The function of the engineering profession is to manipulate materials, energy, and information, thereby creating benefit for humankind. To do this successfully, engineers must have a knowledge of nature that goes beyond mere theory—knowledge that is traditionally gained in educational laboratories. Over the years, however, the nature of these laboratories has changed. This paper describes the history of some of these changes and explores in some depth a few of the major factors influencing laboratories today. In particular, the paper considers the lack of coherent learning objectives for laboratories and how this lack has limited the effectiveness of laboratories and hampered meaningful research in the area. A list of fundamental objectives is presented along with suggestions for possible future research.

http://web.stanford.edu/group/asee/wikiupload/6/69/Feisel_LabsInEngEd.pdf

The Role of the Laboratory in Undergraduate Engineering Education

When there are many people who don't need to expect something more than the benefits to take, we will suggest you to have willing to reach all benefits. Be sure and surely do to take this problem based learning an approach to medical education that gives the best reasons to read. When you really need to get the reason why, this problem based learning an approach to medical education book will probably make you feel curious.

Problem-Based Learning: An Approach to Medical Education

Laboratory-based courses play a critical role in scientific education. Automation is changing the nature of these laboratories, and there is a long-running debate about the value of hands-on versus simulated laboratories. In addition, the introduction of remote laboratories adds a third category to the debate. Through a review of the literature related to these labs in education, the authors draw several conclusions about the state of current research. The debate over different technologies is confounded by the use of different educational objectives as criteria for judging the laboratories: Hands-on advocates emphasize design skills, while remote lab advocates focus on conceptual understanding. We observe that the boundaries among the three labs are blurred in the sense that most laboratories are mediated by computers, and that the psychology of presence may be as important as technology. We also discuss areas for future research.

/pdf/hands-on-simulated-and-remote-laboratories-a-comparative-3v7rg9fjcz.pdf

Hands-on, simulated, and remote laboratories: A comparative literature review

Within education, concepts such as distance learning, and open universities, are now becoming more widely used for teaching and learning. However, due to the nature of the subject domain, the teaching of Science, Technology, and Engineering are still relatively behind when using new technological approaches (particularly for online distance learning). The reason for this discrepancy lies in the fact that these fields often require laboratory exercises to provide effective skill acquisition and hands-on experience. Often it is difficult to make these laboratories accessible for online access. Either the real lab needs to be enabled for remote access or it needs to be replicated as a fully software-based virtual lab. We argue for the latter concept since it offers some advantages over remotely controlled real labs, which will be elaborated further in this paper.We are now seeing new emerging technologies that can overcome some of the potential difficulties in this area. These include: computer graphics, augmented reality, computational dynamics, and virtual worlds. This paper summarizes the state of the art in virtual laboratories and virtual worlds in the fields of science, technology, and engineering. The main research activity in these fields is discussed but special emphasis is put on the field of robotics due to the maturity of this area within the virtual-education community. This is not a coincidence; starting from its widely multidisciplinary character, robotics is a perfect example where all the other fields of engineering and physics can contribute. Thus, the use of virtual labs for other scientific and non-robotic engineering uses can be seen to share many of the same learning processes. This can include supporting the introduction of new concepts as part of learning about science and technology, and introducing more general engineering knowledge, through to supporting more constructive (and collaborative) education and training activities in a more complex engineering topic such as robotics. The objective of this paper is to outline this problem space in more detail and to create a valuable source of information that can help to define the starting position for future research. State of the art in dynamics-based virtual laboratories.Defining the criteria for critical evaluation of existing technologies.State of the art in virtual worlds.Future advances in the field of virtual-world based laboratories.

/pdf/virtual-laboratories-for-education-in-science-technology-and-2t11hptemw.pdf

Virtual laboratories for education in science, technology, and engineering

The emergence of worldwide communications networks and powerful computer technologies has redefined the concept of distance learning and the delivery of engineering education content. This article discusses the Sloan Consortium’s quest for quality, scale, and breadth in online learning, the impact on both continuing education of graduate engineers as well as degree-seeking engineering students, and the future of engineering colleges and schools as worldwide providers of engineering education.

https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/sites/default/files/v9n1_bourne_1.pdf

