liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Publications (10 of 112) Show all publications
Carstensen, A.-K. & Bernhard, J. (2019). Design science research: a powerful tool for improving methods in engineering education research. European Journal of Engineering Education, 44(1-2), 85-102
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Design science research: a powerful tool for improving methods in engineering education research
2019 (English)In: European Journal of Engineering Education, ISSN 0304-3797, E-ISSN 1469-5898, Vol. 44, no 1-2, p. 85-102Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Modelling is a central activity in practical engineering and something that is also useful in engineering education research (EER). Additionally, qualitative research methods have found important applications in engineering research, although their use in EER has not always been widely accepted. Design science research is a qualitative research approach in which the object of study is the design process, i.e. it simultaneously generates knowledge about the method used to design an artefact and the design or the artefact itself. This paper uses techniques from design science research to analyse the method used when deriving the learning of a complex concept(LCC) model, which we developed while designing teaching sequences for a course on electrical engineering. Our results demonstrate the value of design science research in EER and suggest that the LCC model is generally applicable in this field.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2019
Keywords
Modelling; design science research; design-based research; engineering education research
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-153467 (URN)10.1080/03043797.2018.1498459 (DOI)2-s2.0-85050569848 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Swedish Research Council, VR 721-2011-5570
Available from: 2018-12-18 Created: 2018-12-18 Last updated: 2019-08-20Bibliographically approved
Bernhard, J. & Carstensen, A.-K. (2019). Learning of complex concepts: Engineering students’ developing epistemic fluency in an electric circuit theory course. In: SEFI annual conference, 2019, Budapest: . Paper presented at SEFI annual conference, 2019, Budapest, September 16-19, 2019.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Learning of complex concepts: Engineering students’ developing epistemic fluency in an electric circuit theory course
2019 (English)In: SEFI annual conference, 2019, Budapest, 2019Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

An important aim in engineering education is that students should not only acquire knowledge, but they should be able to use this knowledge in action. I.e. they should develop professional capabilities for knowledgeable action and actionable knowledge. 

According to Markauskaite and Goodyear professional knowledgeable action requires a holistic, fluent and co-ordinated use of semiotic and material tools, body and environment. Knowledgeable action requires the development of epistemic fluency that involves the ability to smoothly move between abstract, contextual and situated ways of knowing and the capacity to employ multiple epistemic tools. However, the epistemic complexity of knowledgeable action is often underestimated in engineering education. This epistemic complexity has been addressed by Carstensen and Bernhard who have developed the notion of “learning of complex concepts” (LCC-model) that models how students learn to master epistemic tools by “making links”. 

In this study we have used the LCC-model as an investigatory tool to analyse video-recordings from electric circuit theory courses. The aim was to gain an increased understanding in how students develop epistemic fluency. We will discuss critical features in the design of labs and in the use of real experiments, computer simulations, modelling and other semiotic and material tools in labs for students’ development of epistemic fluency. The results of this study show that labs can be designed to facilitate students’ development of epistemic fluency by making links.

Keywords
Learning of complex concepts, epistemic fluency, knowledge in action, lab-work.
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-157979 (URN)
Conference
SEFI annual conference, 2019, Budapest, September 16-19, 2019
Available from: 2019-06-21 Created: 2019-06-21 Last updated: 2019-06-27Bibliographically approved
Edström, K., Kolmos, A., Malmi, L., Bernhard, J. & Andersson, P. (2018). A bottom-up strategy for establishment of EER in three Nordic countries: The role of networks. European Journal of Engineering Education, 43(2), 219-234
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A bottom-up strategy for establishment of EER in three Nordic countries: The role of networks
Show others...
2018 (English)In: European Journal of Engineering Education, ISSN 0304-3797, E-ISSN 1469-5898, Vol. 43, no 2, p. 219-234Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper investigates the emergence of an engineering education research (EER) community in three Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland and Sweden. First, an overview of the current state of Nordic EER authorship is produced through statistics on international publication. Then, the history of EER and its precursor activities is described in three national narratives. These national storylines are tied together in a description of recent networking activities, aiming to strengthen the EER communities on the Nordic level. Taking these three perspectives together, and drawing on concepts from community of practice theory, network theory and learning network theory, we discuss factors behind the differences in the countries, and draw some conclusions about implications for networking activities in a heterogeneous community. Further, we discuss the role of networks for affording a joint identity.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2018
Keywords
engineering education research; research networks; community building; Nordic engineering education research
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-129838 (URN)10.1080/03043797.2016.1190956 (DOI)2-s2.0-84976286914 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Nordic Council of Ministers
Available from: 2016-06-29 Created: 2016-06-29 Last updated: 2018-07-19Bibliographically approved
Bernhard, J. (Ed.). (2018). Engineering Education Research in Europe – coming of age: Special Issue. Taylor & Francis
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Engineering Education Research in Europe – coming of age: Special Issue
2018 (English)Collection (editor) (Refereed)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2018. p. 158
Keywords
Engineering education research
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-153473 (URN)
Note

