ICT Needs and Trends in Engineering Education
Abstract— Many technologies are shaping the way we learn
and teach engineering education. Using learning technologies
successfully in the classroom requires educational research to
discover the usefulness of existing tools, the absence of desired
tools, and the best pedagogical-use models to ensure that student
knowledge grows and matures. This paper documents the results
of a global survey on engineering education learning technologies
that was distributed to a diverse group of engineering
researchers and practitioners. The survey asked each participant
to choose the three learning technologies that will likely impact
engineering education in the near future. 375 participants
responded to the survey offering the current view of learning
technologies in engineering education. The results from data
mining are documented so that researchers in learning
technologies can focus on theory and product development.
Keywords— Engineering education,
enhanced learning meta-trends.
I.
survey,
technology areas and consistent results were obtained
regardless of continent of residence. The following
technologies were selected.
•
3D printing: a process of making a three-dimensional
solid object of virtually any shape from a digital
model [5].
•
Augmented reality for learning: a technology that
basically merges information or images with video
streamed from a webcam or mobile cellular telephone
camera. This can be considered a step beyond data
mashup. This technology can be applied to some of
the many potential revolutionary applications in
education, including the study of architecture, art,
anatomy, languages [6], decoration, or any other
subject in which a graphic, simulation or 3D model
could improve comprehension [7].
•
Cloud computing: this technology is based on the idea
that a user’s information and software must be on the
Internet and no longer stored only on the hard disk of
the computer. All user data and services will be
available in any device with an Internet connection
and a web browser [8].
•
Digital accreditations (badges): its use in e-learning is
intended to foster student motivation increase by
gamifying the educational process [9].
•
E-books and digital libraries: e-books replace
traditional printed text with electronic text and
potentially dynamic content accessed through
hyperlinks and embedded media [10]. Today, many of
those technologies have matured and the penetration
of successful e-book readers, such as the Amazon
Kindle and Apple iPad, into the worldwide consumer
market has finally made e-books and digital libraries
attractive and affordable. Engineering textbook
publishers are beginning to publish textbooks in
electronic form and often supplement the traditional
printed text with dynamic content. Thus, this
technology seems poised to dramatically change the
distribution of the traditional asynchronous and
supplemental study materials from print to electronic
form.
•
E-learning
platforms
and
architectures:
content/learning management systems designed to
encapsulate, administer, and assess student learning of
educational modules. Example e-learning platforms
include the commercially licensed Blackboard
environment and the open source Moodle
environment. Most e-learning platforms include tools
for content distribution, social interaction (chat rooms,
forums, whiteboards, and blogs), and automated
assessment through homework and exams. These
technology-
INTRODUCTION
There are various references and bibliographic sources in
which experts predict which technologies will be the most
relevant in future education [1]. One example is the UK eLearning Market Report [2]. The Horizon Reports also predict
the impact of emergent technologies on education across the
world [3]. However, these studies about general educational
trends do not focus specifically on the needs of engineering
educators in higher education [4]. Engineering educators may
require different technologies than the ones used in general
education.
This paper documents the results of a worldwide survey of
engineering education researchers and practitioners as a first
step in measuring trends and perceptions. The survey was
designed as a minimal instrument where each participant was
asked to choose three technologies that had the most potential
to have an impact on engineering education. Each participant
also predicted the time when the selected technologies would
become a standard instructional tool.
The results of the survey can be a tool for researchers in the
area of learning technologies for engineering education by
identifying the perceived most important technologies in this
arena in the near future. As such, it may help researchers
decide where to focus their efforts.
II.
METHODOLOGY
The survey relied on the demographic reliability of the
distribution list because it was sent to members of several
worldwide engineering education societies and to the authors’
list of international engineering education conferences.
The survey asked the participants to predict the most
important learning technologies that will impact engineering
education in the near future. Each participant voted for three
978-1-4799-8706-1/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
20-24 September 2015, Florence, Italy
Proceedings of 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL)
platforms have been integrated into both residential
campus educational models as well as in distance
learning educational models. Studies on the
effectiveness of using parts of these platforms with
students have been documented for Spain [11], India
[12] the United States [13] and some other countries
as well.
•
Games & virtual worlds to foster student’s
engagement and motivation proponents of educational
games argue that today’s students are used to a
different kind of interaction [14]. Students would
benefit from more interactive and engaging learning
material because this is how they have acquired a
great deal of their cultural knowledge [15] [16].
•
Intelligent
tutoring:
these
systems
provide
personalized support to students during their learning
process [17].