Online Engineering Education: Learning Anywhere, Anytime

Economic pressures on universities and the emergence of new technologies have spurred the creation of new systems for delivering engineering laboratories in education, in particular simulations and remote-access laboratory systems. Advocates of simulation argue that physical labs needlessly consume university space and students' time. However, proponents of hands-on laboratories argue that student engineers should be exposed to real environments. Remote laboratories have appeared as a third option. These laboratories are similar to simulation techniques in that they require minimal space and time, because the experiments can be rapidly configured and run over the Internet. But unlike simulations, they provide real data. Studying the relative effectiveness of these modes of delivering student laboratories is complex, for the underlying technology of the laboratory is just one of many possible factors that could influence effectiveness. For example, the interface to the equipment may be of importance, as might the discussions students have among themselves. This paper presents a model for testing the relative effectiveness of engineering laboratories in education that takes account of these and other factors. The results are presented for an assessment study comparing versions of remote labs versus hands-on labs in a junior-level mechanical engineering course on machine dynamics and mechanisms. The results suggest that students learned lab content information equally well from both types of laboratories, and that they have a realistic understanding and appreciation of the practical advantages of remote laboratories.

A model for evaluating the effectiveness of remote engineering laboratories and simulations in education

Laboratories play a crucial role in the education of future scientists and engineers, yet there is disagreement among science and engineering educators about whether and which types of technology-enabled labs should be used. This debate could be advanced by large-scale randomized studies addressing the critical issue of whether remotely operated or simulation-based labs are as effective as the traditional hands-on lab format. The present article describes the results of a large-scale (N = 306) study comparing learning outcomes and student preferences for several different lab formats in an undergraduate engineering course. The lab formats that were evaluated included traditional hands-on labs, remotely operated labs, and simulations. Learning outcomes were assessed by a test of the specific concepts taught in each lab. These knowledge scores were as high or higher (depending on topic) after performing remote and simulated laboratories versus performing hands-on laboratories. In their responses to survey items, many students saw advantages to technology-enabled lab formats in terms of such attributes as convenience and reliability, but still expressed preference for hands-on labs. Also, differences in lab formats led to changes in group functions across the plan-experiment-analyze process: For example, students did less face-to-face work when engaged in remote or simulated laboratories, as opposed to hands-on laboratories.

/pdf/constructing-reality-a-study-of-remote-hands-on-and-4uc5q4fr3u.pdf

Constructing reality: A study of remote, hands-on, and simulated laboratories

Project-based learning (PBL) is an instructional approach that is gaining increasing interest within the engineering education community. The benefits of PBL include enhanced student participation in the learning process (active learning and self-learning), enhanced communication skills, addressing of a wider set of learning styles, and promotion of critical and proactive thinking. PBL also facilitates the development of many of the "soft skills" demanded from engineering graduates, as embodied in the ABET EC 2000. Examples include effective teaming skills, project management, communications, ethics, engineering economics, etc. At Stevens Institute of Technology the undergraduate engineering curriculum has undergone significant revisions to reflect the latest trend towards enhancement of traditional lecture-based courses with both a design spine and a laboratory experience propagating through the entire educational program. Project-based learning is also being integrated throughout the curriculum. An initial implementation of PBL and its preliminary assessment in a freshman-level course on Mechanics of Solids and a junior-level course on Mechanisms and Machine Dynamics is presented.

Enhancing the engineering curriculum through project-based learning

Process and learning outcomes from remotely-operated, simulated, and hands-on student laboratories

Advocates of hands-on laboratories and advocates of simulation have debated for years. Proponents of hands-on laboratories argue that student engineers need to be exposed to the physical experiences-and the uncertainties-of real environments. Advocates of simulation argue that physical labs are wasteful-they tie up badly needed space, and consume student's time in menial set-up and tear-down procedures. Now remote laboratories have appeared as a third option. These laboratories are similar to simulation techniques in that they require minimal space and time, because the experiments can be rapidly configured and run over the Internet. But unlike simulations, they provide real data. It is unknown what the relative effectiveness of hands-on, simulated, and remote laboratories is. This paper presents a model for testing this relative effectiveness, and discusses the results of a preliminary assessment study comparing versions of remote labs versus hands-on labs in a junior-level mechanical engineering course on machine dynamics and mechanisms.

Sven K. Esche

Papers

A model for evaluating the effectiveness of remote engineering laboratories and simulations in education

Constructing reality: A study of remote, hands-on, and simulated laboratories

Enhancing the engineering curriculum through project-based learning

Process and learning outcomes from remotely-operated, simulated, and hands-on student laboratories

Remote versus hands-on labs: a comparative study