Assessment 2 – Comparing and synthesising journal articles
Weighting: 5%
Due date:
Answer the following questions regarding the journals you were given in week 2 and week 4:
Week 2: Lake & Holt 2019 (PLEASE NOTE: you do not necessecerily need this resource, but it may
help you to refine your skills and understanding of the task to have access to it)
Download chapter only:
https:
link-springer-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/content/pdf/10.1007%2F XXXXXXXXXX3_8.pdf
Week 4: Ahern et al., 2019 NOTE – you must use this article:
https:
cqu-
primo.hosted.exli
isgroup.com/permalink/f/1
43g
TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019
_1586325
Part 1
Let’s assume that you have the notes from Lake and Holt below (take some time - 5-7 mins to read
and understand it)
Read through these notes
Reference 1
Lake, N & Holt, J 2019
Download chapter only:
https:
link-springer-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/content/pdf/10.1007%2F XXXXXXXXXX3_8.pdf
Page Ideas/concepts from article Your thoughts/contrasts/similarities
161
educators need to ensure students have a solid
theoretical grounding in engineering and the
underpinning sciences.
However, engineering industry also requires
industry ready graduates, able to write, be self-
sufficient and check their own work, be
technically capable, and be able to
communicate professionally.
The challenge is to develop engineering
cu
icula that balances theoretic understanding
and relevant, authentic practical application.
This should be developed through a cohesive
educational approach that meets the goal of
producing capable, professional engineering
graduates who are employable in the beginning
stages of their careers with sufficient
Students need engineering theory but
industry also requires graduates that are
self-sufficient, reflective, technically
capable and able to communicate
effectively.
https:
link-springer-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/content/pdf/10.1007%2F XXXXXXXXXX3_8.pdf
https:
cqu-primo.hosted.exli
isgroup.com/permalink/f/1
43g
TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325
https:
cqu-primo.hosted.exli
isgroup.com/permalink/f/1
43g
TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325
https:
cqu-primo.hosted.exli
isgroup.com/permalink/f/1
43g
TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325
https:
link-springer-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/content/pdf/10.1007%2F XXXXXXXXXX3_8.pdf
177
2
theoretical grounding to evolve into high
performing, experienced engineering
professionals in the future.
Main points (from p 177 - Implications and
Concluding Remarks): can/should be
paraphrased and include some of the following
ideas:
The Civil Engineering (Southern Cross
University) designed with:
1) whole of course perspective focusing on
the key elements of:
a) scaffolding;
) participation in authentic projects;
self-assessment, reflective practice and
critical thinking;
c) competency development using
ePortfolios;
d) underpinned by an assessment for
learning strategy.
2) A theoretical competency development
model with key implementation strategies
that:
a) enhance the quality of the student
experience
) assist students to understand and assess
their readiness for professional life.
Critical factors for the high-quality design of
authentic cu
iculum relevant
to producing graduates that are work ready
and can think like engineers
are:
• Em
acing a balanced experience profile of
industry = academic and teaching staff
collaboratively design cu
iculum that is
elevant to industry
• Focusing on a whole of course approach
supported by strong scaffolding
• Supporting students to engage with
competency development and provide a
suitable framework to help to organise their
understanding over time
• Creating an environment where students
can explore their meta-learning capacity and
awareness of their own learning processes
and develop control over study and personal
development
Whole of course view
Authentic projects that include:
self-assessment, reflective practice and
critical thinking
assist students to understand and assess
their readiness for professional life
Work ready and think and work like
engineers
Balanced industry experience
178-
9
• Developing authentic assessment tasks that
esemble the projects that graduate engineers
experience
• Developing students’ ability to think
critically, reflect and self-assess.
• Focusing on assessment for cu
ent and
future learning.
Limitations (from p XXXXXXXXXX):
Approach described above is designed to
achieve the benefits outlined,
Important to understand that systems,
frameworks and models on their own do not
ensure quality and professionally relevant
education.
It is the people that control quality, in
particular, the lecturing staff and their ability
to engage students with engineering
education.
The concepts presented in this chapter do
however provide an excellent foundation
from which quality education can be framed
An environment where students can
eflect on their own practice and CT skills
Limitations:
This is a single case study at one uni and
is dependent on teaching staff and their
ability to engage students
Part 2 (2 out of 5 marks)
Now read source 2 (Ahern et al., 2019 https:
cqu-
primo.hosted.exli
isgroup.com/permalink/f/1
43g
TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019
_1586325 )
Find the following information/answers:
Look in the abstract p 816 for Q1-4
Q XXXXXXXXXXmarks) What do students/engineers need to develop solutions to engineering problems?
Q XXXXXXXXXXmarks) What is the methodology this paper uses to conduct the literature review?
Q XXXXXXXXXXmarks) What is a limitation of CT interventions and strategies given by this article?
Q XXXXXXXXXXmarks) What needs to be done to more fully ensure CT is clearly embedded in university
cu
icula?
On p.816 (introduction)
Q XXXXXXXXXXmarks) What do engineering employers say about the importance of CT in engineering
graduates?
On p.818 - CT education practices in engineering
Q6: (0.33 marks) How does the paper discuss the difference between CT in terms of CT skills and CT
dispositions? Provide at least 2 examples of each type.
https:
cqu-primo.hosted.exli
isgroup.com/permalink/f/1
43g
TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325
https:
cqu-primo.hosted.exli
isgroup.com/permalink/f/1
43g
TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325
https:
cqu-primo.hosted.exli
isgroup.com/permalink/f/1
43g
TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325
Part 3 (3 out of 5 marks – marked as fail/pass/distinction)
Write a XXXXXXXXXXword paragraph summarising the findings from both papers.
To do this you need to compare and contrast both sources and answers you have to the above
questions. This section is interpretive, so you need to provide your opinions and justify them too.
Q7 Does Lake and Holts’ case study chapter, and SCU’s approach agree, with Ahern et al.’s findings?
Was Lake and Holts’ approach longitudinal? Was it qualitative? Was it evaluated? Are metrics of its
success provided? (search through the document – is this info explicitly given? Justify your answer
efe
ing to Ahern et al.’s findings)
Q8 Do Lake and Holt make a difference between skills and dispositions? What does this mean to
their theoretical approach?
Q9 Which paper provides a better overview of the field of CT in engineering education? Why?
Assessment 2 – Comparing and synthesising journal articles