This research paper presents the pedagogical approach and some common themes of faculty reflections on the implementation of two engineering graphics courses that utilize mastery-based grading and project-based learning. Mastery learning is based on the philosophical foundation that any student can learn any topic given enough time and support, rejecting the premise of learning as linear. Mastery-based grading is an assessment methodology that provides students a non-punitive way to practice these topics with feedback from their instructor. Mastery-based grading has been shown to have largely positive impacts on student learning by being non-punitive in nature and providing students multiple opportunities to demonstrate mastery of a subject. Mastery-based grading also increases students’ achievement of learning outcomes, since the mastery structure requires students to fully understand and apply concepts before moving on to other learning objectives, unlike traditional numerical grading. This style of grading works well for engineering graphics courses because the generation of engineering graphics is a skill that develops and is retained through repeated practice. By requiring students to practice a skill until it is mastered, the amount that each student will learn and retain should increase. The flexibility of a non-linear learning trajectory means it can adapt to the needs of individual students, a significant move toward educational equity. A project-based approach to engineering graphics education also provides increased opportunity for student engagement, with projects tailored to students’ lives and interests, and exploratory approaches prompt more critical thinking throughout the learning experience, rather than regurgitation.
This paper discusses the development and implementation of mastery-based and project-based courses at two different institutions. The first course is a required, first-year, 3 credit lecture and laboratory course using Onshape taught by one faculty member at a mid-sized, private institution that transitioned from a traditional grading scheme. The second course is a required, first-year, 1-credit laboratory course using AutoCAD taught by a team of three faculty members at a large, public, majority-minority institution. First, the implementation of the two courses in question will be compared by comparing the syllabi of the courses. Then, a thematic analysis of reflections provided by the four faculty involved in teaching and developing the courses will be presented. The analysis will compare the experiences of each faculty member and how the differing implementation of the courses may have affected those experiences. The combination of these experiences and reflections will give insight into the variety of ways that mastery-based grading and project-based learning can be implemented. The insights provided in the faculty reflections highlight important considerations for those implementing mastery-based grading and project-based learning in engineering graphics courses.
The full paper will be available to logged in and registered conference attendees once the conference starts on June 22, 2025, and to all visitors after the conference ends on June 25, 2025