Mathematics for future engineers : a study of teaching and learning mathematics in an engineering curriculum.
Year: 2014
Type: dissertation
Abstract: This is a study of teaching and learning in the first mathematics module for engineering \nstudents at a South African university. The theoretical framing of the study is derived from \nmultiple analytical tools: Bernstein’s theory of the Pedagogic Device; the construct of beliefs and \nBloom’s revised taxonomy. As such this study draws on Bernstein’s concepts of \nrecontextualisation, singulars and regions and classification and framing to describe the three \nmessage systems (content, pedagogy and assessments). The beliefs framework identifies the \nteaching styles used by lecturers while Bloom’s revised taxonomy provides the analytical tool to \nevaluate the quality of the final examination questions. \nThis study took a pragmatist stance which privileged a mixed methods approach to data \ncollection. The first research question sought to determine the role of mathematics in \nengineering. To fully understand the role of mathematics in engineering, document analysis was \nused to analyse the international (Washington Accord) and national (ECSA) professional body \ndocuments and the institutional requirements and interviews were conducted with academic staff \nin the department of mathematics and the school of engineering. The literature showed that \nmathematics is a key component in engineering education and in engineering practice. It also \nforegrounded the ongoing debate about whether it is sufficient for engineers to know the \npractical application of mathematics or whether knowledge of mathematics in all its abstraction \nis required. \nThe second and third research questions looked at how teaching and learning is \napproached and reasons why it is approached in those ways. Data were generated from the \ndocuments stated above, observation of lectures as well as tutorials and interviews with relevant \n \nacademic staff and students. An analysis of the Washington Accord and ECSA documents fell \nwithin the Official Recontextualising Field and showed the influence of the external bodies on \nthe recontextualisation of the ME curriculum. The textbook and head of school (MSC), \nconstituted the Pedagogic Recontextualising Field (PRF), and were found to influence the \nframing over selection, sequencing, pacing and evaluative criteria. It was also established that \nthere was further recontextualisation at the level of the classroom (by lecturers). In effect, the \nrecontextualisation resulted in the exclusion of proofs and theoretical underpinning of the \nmathematics taught. The module showed strong classification of content on the interdisciplinary, \nintradisciplinary and interdiscursive level while framing over selection, sequencing, pacing and \nevaluative criteria were strong. The regionalization of the ME module resulted in it being a site \nof conflict and struggle over ownership of the pedagogic device. \nDespite differences in beliefs about mathematics, the teaching styles of lecturers were \nsimilar in that they demonstrated an algorithmic, assessment-oriented approach to teaching. The \nanalysis revealed that lecturers viewed mathematics in terms of application and as a tool to solve \nengineering problems. Analysis of the final examination questions showed that it fell within the \ncognitive domain of Apply in Blooms’ revised taxonomy. A closer inspection of the final \nexamination questions and those of the mock examination showed a close correlation between \nthe two indicating that the conceptual demand was not as high as initially established. Despite \nthe strong alignment between lectures, tutorials and assessments, many students were \nunsuccessful in passing the module. \nThe thesis concludes with a discussion of the implications of the findings and suggests \nrecommendations for the improvement of teaching and learning mathematics to future engineers \nand for further research.
Author: Mogasuri. Moodley
Language: English
Subfield: Education
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
SDG: Quality education
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2341651846