here i have attached assignment file
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%2F978-3-030-01084-3_8.pdf Week 4: Ahern et al., 2019 NOTE – you must use this article: https://cqu- primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1rb43gr/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%2F978-3-030-01084-3_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 curricula 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%2F978-3-030-01084-3_8.pdf https://cqu-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1rb43gr/TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325 https://cqu-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1rb43gr/TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325 https://cqu-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1rb43gr/TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325 https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-030-01084-3_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; b) 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 b) assist students to understand and assess their readiness for professional life. Critical factors for the high-quality design of authentic curriculum relevant to producing graduates that are work ready and can think like engineers are: • Embracing a balanced experience profile of industry = academic and teaching staff collaboratively design curriculum that is relevant 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 resemble the projects that graduate engineers experience • Developing students’ ability to think critically, reflect and self-assess. • Focusing on assessment for current and future learning. Limitations (from p 178 -179): 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 reflect 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.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1rb43gr/TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019 _1586325 ) Find the following information/answers: Look in the abstract p 816 for Q1-4 Q1 (0.33 marks) What do students/engineers need to develop solutions to engineering problems? Q2 (0.33 marks) What is the methodology this paper uses to conduct the literature review? Q3 (0.33 marks) What is a limitation of CT interventions and strategies given by this article? Q4 (0.33 marks) What needs to be done to more fully ensure CT is clearly embedded in university curricula? On p.816 (introduction) Q5 (0.33 marks) 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.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1rb43gr/TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325 https://cqu-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1rb43gr/TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325 https://cqu-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/1rb43gr/TN_informaworld_s10_1080_03075079_2019_1586325 Part 3 (3 out of 5 marks – marked as fail/pass/distinction) Write a 200- 300 word 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 referring 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