2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Professional engineering demands more than the ability to proficiently carry out engineering calculations. Engineers need to approach problems with a holistic view, make decisions based on evidence, collaborate effectively in teams, and learn from setbacks. Laboratory work plays a crucial role in shaping the professional development of university engineering students, as it enables them to cultivate these essential practices. A successful laboratory task design should provide students opportunities to develop these practices but also needs to adhere to the constraints of the educational environment. In this project, we explore how both virtual (simulation-based) and physical (hands-on) laboratories, based on the same real-world engineering process, prepare students for their future careers. Specifically, we seek to determine whether the virtual and physical laboratory modes foster different yet complementary epistemic practices. Epistemic practices refer to the ways in which group members propose, communicate, justify, assess, and validate knowledge claims in a socially organized and interactionally accomplished manner.
To accomplish these objectives, we are conducting a microgenetic analysis of student teams engaging in both the virtual and physical versions of the same laboratory exercise, the Jar Test for Drinking Water Treatment. Jar testing is a standard laboratory procedure used by design engineers and water treatment plant operators to optimize the physical and chemical conditions for the effective removal of particulate contaminants from water through coagulation, flocculation, and settling. The central hypothesis guiding this research is that physical laboratories emphasize social and material epistemic practices, while virtual laboratories highlight social and conceptual epistemic practices. The goal is to gain transferable knowledge about how the laboratory format and instructional design influence students' engagement in epistemic practices.
To date we have developed physical and virtual versions of the Jar Test laboratory, each built around the affordances of their respective modes. We have completed two rounds of data collection resulting in data from 21 students (7 groups of 3). The primary data sources have included video recordings and researcher observations of the teams during the laboratory work, semi-structured stimulated recall interviews with students and laboratory instructors, and student work products. Using discourse analysis methods within a sociocultural framework, we are addressing the following research questions:
1. In what ways and to what extent does conducting an experiment in a physical mode to develop a process recommendation influence students’ engineering epistemic practices?
2. In what ways and to what extent does conducting an experiment in a virtual mode to develop a process recommendation influence students’ engineering epistemic practices?
3. How do students in each laboratory mode respond to being “stuck”? Do students’ views on the iterative nature of science/engineering and their tolerance for mistakes depend on the instructional design afforded by the laboratory mode?
While this study focuses on a process specific to environmental engineering, its findings have the potential to positively impact teaching and learning practices across all engineering and science disciplines that rely on laboratory investigations in their curriculum.