and effective community engagement experiences through university overseas study trips [Paper presentation]. In Higher Education Conference in Singapore (HECS) 2024, 3 December, National University of Singapore. https://blog.nus.edu.sg/hecs/hecs2024-ong-et-al/

SUB-THEME

Opportunities from Engaging Communities

KEYWORDS

Overseas study trips, high-impact educational practice, deep learning, community engagement, course design

CATEGORY

Paper Presentation 

 

INTRODUCTION

This paper documents the reflective experiences of the authors in designing a new undergraduate course involving a 10-day overseas learning component in a public university in Singapore. We illustrate how community engagement can be integrated into a course which focuses on culture and sustainability in Southeast Asia. The benefits of community-based learning experiences are increasingly well-established in the higher education landscape, constituting a form of high-impact educational practice, especially when facilitated by deep learning teaching strategies (Laird, 2008). Its accruable benefits range from developing greater civic interest and engagement, increased social capital, competency development, personal growth, and improved academic achievement among students (O’Brien, 2014). Deep learning, which furthers the impact of community engagement experiences, are enabled through integrative learning experiences (e.g. perspective-taking, interdisciplinary problem-solving), higher-order learning experiences (e.g. theoretical applications, idea analyses, and synthesis), and reflective learning experiences (Warburton, 2003).

 

PURPOSE/SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY

Planning a study trip that integrates community engagement opportunities is a manifold process that this paper seeks to demystify. For instance, such engagements can exist in (a) multiple forms (between educators and the partners, between organisations, between students and community partners), and are (b) managed and enacted at various temporal junctures (course design to implementation and post-trip). Designing community engagement encounters also involves the deliberate introduction of (c) student learning objectives as guided by certain principles and values (e.g. social equity), and (d) intentional learning activities/assessments (e.g. reflections, stakeholder interviews, awareness-building projects) capable of maximising benefits for all stakeholders.

 

By documenting, conceptualising, and evaluating community engagement in the above ways, this paper is expected to provide educators, keen to introduce community engagement opportunities in undergraduate overseas study trips, with considerations on how community engagement activities can be integrated in impactful ways in overseas study trips. The following research questions (RQs) are examined:

 

1. How can community engagements for overseas study trips be designed to maximise its positive benefits for all stakeholders, including students?

Through this research question, we discuss the importance of context in shaping the design of these engagements, such as choice of issues of coverage and partners in order to meet course learning objectives. For instance, Southeast Asia, with its cultural diversity, natural resource endowments, and economic potential, offers significant scope for learning about sustainability (tensions) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Partners who were actively contributing to promoting cultural and/or environmental sustainability in local communities in East Malaysia (e.g. WWF-Sarawak, Shell Sabah, Borneo Marine Institute, Sabah, Sarawak Biodiversity Centre) for instance, were identified and engaged as our partners who created learning content and insight-sharing opportunities with students.

The interdisciplinary nature of sustainability further lends itself to learning and inquiry from multiple disciplines. We share examples of how students from different disciplines were engaged in cross-disciplinary learning in the process of community engagement, and how course activities (e.g. pre-seminar activities ranging from videos, case analyses), in-trip post-engagement reflections, and post-trip activities (video documentaries), were designed with the intent of helping students make critical culture and sustainability connections, while leveraging on their engagement experiences. These aspects of course design are expected to be instructive to educators of diverse disciplines.

 

2. What are the benefits of learning activities facilitated around community engagement encounters for students?

This includes a discussion of how community engagement skills (e.g. cultural sensitivity, interview skills), acquired through experiences from these study trips, could be applied to contexts beyond Malaysia and to different disciplines or topics of study.

 

METHODS

The findings of this paper are informed and derived from the triangulation of multiple data points: from the authors’ reflections of engagement efforts and encounters from course design to implementation, observations of student learning, and students’ works and course feedback.

 

PRELIMINARY FINDINGS

In response to RQ1, we outline key phases of the engagement planning process and accompanying considerations in three phases, namely pre-trip, in-trip, and post-trip:

Table 1
Conceptualisation of phases, actions/activities, and considerations involved in community engagement planning (click on the table to view a full-sized version)

HECS2024-a89-Table1

 

In response to RQ2, final course evaluations from students showed that nearly all students (at least 90%) who responded (N=12) indicated their agreement with the perceived achievement of learning outcomes (Figure 1),  and satisfaction with the course’s design and structure (Figure 2).

HECS2024-a89-Fig1

Figure 1: Students’ self-reported evaluation of the extent to which course learning outcomes were achieved.

 

HECS2024-a89-Fig2

Figure 2: Students’ evaluation of the effectiveness of the course structure and design.

 

Finally, students’ qualitative course feedback (some examples of anonymous student feedback shared below) reinforced the value of learning activities, especially pertaining to planned community engagements and instructor-facilitated class debriefs:


“The most effective learning strategy was definitely interacting with the locals and the people working in the NGO’s since they do not necessarily have the same views as the organisations they are working for/the views that are prevalent in academic literature. It was really eye opening how many of the social issues faced by the people and the challenges faced by organisations were not readily available or easy to find solely through research…”

 

Another student shared how the community interactions and reflections proved transformative, offering them new insights on privilege and the value of context in perspective-making:


“I think what was most effective was interacting with different stakeholders, ranging from students to villagers, and experiencing the homestays, especially Kampung Menuang…It also reminded me of how small we are compared to the world. Through daily reflections from the trip, I really feel and learned a lot from our peers, professors and our partners as we all have different perspectives due to different backgrounds.”

 

These findings validate the effectiveness of community engagement encounters in promoting meaningful, deep, and transformational learning for students.

 

REFERENCES

Grauerholz, L. (2001). Teaching holistically to achieve deep learning. College Teaching, 49(2), 44–50. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27559032

Laird, N. et al. (2008). The effects of discipline on deep approaches to student learning and college outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 49, 469–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9088-5

Roberts, J. W. (2012;2011;). Beyond learning by doing: theoretical currents in experiential education (1st ed.). Routledge.

Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative learning as discourse. Journal of Transformative Education, 1(1), 58-63. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344603252172

O’Brien, W., & Sarkis, J. (2014). The potential of community-based sustainability projects for deep learning initiatives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 62, 48-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.001

Warburton, K. (2003). Deep learning and education for sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 4(1), 44-56. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676370310455332

Viewing Message: 1 of 1.
 Success

Blog.nus login is now via SSO. Don't see or cannot edit your blogs after logging in? Please get in touch with us, and we will fix that. (More information.)