Mini-Project Case Study
Bringing student centred experiences to the electronics
laboratory: does this enhance student learning?
Dr Sherri Johnstone sherri.johnstone@durham.ac.uk, Dr Andrew Gallant, Dr Stuart
Feeney, and Dr Dagou Zeze
School of Engineering and Computing Sciences, Durham University, England
Abstract
The project focussed on three Level 1 laboratory experiments in which the students used academic
principles from their courses to design, build and test complete systems which fit into their normal
everyday experience. The three applications investigated were (i) an audio amplifier for mp3 players
(ipods), (ii) filters used in music mixers and guitar pedals and (iii) a stopwatch. The hypothesis tested
was: Does introducing new academic concepts via routes which are familiar in everyday life,
encourage a more intrinsic orientation to learning? To test this concept, two experimental hardware
platforms, known as the Durham University Analogue and Digital experimenters were designed and an
appropriate syllabus developed to implement the teaching approach. Data on perceived outcomes
were collected by student questionnaires and interviews. The paper questionnaire results suggest that
introducing an experiential element into the laboratory teaching was not perceived by the students to
enhance understanding or encourage them to pursue electronics further. The interviews however,
revealed that together with other modes of learning, a greater variety of learning styles as described
by Wolf and Kolb (1984) were accommodated, with some students showing a high level (more
intrinsic) orientation to learning as described using Biggs’ SOLO taxonomy (1982).
1. Background
The rationale behind this idea has stemmed from three routes. Firstly, feedback from current students,
together with low numbers of students opting for Electronics in Level 3 indicated that although the
academic principles delivered during laboratory sessions are at an appropriate level and aligned with
lecture course material and assessments, the experiments are “boring” and “lack relevance” to the
students. Secondly, problem-based practical projects have been successfully introduced to Science
Experience events in local schools in the region (Johnstone, 2004). Thirdly, the laboratories in their
current form do not expose students to the practical issues of interfacing electronic sub-circuits to
produce larger systems. Thus, the academic team driving this initiative were aiming to exploit their
previous experiences in project-based learning to induce a more intrinsic interest and thus a deep
learning orientation.
The resources in terms of hardware development and experimental design were supplied by Durham
University. Thus, this mini-project was purely aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of this learning
methodology.
A Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre Case Study
1
2. Methodology
2.1 Laboratory experiments
The three original experiments were related to two lecture courses. The students were asked to read
the laboratory script before the session. Then they were asked to spend three hours following the
instructions from the script using the Durham Experimenter Systems and keeping a record of their
findings in their hand-written laboratory books. These were discussed and marked with demonstrators
the following week.
The experiential experiments were designed to include a practical application to which students are
accustomed but which does not necessarily relate to lecture materials. The approach proposed was
designed to bridge this gap.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
In the Operational Amplifiers and Circuits experiment, music from an mp3 player was passed
through both an inverting and non-inverting amplifier configuration for both the left and right
channels, such that the students could hear the effect of amplification, input impedance,
distortion due to saturation and phase shift. The aim was to relate the experience of volume
control on sound systems to basic electronic circuit principles.
In the Resistor Capacitor (RC) circuit experiment, music from an mp3 player was passed
through a low pass filter on the right channel and a high pass filter on the left channel. This
could be related to woofer and tweeter type speakers or electric guitar pedals and was aimed to
relate the circuit principle of low pass, high pass and bandpass filters to music and sound
systems.
The Digital Logic Gates experiment was based on a stopwatch. Although the students had not
learnt all the concepts to completely design this, the aim was to show how the base principles of
logic decoders could be used to convert binary outputs into base ten digit displays.
The students were first asked to read the laboratory scripts before attending the laboratory session.
The demonstrators would then show them the application and explain its operation, i.e. the audio
amplifiers, filters and stopwatch. The students would subsequently carry out the base principle
experiments as before. Finally, they were expected to apply their knowledge to recreate the
applications. Records of their work were kept for discussion and marking in the following week with
demonstrators.
