Title | ||
---|---|---|
The Impact of Laboratory Courses in Technical Study Programs – Knowledge Earning or Not Much Learning? |
Abstract | ||
---|---|---|
In engineering courses laboratory sessions, there are long-established vehicles to transmit basic knowledge as well as engineering concepts and strategies. Even though their share is already high in most of technical degree programs, it is expected to increase further. The reason is that change is coming along with digitization and Industry 4.0. In this regard, laboratory work enables the students to practically implement complicated theoretical contexts to automation-technology and get familiar with real machines and equipment. On the other hand, with budget constraints in public education, laboratories are often criticized for being too expensive and too inefficient. Therefore it should always be a target to choose an efficient and adequate setup. To understand the institution’s own needs, a project was carried out at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences to analyze the situation and define strategies focusing on “laboratories for manufacturing technology”. A questionnaire was designed to assess motivational effects of laboratory work, and measure the level of knowledge gained. With respect to motivation, a clear preference could be found for laboratory sessions among the 76 participants. The knowledge gain showed some improvement from lab teaching, but all in all the effect was not as high as expected. This gave rise to further considerations and interesting hints on how to improve the operational setup. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
---|---|---|
2019 | 10.1109/EDUCON.2019.8725248 | 2019 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
Thermoforming,Tools,Polymers,Engineering education,Conferences,Injection molding | Knowledge management,Engineering | Conference |
ISSN | ISBN | Citations |
2165-9567 | 978-1-5386-9506-7 | 0 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.34 | 0 | 3 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
---|---|---|---|
Damian Großkreutz | 1 | 0 | 0.68 |
Doina Logofatu | 2 | 17 | 16.74 |
Anna Schott | 3 | 0 | 0.68 |