Effects of Student Interests on Engagement and Performance in Biomechanics

in Journal of Applied Biomechanics
View More View Less
  • 1 University of Pittsburgh
Restricted access

Purchase article

USD  $24.95

Student 1 year online subscription

USD  $88.00

1 year online subscription

USD  $118.00

Student 2 year online subscription

USD  $168.00

2 year online subscription

USD  $224.00

There is a need for pedagogical techniques that increase student engagement among underrepresented groups in engineering. Relating engineering content to student interests, particularly through biomechanics applications, shows promise toward engaging a diverse group of students. This study investigates the effects of student interests on engagement and performance in 10th grade students enrolled in a summer program for students underrepresented in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields. The authors assessed the effects of interest-tailored lectures on student engagement and performance in a 5-week program with bioengineering workshops, focusing on the delivery of biomechanics content. A total of 31 students received interest-tailored lectures (intervention) and 23 students received only generic lectures (control) in biomechanics. In addition, the authors assessed the effects of teaching method (lecture, classroom activities, and laboratory tours) on student engagement. The authors found interest-tailored lectures to significantly increase student engagement in lecture compared with generic lectures. Students that received interest-tailored lectures had an insignificant, but meaningful 5% increase in student performance. Students rated laboratory tours higher in engagement than other teaching methods. This study provides detailed examples that can directly assist student teaching and outreach in biomechanics. Furthermore, the pedagogical techniques in this study can be used to increase engagement of underrepresented students in engineering.

Pliner, Beschorner, and Mahboobin are with the Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA. Dukes is with the Engineering Education Research Center, University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

Pliner (emp95@pitt.edu) is corresponding author.

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplementary Material 1 (PDF 46 KB)
    • Supplementary Material 2 (PDF 221 KB)
    • Supplementary Material 3 (PDF 95 KB)
    • Supplementary Material 4 (PDF 140 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S1 (PDF 560 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S2 (PDF 216 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S3 (PDF 219 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S4 (PDF 195 KB)
    • Supplementary Table S5 (PDF 187 KB)
  • 1.

    National Science Foundation NCfSaES. Women, Minorities, and Persons With Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2017. Arlington, VA: National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics; 2017.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Cesario SK. Seat belt use in pregnancy: history, misconceptions and the need for education. Nurs Womens Health. 2007;11(5):474481. PubMed ID: 17897427 doi:10.1111/j.1751-486X.2007.00215.x

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Connolly AM, Katz VL, Bash KL, McMahon MJ, Hansen WF. Trauma and pregnancy. Am J Perinatol. 1997;14(6):331336. PubMed ID: 9217953 doi:10.1055/s-2007-994155

  • 4.

    Brodie M, Pliner E, Ho A, et al. Big data vs accurate data in health research: large-scale physical activity monitoring, smartphones, wearable devices and risk of unconscious bias. Med Hypotheses. 2018;119:3236.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Cannady MA, Greenwald E, Harris KN. Problematizing the STEM pipeline metaphor: is the STEM pipeline metaphor serving our students and the STEM workforce? Sci Educ. 2014;98(3):443460.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Drazan JF. Biomechanists can revolutionize the STEM Pipeline by engaging youth athletes in sport-science based STEM outreach. J Biomech. 2020;99:109511. PubMed ID: 31780120 doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.109511

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Barkley EF. Student Engagement Techniques: A Handbook for College Faculty. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons; 2009.

  • 8.

    Rusk N, Resnick M, Berg R, Pezalla-Granlund M. New pathways into robotics: strategies for broadening participation. J Sci Educ Technol. 2008;17(1):5969.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Robnett RD, Leaper C. Friendship groups, personal motivation, and gender in relation to high school students’ STEM career interest. J Res Adolesc. 2013;23(4):652664.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Crisp G, Nora A, Taggart A. Student characteristics, pre-college, college, and environmental factors as predictors of majoring in and earning a STEM degree: an analysis of students attending a Hispanic serving institution. Am Educ Res J. 46(4):924942.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Tai RH, Liu CQ, Maltese AV, Fan X. Planning early for careers in science. Science. 2006;312(5777):11431144.

  • 12.

    Dillon S. Schools cut back subjects to push reading and math. The New York Times. March 26, 2006.

  • 13.

    Krause SJ. Muddiest point formative feedback in core materials classes with YouTube, Blackboard, class warm-ups and word clouds. Age. 2013;23:1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Kothiyal A, Murthy S, Iyer S. Think-pair-share in a large CS1 class: does learning really happen? Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Innovation & technology in computer science education2014.

    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Gilboy MB, Heinerichs S, Pazzaglia G. Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2015;47(1):109114. PubMed ID: 25262529 doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2014.08.008

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Catena RD, Carbonneau KJ. Guided hands‐on activities can improve student learning in a lecture‐based qualitative biomechanics course. Anat Sci Educ. 2019;12(5):485493. PubMed ID: 30408348 doi:10.1002/ase.1832

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Cross KP. Learning Is about Making Connections. The Cross Papers Number 3. Laguna Hills, CA: League for Innovation in the Community College; 1999.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    American Society of Biomechanics. About ASB. 1977. http://www.asbweb.org/about-asb/. Accessed May 3, 2020.

    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Klem AM, Connell JP. Relationships matter: linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. J School Health. 2004;74(7):262273. PubMed ID: 15493703 doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08283.x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Hao Y. Exploring undergraduates’ perspectives and flipped learning readiness in their flipped classrooms. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;59:8292.

  • 21.

    Coco M. Internships: a try before you buy arrangement. SAM Adv Manag J. 2000;65(2):41.

  • 22.

    Behrendt M, Franklin T. A review of research on school field trips and their value in education. Int J Environ Sci Educ. 2014;9(3):235245.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 39 39 34
Full Text Views 262 262 114
PDF Downloads 114 114 42