2.2 Level 1 paper questionnaires
In May 2009, six questions (Table 1) were given to a sample of 48 and to a second sample of 85 later
in November 2010. There were five categories of response ranging from “definitely agree” to
“definitely disagree”. A t-test on this data showed that there was no significant difference in the
responses from the two cohorts. Also, for all of the questions, the mode did not change from the
“mostly agree” response. For comparison, both data sets were normalised to a sample size of 100 for
percentage comparison.
Table 1. Questions used in the survey
Q1
The electronics lab experiments have enhanced my understanding of the lecture material.
Q2
I am happy with the content of the electronics laboratory experiments.
Q3
The laboratory experiments give me an insight into how electronic products are designed and
operate.
Q4
I can clearly see the relevance of each laboratory experiment.
Q5
The laboratory scripts are easy to follow.
Q6
The laboratory experiments have encouraged me to pursue electronics further.
A Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre Case Study
2
2.3 Level 2 paper questionnaires
Six questions were given to a sample of 65 in May 2009 and a sample of 82 in November 2010.
Again, a t-test on this data showed that there was no significant difference in the responses from the
two cohorts. The mode was in the “Mostly agree” category for both cohorts for all questions except
question two where there was an increase from the “Neither agree nor disagree” category to the
“Mostly agree”. Likewise for question six, the mode increased from “Definitely disagree” to the “Neither
agree nor disagree” category from cohort 1 to 2. This suggests that there could be other factors in the
electronics stream biasing the outcome of this study. For comparison both data sets were normalised
to a sample size of 100 for percentage comparison. This was classed as the control group because no
changes were made to the Level 2 laboratory.
2.4 Paper questionnaire conclusions
The evidence from these data suggests that introducing an experiential element into the laboratory
experiments was not perceived by the students to enhance understanding or encourage them to
pursue electronics further. Two possible explanations are (i) the introduction of a concrete experience
(experiential) stage did not assist students whose learning tended towards divergent and
accommodative or (ii) the number of students exhibiting divergent and accommodative learning
tendencies within these cohorts was small, such that introducing the concrete experience stage had
minimal effect.
2.5 Level 1 interviews
The paper questionnaires were designed to examine the perceived outcomes by the students and to
explore further whether more learning orientations were accommodated. This next study, using
interviews, focuses more on the detail of what the students actually did, how they carried out the
learning process and the detail of what they actually learnt. From this evidence, the effect of the
experimental design, expressed in terms of Kolb components from which learning orientations can be
extracted, is explored. Based on the Kolb components, different learning orientations and levels of
understanding have been suggested. Current results suggest that the experiments with the
experiential aspects together with traditional lecturing and background reading methods enable
students with a wide range of learning orientations to access the original academic principles
(Johnstone et al., in press). This is consistent with Kolb’s learning cycle.
3. Issues
The paper questionnaires were given to cohort 1 in the Easter term after they had completed the
lecture courses associated with the experiments and had started the revision process for their
examinations. Cohort 2 was questioned towards the end of the Michaelmas term, a third of the way
through the lecture material. Thus, a significant proportion of cohort 2 were meeting the basic
concepts for the first time through the experiments. They were still adjusting to the methods of learning
in higher education and still progressing through the cognitive levels of learning outcomes as
described by Biggs (1982).
The Level 2 control cohorts would experience the same effect when they met the new material but
without the adjustment to higher education factor. Despite this, there were improvements in the modes
suggesting other factors within the course were affecting their perceived outcomes. It is suggested
that these surveys are repeated in May 2011 and November 2011 to further examine these factors.
A Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre Case Study
3
4. Benefits
The interviews revealed that the students could now see a coherency in the academic principles due
to the link given by the application. The application was always demonstrated before the students
started their investigations. The slower students conveyed a feeling of disappointment at not at being
able to complete the application. The course portfolio is now more balanced in accommodating
different learning styles. This is an important step in encouraging higher level engagement with
academic principles.
5. Evidence of Success
A bid to apply this learning methodology to Level 2 laboratories has been approved by the School’s
Education Committee. The written laboratory reports this year show a greater depth of understanding,
although this has not been rigorously evaluated.
6. How Can Other Academics Reproduce This?
Durham University have produced two Experimenter boards as shown in Figures 1 and 2. These will
be demonstrated at the Three Rivers Learning and Teaching Conference, Northumbria University on
th
12 April 2011 (Johnstone et al, in press). Instructions on how to use the equipment together with a
demonstration of the three applications will be available.
