Exploring the Differences in Hydraulic Engineering Problem-Solving Behavior between Undergraduate Students and Engineering Practitioners with Multiple Representations Using Eye-Tracking Techniques

被引:0
|
作者
Gestson, Sean L. [1 ]
Brown, Shane [2 ]
Ahmed, Ananna [2 ]
Hurwitz, David [2 ]
Bornasal, Floraliza [3 ]
Desing, Renee M. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Portland, Shiley Sch Engn, Portland, OR 97203 USA
[2] Oregon State Univ, Sch Civil & Construct Engn, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA
[3] St Martins Univ, Hal & Inge Marcus Sch Engn, Lacey, WA 98503 USA
来源
JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING EDUCATION | 2024年 / 150卷 / 01期
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Problem solving; Eye tracking; Representations; Behavior; COGNITIVE LOAD; COMPETENCE; EXPERT; FLUENCY; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1061/JCEECD.EIENG-1872
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Problem solving is a common activity for engineering students and practicing engineers as they learn and practice the use of engineering concepts. Understanding the approach to a problem provides a glimpse at unique problem-solving behaviors that can be used as a means to compare different problem solvers. Engineering education research has focused on particular behaviors to compare problem solvers and problem types, which has led to a greater understanding of the gap in student preparedness for the workplace and advances in better teaching practices. This study further explores the similarities and differences in problem-solving behaviors of engineering practitioners and students as they solve problems with multiple representations. An exploratory study was done using eye-tracking techniques to observe the problem-solving behaviors of engineering practitioners and engineering students as they solve three problems with four equivalent representations as means to solve the problems. Problem-solving behaviors were compared and explored using descriptive statistics to understand unique similarities and differences and search for patterns across multiple problems. The results show that engineering practitioners appear to be more consistent, efficient, and rigid in their approach and that students are more likely to adjust their problem-solving approach and use different representations. No observable trends in time spent solving the problems or problem correctness with respect to a particular representation were observed, which suggests that there is not one representation that is better than another. Students used formulaic representations more often than visual representations, whereas engineering practitioners had no observable use based on representation typology. Trends related to problem correctness across the three problems were observed for both students and engineering practitioners, and students began exploring additional representations as they solved more problems. These similarities and differences suggest that there is more to learn about the problem-solving behaviors of students and engineering practitioners. Understanding more about these behaviors can assist in understanding the gap in student preparedness for the workplace and help educators in further developing better teaching practices. (c) 2023 American Society of Civil Engineers.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 8 条
  • [1] Problem Solving Personas of Civil Engineering Practitioners Using Eye Tracking Techniques
    Gestson, Sean L.
    Barner, Mathew S.
    Abadi, Masoud Ghodrat
    Hurwitz, David S.
    Brown, Shane
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 2019, 35 (04) : 1074 - 1093
  • [2] How engineering students use domain knowledge when problem-solving using different visual representations
    Johnson-Glauch, Nicole
    Choi, Dong San
    Herman, Geoffrey
    JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 2020, 109 (03) : 443 - 469
  • [3] Investigating problem-solving behaviours of university students through an eye-tracking system using GeoGebra in geometry: A case study
    Turkoglu, Hacer
    Yalcinalp, Serpil
    EDUCATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, 2024, 29 (12) : 15761 - 15791
  • [4] Comparing Middle School Students' Scientific Problem-Solving Behavior in Hands-On Manipulation Performance Assessment: Terms by Eye-Tracking Analysis
    Zang, Shiyi
    Lin, Pingting
    Chen, Xinyu
    Bai, Yi
    Deng, Huihua
    SCIENTIFIC PROGRAMMING, 2022, 2022
  • [5] Exploring Computer Engineering Students' Perceptions When Introduced to Low-Code Platforms: A Study Using Inquiry Methods and Eye-Tracking Data
    Evangelou, Semira Maria
    Fotopoulos, Angelos
    Minas, Dimosthenis
    Xenos, Michalis
    2024 IEEE GLOBAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION CONFERENCE, EDUCON 2024, 2024,
  • [6] Differences between Professionals and Students in Their Visual Attention on Multiple Representation Types While Solving an Open-Ended Engineering Design Problem
    Ahmed, Ananna
    Hurwitz, David
    Gestson, Sean
    Brown, Shane
    JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 2021, 147 (03):
  • [7] Closure to "Differences between Professionals and Students in Their Visual Attention on Multiple Representation Types While Solving an Open-Ended Engineering Design Problem" by Ananna Ahmed, David Hurwitz, Sean Gestson, and Shane Brown
    Ahmed, Ananna
    Hurwitz, David
    Gestson, Sean
    Brown, Shane
    JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 2023, 149 (01):
  • [8] Discussion of "Differences between Professionals and Students in Their Visual Attention on Multiple Representation Types While Solving an Open-Ended Engineering Design Problem" by Ananna Ahmed, David Hurwitz, Sean Gestson, and Shane Brown
    Bhanage, Shreeya S.
    Mutha, Runaj K.
    Bhanage, Chhaya S.
    Dhonde, Hemant B.
    JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING EDUCATION, 2023, 149 (01):