Welcome to the Real World: Showing the Value of Information Literacy Beyond the Classroom 

John B. Napp, University of Toledo started his career as a librarian at an engineering firm. When he started as an academic librarian, surveyed engineering firms to find out how many have librarians (very few). His goal is to make sure the engineering students are capable of finding the information they need when they start their engineering careers, since they may not have librarians to assist them.

Resources:

• Learning to Solve Problems: A Handbook for Designing Problem-Solving Learning Environments by David H. Jonassen (2010)
• Hsieh, C. and L. Knight. 2008. Problem-Based Learning for Engineering Students: An Evidence-Based. Comparative Study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship. DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2007.11.007
• Yadav, et al 2011 PBL in Electrical Engineering found that students who were taught using PBL performed better. 

Napp decided a problem-based learning would be a useful approach to build in ACRL IL & ABET outcomes. Working with engineering faculty and students, they devised a team-based PBL assignment. He surveyed students on their use of information types as well as perceptions. 41% felt they would still be able to find everything they need on Google. Check out the paper for more findings.

What Information Sources Do Engineering Students Use to Address Authentic Socio-technical Problems?
Eugene Barsky, Annette Berndt, Aleteia Greenwood, and Carla S. Paterson from University of British Columbia discussed their work with an applied science course, Technology and Development, The Global Engineer. Instructors work with a local community partner, a social entrepreneur Charlotte Kwon (maiwa.com) who works with global artisans. The students focus on authentic problems of rural artisans in India. One example is the potential use of solar energy to power sewing machines. Students are required to produce a formal report proposing technological and socially appropriate solutions. The problems are ill-defined and students have to move into areas they are unfamiliar with. One of the course outcomes is to get students "to develop a tolerance for ambiguity." 

Librarians worked with these students to teach them research skills. To assess they conducted 3 student surveys, a pre, post and one after the formal reports were complete. Librarians and faculty also reviewed the reference list of the reports. In the pre-survey they found that 90% of students plan to use library resources, 70% mentioned library books, and 40% mentioned library journals and databases. After completing the project 55% of students reported using library resources, 15% books, and 50% library databases and journals.

People are an important source of information for engineers. Some students reported talking with academic experts, a few to librarians, and they expressed a desire to have more contact/communication with the project sponsor/contact in India.  

Their post-survey and paper review confirmed high use of non-academic sources. Overall only 20% of sources were academic sources. Due to lack of clarity and vagueness of project, one student commented that internet search engines are a good place to start. 75% of students reported that presentations by librarians were useful to them. 60% of students reported subsequently using advanced search commands presented by librarians.

Authentic problems as “high engagement, high impact” (Kuh, 2009) activities lead to co-creation of new knowledgebases.

Gauging Workplace Readiness: Information Behavior and Preparedness of Engineering Students in Cooperative Education Programs

Jon N. Jeffryes, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, collaborating with another librarian surveyed co-op students to find out what types of information they are using “on the job.” Out of 42 co-op students, 36 responded. Almost all were mechanical engineering students, most junior/senior level.

Not surprisingly, the librarians found that everyone had to find information on the job. Three areas the data will guide:

1. Portfolio program: six skills students need for their careers, many gleaned from their literature review, putting together this program and used survey findings to help make the case for this initiative.

2. Teamwork workshop: piloted 90-minute workshop already, drop in workshop, not required. Sent to faculty and some strongly requested that one student from each team attend. Focus on team skills and library tools that can assist with teamwork, recent physical space improvements aid with this effort, many active learning/collaborative learning labs. Discussions are now underway on how to incorporate into the curriculum.

3. Information literacy integration: survey data will help and provide examples to engage students within large lecture format IL session for engineering students.

It's a Wrap: a Real-life Engineering Case Study as the Focus of an Online Library Tutorial
Patsy D. Hulse at University of Auckland working with subject librarians D. Dantang Han, E.I. Melnichenko, and S. Brookes developed an online tutorial that incorporates a real-life engineering case study. The idea for this was to fill a research education gap within the engineering students third year. This class has 550 students so an online tutorial was the best approach for an already overstretched staff. They needed to create this within 4 months. Six modules cover how to find the information the students need. Module 4: Time to do testing, is the finding standards part of the tutorial, is one example where they create a scenario that outlines the information need and provide information on how to use databases for finding standards. They created a bank of around 80 assessment questions, and there is a test is worth 3% of the final grade.

