Assessing Effectiveness of Different Teaching Modalities in Linear Circuits I

ABSTRACT

The four- and six-year graduation rates (~17.7% and ~64.5% respectively) of engineering (ENGR), are below the University's average graduation rates (~ 33.1% and 67.4%). The goal of this study is to seek solutions towards increasing the graduation rates and ultimately decreasing the time-to-graduation. There are several steps that could be taken to help the engineering students graduate earlier. Examples are summer bridge programs that focus on strengthening mathematical skills of students, encouraging students to attend tutoring sessions and practice problem-solving. One of the factors that add to the time-to-graduation of students is not being able to pass the lower division courses that serve as the prerequisite to other discipline courses. The result will be high DFW rate courses which students repeat several times before they can pass them and pursue other courses that rely on these high DFW courses. This can adversely affect the student's sense of belonging and decrease the retention rate. During the COVID-19 pandemic, all courses, including some of the high DFW courses, were taught in various modalities. This has created different results and perceptions by students. The Linear Circuits I is a high DFW rate course in the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department of CSU Chico. In this study, the author, who has taught this course in four different modalities, looks closely at the results of this class and compares the effect of different teaching modalities on the DFW rates. The author will also reflect on the effectiveness of each of the teaching modes, student engagement, and student feedback on each mode. The results could be used for the recommendation of teaching modalities if the course is offered online again due to a pandemic or other need. Additionally, the lessons learned and the technology related features of online instruction can be integrated with in-person instruction to increase the effectiveness of teaching. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2022.