Figure 1.Durham University Analogue Experimenter
A Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre Case Study
4
KEYPAD
K0
1
2
3
F
4
5
6
E
K1
K2
NOT
AND
NAND
NOT
OR
NOR
XOR
K3
7
8
9
D
A
0
B
C
DIGITAL LOGIC
EXPERIMENTER
STB
MSD
BINARY CODED SWITCH
B3
B2
B1
B0
A0
S0
A1
S1
A2
S2
A3
S3
CARRY IN
S5Q
S4Q
S3Q
S2Q
S1Q
S0Q
J
K
SET
CLR
J
Q
K
Q
J-K Flip-Flop
B0
SET
CLR
Q
Q
J-K Flip-Flop
B1
K
SET
CLR
Q
Q
J-K Flip-Flop
N_CLK 0
Q0
CLR
B3 CARRY OUT
S4NQ
S3NQ
S2NQ
S1NQ
D Flip-Flop
S0NQ
D
SET
CLR
Q2
PULSE
P0Q
P1Q
CLR
P0NQ
SHIFT REGISTER
Q
N_CLK 0
Q0
Q1
DSA
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
CLK
CLR
Y3 Y2 Y1 Y0 X3 X2 X1 X0
P1
P2
UP/DOWN COUNTER
PE
Q0
L7 L6 L5 L4 L3 L2 L1 L0
N_CARRY IN
Q1
RESET
Q2
UP/DOWN
Q3
N_CLK 1
CLR
LOGIC HIGH
P0
Q1
P1
Q2
P2
Q3
P3 N_CARRY OUT
Q
N_RST
LED STATE MONITORS
CLK
Q7
DSB
CLOCK GENERATOR
BINARY CODED
DECIMAL DISPLAY
P0
Q
CQ
CNQ
Q0
CLR
D Flip-Flop
SET
Q3
DECADE COUNTER
P1NQ
D
Q2
UP/DOWN
Q
Q3
PULSE
Q1
RESET
P3 N_CARRY OUT
Q1
S5NQ
Q0
N_CARRY IN
UP/DOWN COUNTER
N_CLK 1
4-BIT ADDER
PE
CLK
DECADE COUNTER
B2
STATIC SWITCHES
J
LSD
LOGIC PULL-UP / DOWN
LOGIC LOW
Figure 2. Durham University Digital Experimenter
7. Reflections
It took longer than expected to produce the Experimenters. Thus, in hindsight we should have
completed that phase first before attempting the pedagogical assessment.
8. References
Biggs, J. and Collis, K.F. (1982) Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy. London:
Academic Press.
Johnstone, S. (2004) A project to produce an analogue robot kit for Key Stage 3 students: Do
customer-based projects affect student motivation? International Journal for Engineering Education
20(5) 861-866.
Johnstone, S., Gallant, A.J., Feeney, S.M. and Zeze, D.A. (In press) Bringing Student Centered
Experiences to the Electronics Laboratory: Does this Enhance the Prehension Phase in Kolb’s
Experiential Learning Model? (submitted to Three Rivers Learning and Teaching Conference,
th
Northumbria University, 12 April 2011).
Wolf, D.M. and Kolb, D.A. (1984) Career Development, Personal Growth and Experiential Learning,
th
Organisational Psychology: Readings on Human Behaviour, 4 ed, NJ, Prentice-Hall.
A Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre Case Study
5
Background Information
Discipline
Participants
Electronic Engineering
45-85 students, 3 postgraduate demonstrators, 3 lecturers
Level
Pedagogical
Approach
1
Undergraduate laboratories
Teaching Methods
Practical experimentation
Materials Required
Hand-outs, Experimenter boards, USB connected software
oscilloscopes
Assessment used
Laboratory note book, oral discussion with demonstrator, written
laboratory report
Contact Details
Author(s):
Dr Sherri Johnstone, Dr Andrew Gallant, Dr Stuart Feeney, Dr
Dagou Zeze,
School of Engineering and Computing Sciences, Durham
University, South Road Durham, DH1 3LE, 0191 334 2445,
sherri.johnstone@durham.ac.uk.
March 2011
A Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre Case Study
6