The Quality of Solutions to OpenEnded Problem Solving Activities and its Relation to FirstYear Stude

1
The Quality of Solutions to Open-Ended Problem
Solving Activities and its Relation to
First-Year Student Team Effectiveness

• Tamara J. Moore
• Heidi A. Diefes-Dux
• P.K. Imbrie

2
What are Model-Eliciting Activities?

• MEAs are authentic assessment activities that are
  open-ended with a fictitious client
• Connect mathematical modeling to other fields
• Elicit students thinking in the process of
  solving
• Require teams of problem solvers

3
Research Question

• What relationship exists between student team
  functioning (as measured by interdependency, goal
  setting, and potency) and performance on
  Model-Eliciting Activities?

4
Setting

• ENGR 106 Engineering Problem Solving and
  Computer Tools
• First-year required introductory course in
  engineering (Approx. 1400 students)
• Problem Solving Mathematical Modeling
• Teaming
• Engineering Fundamentals statistics/economics/lo
  gic development
• Computer Tools Excel/MATLAB

5
Factory Layout MEA

• Client The general manager of a metal
  fabrication company
• Provide results for 122,500 ft2 square layout
• Placement of departments extrusion, heat-treat,
  shipping/receiving, and office space
• Total distance and order of material travel for
  each product
• Final department dimensions
• Propose a reusable procedure to determine any
  square plant layout that takes spatial concerns
  and material travel into account

6
Teaming

• What are teams?
• Task-oriented
• Interdependent social entities
• Individual accountability to team
• Why encourage teaming?
• Research indicates student participation in
  collaborative work increases learning and
  engagement
• Accreditation Board for Engineering and
  Technology (ABET)
• Demand from industry

7
Team Effectiveness Scale

• Student-reported questionnaire to measure team
  functionality
• 26-item Likert scale
• Given immediately following MEA
• Internal reliability measured
• Cronbachs Alpha gt 0.95 (N 1400)
• Subscales
• Interdependency, Potency, Goal Setting, and
  Learning

8
Researcher Observations

• Observation of one group per lab visited
• Based on teaming literature
• Interdependency 3 items
• Potency 2 items
• Goal Setting 2 items
• Teams received 1-5 score for 7 items
• Detailed field notes also taken

9
Quality Assurance Guide
Does the product meet the clients needs?
10
Results

• 11 student teams observed
• Correlation of rankings of
• 11 teams self-reporting ranking
• 11 observation score ranking
• Aggregate score ranking
• With the MEA Quality Score

11
Results

• MEA Quality Score vs.11 teams self-reporting
  ranking
• Kendalls Beta-Tau coefficient is -0.410
• Not statistically significant at a 0.05 level
  (2-tailed correlation) (p0.108)
• Moderate degree of correlation

12
Results
13
Results

• MEA Quality Score vs.11 teams observed ranking
• Kendalls Beta-Tau coefficient is -0.572
• Statistically significant at a 0.05 level
  (2-tailed correlation)
• Moderate degree of correlation

14
Results
15
Results

• MEA Quality Score vs. Aggregate Team score
  ranking
• Kendalls Beta-Tau coefficient is -0.733
• Statistically significant at a 0.01 level
  (2-tailed correlation)
• Marked degree of correlation

16
Results
17
Findings

• Data suggests that
• More work is needed in having students understand
  how to self-assess their teaming abilities
• Research is needed to understand which of the
  team functioning categories are most important
  especially in the observer rankings

18
Significance of the Study

• Provides insight to the fundamental question
• Does team functionality affect team performance?
• Leads to other research questions
• Which characteristics of teaming are more likely
  to create better solutions?
• How are these team attributes best fostered in
  the classroom?
• Contributes to the discussion on ABET and the
  role of teaming and problem solving in
  undergraduate engineering education

19
Questions?

• To contact me
• Tamara Moore
• tamara_at_umn.edu