Comparison of Student Learning in Physical and Simulated Unit Operations Experiments

Journal of Engineering Education, Jul 2004 by Wiesner, Theodore F, Lan, William

ABSTRACT

Industries are tending toward computer-based simulation, monitoring, and control of processes. This trend suggests an opportunity to modernize engineering laboratory pedagogy to include computer experiments as well as tactile experiments. However, few studies report the impact of simulations upon student learning in engineering laboratories. We evaluated the impact of computer-simulated experiments upon student learning in a senior unit operations laboratory. We compared data on control and test groups from three sources: 1) a comprehensive exam over the course; 2) a questionnaire answered by students regarding how well the areas of ABET Engineering Criterion 3 (a-k) were met; and 3) oral presentations given by the students. Our results indicate that student learning is not adversely affected by introducing computer-based experiments. We therefore conclude that, while the tactile laboratory should remain in the engineering curriculum, the pedagogy can reflect the increasing use of information technology in the manufacturing industries without compromising student learning.

Keywords: laboratory instruction, virtual laboratory, comparative learning

I. INTRODUCTION

In the traditional pedagogy of engineering laboratories, students are required to conduct experiments on lab-scale physical equipment. From this experience, they acquire a tactile appreciation of how equipment works. While this skill set remains important to the manufacturing engineer, he or she must also be conversant in interfacing with the plant via computerized interfaces. Due to equipment costs, safety concerns, human resource limitations, and the increasing availability and capability of computers, manufacturing industries, particularly the chemical process industries (CPI), increasingly use computers to simulate, monitor, and control operations once facilities have been commissioned [1]. Computers have been used to monitor and control chemical and refinery processes since at least 1966 [2], and the use of computers in manufacturing has evolved to the scale of the enterprise. Inputs from diverse corporate functions such as marketing, manufacturing, research, process development, and quality assurance are integrated into a process management and control (PMC) framework [3, 4]. More and more, the engineer works from a control room or, at least, from behind a computer screen. Concomitantly, as computerized process management and control systems become more widespread, comprehensive, and reliable, an engineer spends less and less time out in the field manipulating production rates and other manufacturing variables by adjusting physical equipment.

The trend employing computers to simulate, monitor, and control manufacturing operations suggests an opportunity to modernize the pedagogy of engineering laboratories. To keep laboratory courses relevant to industrial needs, university instructors should consider the use of computers to monitor and simulate laboratory experiments. Indeed, Sorby et al. [5] reported "a serious disconnect between what universities provide for mechanical engineering education and what industry needs from the matriculated students they hire." The disconnect lay in the use of computers for design, analysis, and manufacturing courses.

Modernization of engineering laboratories in such a manner supports the trend in higher education to increase authenticity of instruction. Authenticity of instruction is the relevance of pedagogy to the professional practice of a discipline. It is one of the major principles of effective learning and instruction [6-8], Authentic instruction maximizes students' learning by incorporating into learning situations the fidelity and complexity of real-life tasks that students will encounter in their future careers [9]. Computer interfaces are authentic in the sense that they are widely used in the manufacturing industries.

In addition to greater fidelity to the future employment environment, the use of computer-based technologies to teach traditional laboratory courses is attractive from other standpoints as well. Engineering educators report reduced equipment and space costs, along with increased faculty and staff productivity [10]. Many instructors report improved quality of learning [10-14]. As a result, there is currently widespread development of "labware," as reported in the survey by Anido et al. [15].

However the following question arises: how much is student learning compromised by the reduction of tactile or "hands-on" learning? Experience has shown that the computer cannot replace the physical laboratory, but it can greatly enhance the understanding of real world situations. On the general topic of research into technology-mediated instruction, Kadiyala and Crynes [16] published an exhaustive overview of findings and trends over the past fifteen years. Reviewing 760 reports, they found convincing evidence that information technologies can enhance learning when the pedagogy is sound, and when there is a good match of technology, techniques, and objectives. However, Kadiyala and Crynes could not restrict their reviews to only engineering and related subjects, for there were too few studies that met their criteria. One criterion in particular was notable: provide quantitative results on an outcome variable measured in the same way with a technology-taught or assisted group and a conventionally instructed group. They did summarize two studies of sophomore chemical engineering courses. The first study [17] found that student performance improved when Resource Based Education (i.e. computer-aided learning packages, software tools, etc.) was employed. The second study [18] reported that students' satisfaction and attitudes improved using multimedia and cooperative learning.