•
Interactive video lectures and video conferencing:
broadband wired, wireless, and cellular networks have
been extended to large numbers of citizens in
developed societies. These networks allow the
transmission of duplex audiovisual data and greatly
enhance the utility of video conferencing. State-ofthe-art software packages available on any computer
allow simultaneous file sharing and provide basic
collaboration tools such as whiteboards [18] [19] [20].
•
Learning analytics: the measurement, collection,
analysis and reporting of data about learners and their
contexts, for purposes of understanding and
optimising learning and the environments in which it
occurs. Much of the software that is currently used for
learning analytics duplicates functionality of web
analytics software, but applies it to learner interactions
with content.
•
Learning objects reusability and digital repositories: a
digital learning object [21] consists of content (e.g.,
images, text, videos, and simulations) and an interface
(e.g., metadata) to allow user access. These objects are
reusable, manageable, and discoverable, and they
represent the basis for content delivery and exchange
in an educational environment. This initiative has
focused mainly on educational contents, leading to
results such as ADL SCORM, IEEE LOM, or IMS
QTI.
•
Massive Open Online Courses: MOOCs have lately
attracted important interests to the educational
landscape. They may be used to acquire professional
competences following pre-defined personal learning
pathways.
•
Mobile and ubiquitous technologies for Learning
(including Smartphones and iPad): mobile cellular
telephones as well as tablet computers present new
platforms for learning applications [22]. Many of
these devices have significant solid-state data storage
and thus make large learning databases portable.
Common examples include language dictionaries,
historical references, and corporate training guides
[23]. Perhaps more powerful, however, is the potential
for dynamically served content from cellular
networks, wireless hotspots, and global positioning
systems [24]. This location awareness allows
augmented reality [25] and knowledge discovery [26]
with new data pushed to the user as the user moves
within the real space of the location geography [27].
•
Open source, open standards, and federated systems:
software based on open distribution of the source code
that forms the software’s foundations [28]. This
means that any technically competent programmer
can examine the inner workings of the source code
and make changes to the operation of the software.
According to Pountain [29], an open standard is a
standard that is independent of any single institution
or manufacturer, and to which users may propose
amendments [28]. Open standards are transparent
descriptions of data and behavior that form the basis
of interoperability [28], which is the basis of the
creation of federated systems. Some common open
standards include Digital Object Identifier System
(DOI) and Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI).
•
P2P on-line assessment: consists on getting students
to evaluate their peers’ work. This is useful for large
communities in which it is impossible for teachers to
grade individually by hand [30] [31].
•
Simulators and virtual laboratories: are software
programs that emulate the operation of real
laboratories and enable students to practice in a “safe”
environment before using real components. The main
difference is that virtual labs are usually web-based
while simulators are not. Examples of virtual
laboratories include an optical networking virtual lab
[32] and a virtual lab for programmable logic
controllers [33].
•
Remote laboratories: provide a virtual interface to a
real component. These laboratories usually allow for
the component behavior to be observed through a
webcam and thus give students a more realistic view
of system behavior [34] [35] [36].
•
Web 2.0 tools and social networks for learning
(podcasting, wikis, blogs, microblogs, bookmarking,
tagging, etc.): social interaction puts the user at the
center of attention as an active player. This notion
naturally extends from the Web 2.0 philosophy [37],
in which content is the key driver of new media
applications and collaboration and social interaction
are the driving forces behind opinions (e.g., through
blogs), knowledge (e.g., on wikis) or the sharing of
digital artifacts (e.g., presentations, photos, audio, and
video).
978-1-4799-8706-1/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
20-24 September 2015, Florence, Italy
Proceedings of 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL)
III.
RESULTS
The results show that some technologies were indeed
predicted by the survey participants as the most promising for
engineering education: e-learning platforms and architectures
(9.69%) were forecasted in a short term. The second most
voted technology was 3D printing (8.36%). It was forecasted
for a mid-term.
Other technologies that also obtained a significant number
of votes were e-books and digital libraries (8.18%), simulators
(7.91%) and mobile and ubiquitous learning technologies
(7.02%). Table 1 shows the complete list of results.
TABLE I.
SURVEY RESULTS (N=375).
Technologies
% Votes
3D printing
8.36%
Augmented Reality for Learning
3.02%
Cloud computing
6.49%
Digital accreditations
1.24%
E-books and digital libraries
8.18%
E-learning Platforms and Architectures
9.69%
Games & Virtual Worlds
3.56%
Gesture-based computing
0.80%
Intelligent tutoring systems
4.71%
Interactive video lectures and video conferencing
5.78%
Learning analytics and semantic web
2.31%
Learning Objects reusability and digital repositories
2.76%
Massive Open Online Courses
6.58%
Mobile and Ubiquitous Learning
7.02%
Open Source, Open Standards, and Federated Systems
4.09%
P2P online assessment
0.89%
Remote labs
5.60%
Simulators
7.91%
Virtual labs
6.31%
Web 2.0 tools and social networks for learning
4.71%
IV.