Special Issue 43(2) of European Journal of Engineering Education

Available from: 2018-12-18 Created: 2018-12-18 Last updated: 2018-12-19Bibliographically approved
Bernhard, J. (2018). Engineering Education Research in Europe: coming of age. European Journal of Engineering Education, 43(2), 167-170
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Engineering Education Research in Europe: coming of age
2018 (English)In: European Journal of Engineering Education, ISSN 0304-3797, E-ISSN 1469-5898, Vol. 43, no 2, p. 167-170Article in journal (Other academic) Published
Abstract [en]

n/a

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2018
Keywords
Engineering education research
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-153469 (URN)10.1080/03043797.2017.1412854 (DOI)000426914500001 ()2-s2.0-85043532558 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-12-18 Created: 2018-12-18 Last updated: 2019-01-08Bibliographically approved
Bernhard, J. (2017). Beyond active learning: Critical factors for learning in labs. In: 7th Research in Engineering Education Symposium (REES 2017), Bogota, Columbia, 6-8 July 2017, Volume 2 of 2: . Paper presented at 7th Research in Engineering Education Symposium (REES), Bogotá, July 6-8, 2017. (pp. 532-540). Research In Engineering Education Network, 2
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Beyond active learning: Critical factors for learning in labs
2017 (English)In: 7th Research in Engineering Education Symposium (REES 2017), Bogota, Columbia, 6-8 July 2017, Volume 2 of 2, Research In Engineering Education Network , 2017, Vol. 2, p. 532-540Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Active learning is generally defined as an approach that engages students in the learning process and is supposed to lead to consistently better and deeper understanding. In an earlier study students in mechanics were offered the choice between labs using probe-ware (MBL) [FMCE normalised gain: 48%] and experimental problem-solving labs [18% gain]. Both options were considered to employ active learning, but the difference in gains was remarkable. As this contradicts the conclusions in the literature a follow-up study was performed. Analysis of video recordings from the labs showed that in probe-ware labs students linked observed data to concepts, whereas students in the problem-solving labs made little use of physical concepts in their modeling of phenomena. One implication of this study is that we have to go beyond surface interpretations of “active learning”, and in a detailed and nuanced way look into the ways in which students are actually active in a learning environment.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Research In Engineering Education Network, 2017
Keywords
Active learning, lab-work, engineering education research
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-138020 (URN)9781510849419 (ISBN)
Conference
7th Research in Engineering Education Symposium (REES), Bogotá, July 6-8, 2017.
Funder
Swedish Research Council, VR 721-2011-5570
Available from: 2017-06-06 Created: 2017-06-06 Last updated: 2018-08-27Bibliographically approved
Bernhard, J. & Carstensen, A.-K. (2017). “Real” experiments or computers in labs – opposites or synergies?: Experiences from a course in electric circuit theory. In: José Carlos Quadrado, Jorge Bernardino, João Rocha (Ed.), Proceedingsof the 45th SEFI Annual Conference 2017 Education Excellence for Sustainability: Education Excellence for Sustainability. Paper presented at 45th SEFI Conference, 18-21 September 2017, Azores, Portugal (pp. 1300-1307). Bryssels: SEFI – Société Européenne pour la Formation des Ingénieurs
Open this publication in new window or tab >>“Real” experiments or computers in labs – opposites or synergies?: Experiences from a course in electric circuit theory
2017 (English)In: Proceedingsof the 45th SEFI Annual Conference 2017 Education Excellence for Sustainability: Education Excellence for Sustainability / [ed] José Carlos Quadrado, Jorge Bernardino, João Rocha, Bryssels: SEFI – Société Européenne pour la Formation des Ingénieurs , 2017, p. 1300-1307Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In this study we report from our experiences designing and re-designing a lab where engineering students studied transient response in electric circuits. In the first version of the lab students had difficulties doing the mathematical modeling of the experimentally measured graphs as it required students’ to link the time- and frequency domains as well as the object/event and theory/model worlds simultaneously. In the re-designed lab some computer simulations were included together with the original experiments on real circuits. The simulations opened up for learning and enabled students to establish links that are hard access directly with real experiments.Still doing real experiments is important to secure students ability to make links between models and theories and the physical reality. This study demonstrates that synergetic learning effects can be achieved by a careful design using an insightful combination of real experiments and computer simulations.  Hence, we propose that the question of “real” experiments or “virtual” labs using computer simulations are best for students’ learning is not an either or question. Rather, it is a question of finding the right blend to achieve synergetic effects.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Bryssels: SEFI – Société Européenne pour la Formation des Ingénieurs, 2017
Keywords
Interaction analysis, experiential learning, modeling, simulations
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-153470 (URN)9789899887572 (ISBN)
Conference
45th SEFI Conference, 18-21 September 2017, Azores, Portugal
Funder
Swedish Research Council, VR 721-2011-5570
Available from: 2018-12-18 Created: 2018-12-18 Last updated: 2018-12-19Bibliographically approved
Carstensen, A.-K. & Bernhard, J. (2016). Design Science Research as an Approach for Engineering Education Research. In: Jerker Björkqvist, Kristina Edström, Ronald J. Hugo, Juha Kontio, Janne Roslöf, Rick Sellens & Seppo Virtanen (Ed.), The 12th International CDIO Conference: . Paper presented at The 12th International CDIO Conference (pp. 1072-1081). Åbo: Turku University of Applied Sciences
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Design Science Research as an Approach for Engineering Education Research
2016 (English)In: The 12th International CDIO Conference / [ed] Jerker Björkqvist, Kristina Edström, Ronald J. Hugo, Juha Kontio, Janne Roslöf, Rick Sellens & Seppo Virtanen, Åbo: Turku University of Applied Sciences , 2016, p. 1072-1081Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Design Science Research is a research approach that is widely used in information systems, IS, but also in other areas where the development of an artefact is parallel to the development of a theory or methodology for this development. In our research we have developed the model “the learning of a complex concept”, LCC, as a method to analyze learning outcomes, as well intended as experienced by students.

