Search

Irrespective of the branch of study, practical/laboratory courses are integral parts of engineering curriculum. These courses develop the knowledge, skill and attitude of the graduates. It is thus necessary to frame the laboratory experiments, to create a student centric learning environment and to have suitable assessment methodologies to enhance the cognitive, affective and psychomotor skills of the engineering students. This paper proposes a framework of the above three from the authors' perspective for a software laboratory. The proposed framework can be extended to the laboratory/practical with suitable modifications in the Course Outcomes. Also in this paper, a methodology is proposed for converting the scales into marks and also the formula for calculating the marks under various heads (record, viva voce and experiment) is given. Rubrics are defined for the Performance Indicators (PIs) as specified in the Examination Reform Policy of AICTE for the Program Outcomes (POs defined by National Board of Accreditation (NBA), India). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The social constructivist approach to teaching and learning has garnered significant interest among educators and researchers. However, further investigation into its implementation and effectiveness in the classroom is still needed. This study aims to investigate engineering students' perceptions of social constructivist practices in their technology classes, using the constructivist learning environment survey (CLES) as its framework. A mixed-methods approach combining quantitative and qualitative methods was used, which included online surveys and semi-structured interviews. Analysis of data from 300 responses showed that constructivism was partially implemented in the classroom. Specifically, student negotiation emerged as the most frequently perceived dimension, while shared control was perceived as seldom occurring. Most items on the personal relevance scale were frequently perceived, highlighting the importance of integrating technology learning into students' daily lives. Similarly, the uncertainty of technology was found to be a common experience for students. In contrast, the dimension of critical voice received mixed results, emphasizing the necessity of a learning environment that fosters student expression and meaningful discussions. These findings suggest the necessity for additional investigation and integration of social constructivist practices that emphasize the enhancement of student engagement, promotion of critical thinking, and redistribution of power within the classroom setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]