CONCLUSIONS
A learning technology survey was designed and
administered to a significant and diverse set of participants that
are actively researching and practicing engineering education
around the world. The major contribution of this study is a
large data set collected from a statistically significant sample
population of more than 375 worldwide survey participants.
The survey results indicate that e-learning platforms and
architectures are still very promising for engineering education.
Also they indicates that some engineering-focused technologies
such as 3D printing, simulators and virtual/remote labs are
significantly impacting the engineering educational process.
Thus, researchers may use these results to make decisions
about what technology research areas to pursue. The data set
also suggests trends in engineering education learning
technologies and provides a glimpse into how educators expect
these technology areas to enhance and change engineering
education in the near future.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors acknowledge the members of the IEEE
Education Society, the ASEE Educational Research and
Methods Division (ERM), and the ASEE Engineering
Technology Division (ETD), as well as the IEEE EDUCON
paper authors and conference attendees for their participation
in the survey. The authors also acknowledge the governing
boards of the IEEE Education Society, ASEE ERM, ASEE
ETD, and IEEE EDUCON for their help in conducting this
survey. The authors also acknowledge the New Media
Consortium, who publishes the Horizon Report Project, for
their support and inspirational work.
The authors acknowledge the support provided by eMadridCM project ("Investigación y Desarrollo de Tecnologías para el
E-Learning en la Comunidad de Madrid – S2013/ICE-2715).
REFERENCES
[1]
J. Heywood, “Engineering Education: Research and Development in
Curriculum and Instruction,” IEEE Press: Piscataway, N.J., Wiley
Interscience. 2005.
[2] D. Patterson, G. Jung, and G. Broadhead, “The UK e-learning Market,”
Learning Light Limited, 2009.
[3] Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., and Freeman, A. (2015).
NMC Horizon Report: 2015 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas:
The New Media Consortium.
[4] S. Martin, G. Diaz, E. Sancristobal, R. Gil, M. Castro, and J. Peire,
“New Technology Trends In Education: Seven Years Of Forecasts And
Convergence,” Computers & Education, Volume 57, Issue 3, November
2011, Pages 1893-1906.
[5] M. Vona, N.H. Shekar, "Teaching Robotics Software With the Open
Hardware Mobile Manipulator", IEEE Transactions on Education,
Volume: 56, Issue: 1, 2013, Page(s): 42 - 47.
[6] M. Sugimoto, “A Mobile Mixed Reality Environment for Childrenʼs
Storytelling using a Handheld Projector and a Robot,” IEEE
Transactions on Learning Technologies, Mar. 2011.
[7] F. Zhou, H.B.L. Duh, and M. Billinghurst, “Trends in Augmented reality
Tracking, Interaction and Display: A Review of Ten Years of ISMAR,”
In proceedings of ISMAR 2008, Cambridge, UK, 15-18th of September
2008.
[8] L. Xu, D. Huang, W. Tsai, "Cloud-Based Virtual Laboratory for
Network Security Education", IEEE Transactions on Education,
Volume: 57 , Issue: 3, 2014, Page(s): 145 - 150.
[9] I. Boticki, J. Baksa, P. Seow, C. Looi, "Usage of a mobile social
learning platform with virtual badges in a primary school", Computers &
Education, Volume 86, 2015, Pages 120-136.
[10] B.L. Harrison, “E-books and the future of reading,” IEEE Computer
Graphics and Applications, vol.20, no.3, pp.32-39, May/Jun 2000.
[11] M. Llamas-Nistal, M. Caeiro-Rodriguez, and M. Castro, “Use of ELearning Functionalities and Standards: The Spanish Case”. Education,
IEEE Transactions on. In Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available online
19 April 2011, ISSN 0018-9359, DOI: 10.1109/TE.2010.2090154.
[12] M. Goyal and S. Murthy, “Student perceptions on the use of new
techonologies in engineering courses recorded lectures on the internet
978-1-4799-8706-1/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
20-24 September 2015, Florence, Italy
Proceedings of 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL)
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
and moodle,” International Workshop on Technology for Education. pp.
36-41, 2009.
M. Machado and E. Tao, “Whiteboard vs. Moodle: Comparing user
experience of learning management systems”, Proceedings of the 37th
Annual Frontiers In Education Conference, pp.S4J-7-S4J-12, 2007.
M. Sandi and A. Robinson, “Boredom in the lecture theatre: an
investigation into the contributors, moderators and outcomes of boredom
amongst university students”. British Educational Research Journal 35,
no. 2: 243-258, 2009.