In this paper we will show how this model was developed, and how design science research was used to develop a methodology that may now be used in the iterative design and analysis of learning outcomes. LCC was developed while designing teaching sequences in a course in electrical engineering. The model was derived as a means to analyse videorecordings of students’ actions, during lab-sessions in an electric circuit course in the first year of an electrical engineering program.

The model has contributed to the understanding of learning but also to the design of learning materials, and design science research has improved the methodology. Can this become an especially appropriate methodology for analysis of CDIO-projects? What may be learned, and what is actually learned in a CDIO-project? How can “the learning of a complex concept” (LCC) be used in the iterative design process designing a CDIO-project?

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Åbo: Turku University of Applied Sciences, 2016
Series
Research Reports from Turku University of Applied Sciences, ISSN 1796-9964 ; 45
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-129228 (URN)978-952-216-610-4 (ISBN)
Conference
The 12th International CDIO Conference
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 721-2011-5570
Available from: 2016-06-14 Created: 2016-06-14 Last updated: 2016-06-30Bibliographically approved
Bernhard, J., Edström, K. & Kolmos, A. (2016). Learning through design-implement experiences: A literature review. In: : . Paper presented at Work-in-progress presented at the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016..
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Learning through design-implement experiences: A literature review
2016 (English)Conference paper, Published paper (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

In this paper we introduce some literature relevant for design-based learning, in particular for design-implement experiences in line with CDIO Standard 5. The aim is to inform the development of such learning experiences and to indicate some areas where new research would be of relevance to educators.

Keywords
Design-based learning, design-implement experiences, literature review, engineering education research
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-129227 (URN)
Conference
Work-in-progress presented at the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.
Available from: 2016-06-14 Created: 2016-06-14 Last updated: 2016-06-30Bibliographically approved
Carstensen, A.-K. & Bernhard, J. (2016). Make links: overcoming the threshold and entering the portal of understanding. In: Ray Land, Jan H. F. Meyer, Michael T. Flanagan (Ed.), Threshold concepts in practice: (pp. 211-222). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Make links: overcoming the threshold and entering the portal of understanding
2016 (English)In: Threshold concepts in practice / [ed] Ray Land, Jan H. F. Meyer, Michael T. Flanagan, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2016, p. 211-222Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In engineering the student is often ‘faced with contrasting representations or models’ (Entwistle et al., 2005, p. 9), which Entwistle explores as ‘ways of thinking and practising’ (ibid). These contrasting representations are in electric circuits for example: graphs, mathematical models, drawings of circuits and the real circuits. In our research we have found that exploring the relationships – links – between these different representations, as well in the theory/model domain as in the object/event domain (Tiberghien, Vince, & Gaidioz, 2009) is of uttermost importance. We have developed a tool for investigation of ‘the learning of a complex concept’ (Carstensen & Bernhard, 2008a) which we have used in order to find critical aspects, which we call “key concepts” (Carstensen & Bernhard, 2008b), which open up the portal of understanding threshold concepts.

In this paper we will explore these links further. As we have continued our work on how students make links between the different islands of single concepts, in order to make a whole of the complex concept, we have noted that the links between these islands are of different kinds. We will here discuss what kinds of relationships these links consist of, and how they differ in ways of coping with them for students, and how the teachers may notice and highlight these relationships in their instructions.

We have video recorded students interactions during lab-work and analysed these tapes according to the Theory of Variation (Marton & Tsui, 2004). Now we are taking this further, and make a more detailed analysis of what the links are, and by that we contribute to the understanding of the nature of a threshold concept.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 2016
Series
Educational Futures Rethinking Theory and Practice ; 68
Keywords
Threshold concepts, engineering education research, variation theory
National Category
Didactics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-129842 (URN)9789463005104 (ISBN)9789463005111 (ISBN)9789463005128 (ISBN)
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 721-2011-5570
Available from: 2016-06-29 Created: 2016-06-29 Last updated: 2016-12-05Bibliographically approved
Organisations
Identifiers
ORCID iD: ORCID iD iconorcid.org/0000-0002-7708-069X

Search in DiVA

Show all publications