To evaluate the effectiveness of the online tutorial they used direct observation, a feedback form, test results, paper evaluation during lectures to get higher response rate (also offered a raffle prize). Found 24% of students learned about patents for the first time. They made changes after student feedback, such as adding video times/sizes, improving navigation and fonts.  Side benefit: Librarians were able to use some of the videos within other courses at the graduate level. 

Check the tutorial out at their website.

Aside: UofA’s Engineering Library has a neat creativity center, with building materials and a large engineering firm sponsors a model building competition.  

Distinguished Lecture: Problem Solving in Engineering Education

David Jonassen, Missouri University
Problem solving ability is more important then ability to write an exam in a blue book. If you want student to learn take the numbers away. What kind of problems do engineering students learn to solve? Story problems taught by worked examples where they learn to mimic process not meaning. Students are not learning what the equations mean and they need to understand the problems qualitatively. Jonassen’s feels there are issues with conceptual understanding due to over reliance of instructors on quantitative processes.

To help students he suggests instructors represent problems as structure maps, asking students to relate concepts together. Understanding nature of the problem is often superfluous for students who are focused on the answer and the grade. Ask them to step back and look at problems conceptually. Use analogies. Help them understand causal relationships using animations, simulations, causal diagrams, asking causal questions. Get them to transfer concepts to solve everyday problems. Simulations alone are not enough for learning so build in reflective and causal modeling. Causal diagrams or chains can illustrate problems for students. Follow up with causal reasoning questions such as prediction and argumentation.

They use ASK systems, TeachNET: A Resource for Engineering Teachers, real world examples and case studies.  Structure a dialog with reflection in action.

Now for an example. Within a radiation protection technical curriculum instructor’s created a series of questions about the daily work, common tasks and knowledge required of a technician. Responses are provided with videos of professionals. A standard learning outcome for any course is to get students to ask meaningful questions.

Another strategy is to get students to build models or model problems with concept maps. Students can be charged with building expert systems where a demonstrated need to articulate questions and rules is needed. Serious conceptual brain work for students and but can be time consuming! Systems modeling is also difficult but meaningful for students.

Argumentation another method to try, one example he used is code enforcement for learning engineering ethics. Instructor’s presented different perspectives and theoretical approaches and gave students a task to review and develop meaningful argumentation. This is a remedial strategy for correcting misconceptions on well-structured problems (see his recent paper on this topic for more detail).  Help students create counterargument and rebuttal.

Questioning students for metacognition forces students to reflect and regulate their own understanding. Have you solved similar problems, what strategies, or steps are needed to solve, and so on. Ask students to classify problems/questions. Text editing problems can be useful and provide impactful learning. Add extra or remove information from a question or specific problem then ask students if there’s sufficient information to respond. He suggests giving students practice first at “text editing” problems. These are very challenging for students.

Problem posing seems like a fun way to reinforce learning. Show picture and ask students to develop problem around it (for instance, soccer player on field in play and what physics concepts are also at play).

Problems engineering face don’t have right answers. Types of problems include design, dilemmas, troubleshooting, planning, and most come down to decision making. Most real problems are ill-structured. Use problem-based learning, real work problems from engineers and case studies. Stories allow case based reasoning and are meaningful, allow for transferability. For assessment consider having students construct story or scenario. Stories, Jonassen stresses are a key component of student learning. The difference between novices and experts are that experts have a story bank to withdraw from and make decisions based upon. This conference, Jonassen tells  us, is all stories. Every presenter is telling a story about how s/he are personally working to improve engineering education. 

Librarians out there, take heed. In reflecting upon this distinguished lecture I concluded that our realm is really all about the “ill-constructed problem.” We help people come up with creative ideas, keywords, phrases, search strategies to solve them. How have people dealt with the problem in the past? What can we learn from them? In helping our users find these stories of the past, new ones are being written. Stories that actually make people think.