P. Moreno-Ger, I. Martínez-Ortiz, J.L. Sierra, and B. Fernández-Manjón,
“A content-centric development process model”, Computer, vol. 41, no.
3, pp. 24–30, 2008.
J.-C. Marty and T. Carron, “Observation of Collaborative Activities in a
Game-Based Learning Platform,” IEEE Transactions on Learning
Technologies, vol. 4, Jan. 2011, pp. 98-110. M. Prensky, “Digital
Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1, On the Horizon”, Vol. 9 Issue
5, Pages 1 – 6, 2001.
P.J. Munoz-Merino, M. Fernandez Molina, M. Munoz-Organero, C.
Delgado Kloos, "Motivation and Emotions in Competition Systems for
Education: An Empirical Study", IEEE Transactions on Education,
Volume: 57, Issue: 3, 2014 , Page(s): 182 - 187.
S. Chandra, “Experiences in Personal Lecture Video Capture,” IEEE
Transactions on Learning Technologies, (preprint) 31 Mar. 2011, pp.
235-247.
B. Marsh, N. Mitchell, and P. Adamczyk, “Interactive video technology:
Enhancing professional learning in initial teacher education”. Computers
& Education 54, number 3, 2010.
R. Smith, “Guidelines for authors of learning objects”. 2004 NMC, The
New Media Consortium.
C. Schuiler, “Pockets of Potential. Using Mobile Technologies to
Promote Children’s Learning”, New York: The Joan Ganz Cooney
Center at Sesame Workshop, 2009.
M. Lloyd, “Mobile Learning Workshop: Summary of Survey Results”.
Queensland University of Technology, 2007.
G. Gay, R. Reiger, and T. Bennington, “Using mobile computing to
enhance field study”. Carrying the conversation forward. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum, 2002.
G. Liestøl, “Situated Simulations: A Prototyped Augmented reality
Genre for Learning on the iPhone”. International Journal of Interactive
Mobile Technologies (iJIM), Vol 3, 2009.
N. Bouvin, C. Brodersen F. Hansen, O. Iversen, and P. Nørregaard,
“Tools of Contextualization: Extending the Classroom to the Field”.
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Interaction design and children.
Boulder, Colorado, Pages: 24–31, 2005.
F. Hansen, N. Bouvin, “Mobile Learning in Context — Context-aware
Hypermedia in the Wild”. International Journal of Interactive Mobile
Technologies (iJIM), Vol 3, No 1, 2009.
J. Dalziel, “Open Standards Versus Open Source in E-Learning”,
EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY, Number 4, 2003.
D. Pountain, “The Penguin Dictionary of Computing”. New York:
Penguin Putnam, 2003.
M.M. Brut, F. Sedes, and S.D. Dumitrescu, “A Semantic-Oriented
Approach for Organizing and Developing Annotation for E-Learning,”
IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, Dec. 2010.
S. Martin, M. Castro, D. Gago, D. Torres, "Empowering communities on
line: A Massive Open Online Community on App Development and
Entrepreneurship", 2013 IEEE International Conference on Teaching,
Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE), 2013, Page(s): 37 40.
S. Ros, R. Hernandez, R. Read, M. Rodriguez, R. Pastor, G. Diaz,
"UNED OER Experience: From OCW to Open UNED", IEEE
Transactions on Education, Volume: 57, Issue: 4, 2014, Page(s): 248 254.
J.A. Muoz, J.L. Guzman, F. Rodriguez, M. Berenguel, and A.
Pawlowski, “Virtual lab for programmable logic controllers.” ETFA
2009. IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory
Automation. Page(s): 1-7, 2009.
J. Garcia-Zubia, P. Orduña, D. López-de-Ipiña, U. Hernández, U. and I.
Trueba, “Remote Laboratories from the Software Engineering point of
view”. IEEE Transaction on Industrial Engineering, July 2007.
C. Gravier, J. Fayolle, B. Bayard, M. Ates, and J. Lardon, “State of the
Art about Remote Laboratories Paradigms - Foundations of Ongoing
Mutations”. International Journal of Online Engineering, Vol 4, No 1,
2008.
I. Gustavsson, J. Zackrisson, H. Åkesson, L. Håkansson, I. Claesson,
and T. Lagö, “Remote Operation and Control of Traditional Laboratory
Equipment”. International Journal of Online Engineering, 2006.
J. Fontenla, M. Caeiro, and N. Martin, “Towards a Generalized
Architecture for the Integration of Tools in LMSs”, International
Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 2009, Volume: 4, Issue:
S1:+SIIE'2008. 2, No 1.
J. Jarvis, What Would Google Do? Collins business, 2009.
978-1-4799-8706-1/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
20-24 September 2015, Florence, Italy
Proceedings of 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL)