Teamwork Exercises and Technological Problem Solving with First-Year Engineering Students: An Experimental Study Mark R. Springston Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Curriculum and Instruction Dr. Mark E. Sanders, Chair Dr. Cecile D. Cachaper Dr. Richard M. Goff Dr. Susan G. Magliaro Dr. Tom M. Sherman July 28th, 2005 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Technology Education, Engineering Design Activity, Teams, Teamwork, Technological Problem Solving, and Educational Software © 2005, Mark R. Springston Teamwork Exercises and Technological Problem Solving with First-Year Engineering Students: An Experimental Study by Mark R. Springston Technology Education Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University ABSTRACT An experiment was conducted investigating the utility of teamwork exercises and problem structure for promoting technological problem solving in a student team context. The teamwork exercises were designed for participants to experience a high level of psychomotor coordination and cooperation with their teammates. The problem structure treatment was designed based on small group research findings on brainstorming, information processing, and problem formulation. First-year college engineering students (N = 294) were randomly assigned to three levels of team size (2, 3, or 4 members) and two treatment conditions: teamwork exercises and problem structure (N = 99 teams). In addition, the study included three non- manipulated, independent variables: team gender, team temperament, and team teamwork orientation. Teams were measured on technological problem solving through two conceptually related technological tasks or engineering design activities: a computer bridge task and a truss model task. The computer bridge score and the number of computer bridge design iterations, both within subjects factors (time), were recorded in pairs over four 30-minute intervals. For the last two intervals with the computer bridge, teams started construction of the truss model task, which created low and high task load conditions for the computer bridge: another within subjects factor. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to analyze time (computer bridge) by factor interactions. No significant time by teamwork exercises or time by problem structure interactions on computer bridge scores were found [F(2.31, 198.46) = 0.10, p = .928; F(2.31, 198.46) = 0.03, p = .984]. There was a significant interaction between the factors of time and team size [F(4.62, 198.46) = 2.75, p = .023]. An ANOVA was conducted with the between subject factors on the truss model task. A significant main effect was found for teamwork exercises [F(1, 86) = 2.84, p = .048, one-tailed], but not for problem structure or team size. Post hoc analyses were conducted for team size on computer bridge and iteration scores over time, as well as teamwork exercises effects for each team size. Findings and their implications were reported, along with suggestions for future research on technological problem solving in a team context. iv Teamwork and Technological Problem Solving DEDICATION I dedicate this work to my two families. To my wife, Patricia, and our child, who is “on the way.” To my parents, Rex and Margaret. To my sisters, Suzanne and Martha. To my parents-in-law, Dagobert and Mery. To my brothers-in-law, Greg, Mickey, Fernando, and Juan Carlos. To my sisters-in-law, Beatriz and Adriana. To my nieces, Brittany Marie, Bailey Cathlin, Noelle Ruth, and Maria Fernanda. To my nephew, Carter Calloway. To our child’s other cousin, who is “on the way.” Preface v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I had a very talented and dedicated committee that helped guide me through the dissertation process. Without their input and support, I would have not been able to successfully complete this project. It always seemed like someone gave me the missing piece of the puzzle at just the right time to make the gestalt fall into place. During my master’s and doctoral degree work, Dr. Sanders has always made sure that the lighthouse was visible, no matter how far off shore I became. He has served as an inspiration for me and is the most dedicated committee chair for which any doctoral student has a right to ask. His teachings have given me a foundation on which to build. Dr. Cachaper was always a great listener, making sure I heard my own ideas. She encouraged me through all the design phases of this research study. Dr. Goff told me to “go for it” when I wondered how I would be able to pull it all off. He was very helpful in making the study a reality within the Engineering Education Department. In addition, he helped me understand the abilities of first-year engineering students and student engineering teams. Dr. Magliaro asked me insightful questions that helped me further my thinking about this research. Her suggestions on my plan of study proved to be very helpful in creating a base to commence my literature review. She was also very helpful in securing rooms for this study. Dr. Sherman was instrumental in helping me organize my thoughts related to this research study and beyond. He had a knack for saying just the right thing to keep an important thought ringing in my ears. A special thanks to Dr. Griffin, Dr. Lo, and the rest of Engineering Education faculty for helping support this research project. They have a great department, and they care about the learning of their students. Thanks also to the research participants and research assistants for their cooperation in this endeavor. I always tried to make things a win-win situation for everyone involved. Thanks to Tom Heck for leading the teamwork exercises, and thanks to Jeff Swab for vi Teamwork and Technological Problem Solving leading the control group activities. A special thanks to the Departments of Teaching and Learning and Engineering Education for financially supporting this research study. Thanks to Dr. Jim LaPorte and Dr. Sharon Brusic for being supportive of my graduate studies. A special thanks to Dr. Susan Mohammed, Dr. John Mathieu, and Dr. John Donovan for consulting with me on team theory and research. Thanks to Dr. Stephen Ressler for consulting with me on the West Point Bridge Designer. Thanks to Everton Lewis for his support and friendship. Thanks to my friends from War Gym (Truman, Jonathan, Jon, Chris, Neal, and Chuck) for their support. Without the love and strength of my family, I most certainly would have failed in this endeavor. To my wife, Patricia, who has always supported me through the good times and the bad, I love you. To my father, mother, and sisters, who have supported me wholeheartedly throughout this research project, I appreciate you. Preface vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................... ii DEDICATION............................................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................................ v TABLE OF CONTENTS.............................................................................................................. vii LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... xi LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................................ xii LIST OF MEDIA.........................................................................................................................xiii Chapter 1. Nature of the Study ....................................................................................................... 1 Overview............................................................................................................................. 1 Importance and Need for the Study .................................................................................... 1 Team Pedagogy in Higher Education ................................................................................. 2 Team Pedagogy in K-12 Technology Education................................................................ 5 Teamwork in the Standards for Technological Literacy..................................................... 7 Statement of the Problem.................................................................................................... 8 Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 8 Research Questions............................................................................................................. 9 Definition of Terms........................................................................................................... 10 Delimitations..................................................................................................................... 12 Assumptions...................................................................................................................... 12 Chapter 2. Review of Related Literature ...................................................................................... 15 Overview........................................................................................................................... 15 Quantitative Research