The document summarizes a case study conducted on student engagement in engineering programmes at a school of engineering. A questionnaire and focus groups were used to understand how to better engage students. Key findings included that students found practical assignments, approachable lecturers who relate theory to practice, balanced timetables, and team-based work to be engaging. The focus groups validated these categories and provided suggestions like company visits, shorter lecture times, clear links between lectures and tutorials, and making course materials available online.

1. Student Attitudes to Engagement –
a case study of engineering programmes
Margaret Morgan and Pearse O’Gorman
School of Engineering

2. School of Engineering
Main programmes: MEngBEng Hons
834 FTEs
BSc Hons
Clean Technology
Biomedical Engineering
Electronic Engineering
Mechatronic Engineering
Engineering Management
•HESA: mechanical/production /
Mechanical Engineering manufacturing engineering
Sports Technology
~ 33% of student numbers
Technology with Design

3. Rationale
How we might engage our students more effectively?
retention
Engagement
NSS results

4. Approach
Questionnaire – closed and free response
Heller1 and CASEE2
All years were surveyed – response rate 51%
Student Focus groups
Investigate what could be done improve ‘engagement’
(1) Heller, R et al, Student and Faculty Perceptions of Engagement in Engineering, Journal of Engineering Education, 2010
(2) Bjorkland, S.,and Fortenberry, N., Measuring Faculty and Student Engagement in Engineering Education, CASEE Report
5902001-20050705

5. Survey Results
Students’ familiarity with the term ‘engagement’
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0% Yes
30.0%
No
20.0%
10.0%
.0%
First Second Final All years

6. Lecturer views on a fully engaged student
• attend all timetabled classes, prepared, on time and
contribute enthusiastically in class discussion.
• occupy themselves with purposeful activities when they
are not in class.
• devote at least 35 hrs per week to their studies inclusive
of class contact time.

7. Students’ perception of their participation
levels
85% considered that they
participated fully in their studies
65% believed that attending all
timetabled classes is important

8. How many hours do students spend on their studies
outside timetabled classes?
Typical class contact (hours): 18 – First Year
18 – Second Year
15 – Final Year

9. Perceived benefit and enjoyment
Enjoyable (fun) activities tend to improve participation
4.00
Laboratory/Workshop
Small lecture Engineering Assignments
3.00 Tutorial
Team projects
Enjoyment
Large lecture
Management assignments
2.00
Oral Presentations
1.00
1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00
Benefit

10. Easy to learn situations/activities

11. Three things that SEng should do to
enhance student participation?
Free responses were categorised into five main areas:
• Relating theory to professional practice
• Lecturer attributes
• Programme organisation
• Team working
• e-Learning opportunities

12. Category Student suggestions Free
response
%
Relating theory to professional Real-life assignments 56
practice Practical laboratory work
Industrial visits
Lecturer attributes Interested in students 44
Enthusiasm for subject
Clear communicator
Approachable
Programme organisation Timetabling 38
Balanced assignment workload
Fewer large lectures
Team-working Design-type assignments 29
Small-group tutorials
e-Learning opportunities Podcasts, BlackBoard, CAE, 17
software
Lectures and assignments on-line

13. Focus Groups
• Validate free responses
• Explore what students believe would enhance their
engagement
• Two groups with 8 students per group – balanced
representation across the two programmes and across
all years
• Groups asked to address those main categories identified
for improvement

14. Material is more interesting Assignments and
when we see its relevance. exercises should be
Lecturers should relate lecture related to ‘real’
material using real-life engineering.
examples/anecdotes.
1. Real-life
assignments, engineeri
ng activities
Company visits Science and maths is easier
- to see what engineering is about to understand when we see
- what jobs engineers do. where it is used in everyday
situations.

15. Good if he/she can
relate classroom
Like to feel that our lecturers Humorous material to real-life
care about us and make an engineering problems.
effort to be helpful.
2. Lecturer attributes
Approachable, avail
able outside class
and provides good
Classes are more interesting
feedback on our
We like a lecturer that if the lecturer uses a variety
assignments.
encourages interaction of media, e.g.
and allows us to ask videos, software, demonstra
questions. tions.

16. We would prefer 3
reasonably busy
Our timetables sometimes don’t days per week.
seem to take account of the 10 am starts are better
expense of travelling to Uni or than 9 am as rush-
accommodating a part-time job. hour is avoided.
3. Programme Organisation
Fewer large lectures. Easier to learn
Not good for asking where there is a
questions and Class duration: 2 hours
max. Ideally an hour clear link
whenever questions between the
are asked they tend long and no more than
an hour gap between lecture and
to break the flow. tutorial class.
classes.

17. We like ‘shared
experience’ of working
together in small group
Enjoyable – provided we tutorial. Makes you Good if all team
have clear outline of what’s feel part of a team. members contribute
expected. equally.
4. Team-working
Put good students
We see the benefit of together in groups.
‘team-work’ for
industry. We don’t like group work in
final year.

18. Make notes available
Notes available beforehand on a week-by week
to ease notetaking. basis.
5. e-Learning
Specialist engineering software Podcasts would let us access
should be available somewhere information and revise when
we can socialise together it suits us.
informally.

19. Thank you