Engineering Students' Thinking About Technical Systems: An Ontological Categories Approach

This paper aims at identifying ontological categories as higher-order knowledge structures that underlie engineering students' thinking about technical systems. Derived from interviews, these ontological categories include, inter alia, a focus on the behavior, structure, or purpose of a technic...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sarah Isabelle Hofer, Frank Reinhold, Frieder Loch, Birgit Vogel-Heuser
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-05-01
Series:Frontiers in Education
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/feduc.2020.00066/full
id doaj-eeb72a17aa3343a09dd81dd24d22978d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-eeb72a17aa3343a09dd81dd24d22978d2020-11-25T03:18:13ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Education2504-284X2020-05-01510.3389/feduc.2020.00066513752Engineering Students' Thinking About Technical Systems: An Ontological Categories ApproachSarah Isabelle Hofer0Frank Reinhold1Frieder Loch2Birgit Vogel-Heuser3TUM School of Education, Technical University of Munich, Munich, GermanyTUM School of Education, Technical University of Munich, Munich, GermanyDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Automation and Information Systems, Technical University of Munich, Munich, GermanyDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Automation and Information Systems, Technical University of Munich, Munich, GermanyThis paper aims at identifying ontological categories as higher-order knowledge structures that underlie engineering students' thinking about technical systems. Derived from interviews, these ontological categories include, inter alia, a focus on the behavior, structure, or purpose of a technical system. We designed and administered a paper-based test to assess these ontological categories in a sample of N = 340 first-year students in different engineering disciplines. Based on their activation patterns across ontological categories, students clustered into six different ontological profiles. Study program, gender as well as objective and self-perceived cognitive abilities were associated with differences in jointly activated ontological categories. Additional idiosyncratic influences and experiences, however, seemed to play a more important role. Our results can inform university instruction and support successful co-operation in engineering.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/feduc.2020.00066/fullconceptual knowledgeontologiesengineering educationhigher educationcluster analysis
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sarah Isabelle Hofer
Frank Reinhold
Frieder Loch
Birgit Vogel-Heuser
spellingShingle Sarah Isabelle Hofer
Frank Reinhold
Frieder Loch
Birgit Vogel-Heuser
Engineering Students' Thinking About Technical Systems: An Ontological Categories Approach
Frontiers in Education
conceptual knowledge
ontologies
engineering education
higher education
cluster analysis
author_facet Sarah Isabelle Hofer
Frank Reinhold
Frieder Loch
Birgit Vogel-Heuser
author_sort Sarah Isabelle Hofer
title Engineering Students' Thinking About Technical Systems: An Ontological Categories Approach
title_short Engineering Students' Thinking About Technical Systems: An Ontological Categories Approach
title_full Engineering Students' Thinking About Technical Systems: An Ontological Categories Approach
title_fullStr Engineering Students' Thinking About Technical Systems: An Ontological Categories Approach
title_full_unstemmed Engineering Students' Thinking About Technical Systems: An Ontological Categories Approach
title_sort engineering students' thinking about technical systems: an ontological categories approach
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Education
issn 2504-284X
publishDate 2020-05-01
description This paper aims at identifying ontological categories as higher-order knowledge structures that underlie engineering students' thinking about technical systems. Derived from interviews, these ontological categories include, inter alia, a focus on the behavior, structure, or purpose of a technical system. We designed and administered a paper-based test to assess these ontological categories in a sample of N = 340 first-year students in different engineering disciplines. Based on their activation patterns across ontological categories, students clustered into six different ontological profiles. Study program, gender as well as objective and self-perceived cognitive abilities were associated with differences in jointly activated ontological categories. Additional idiosyncratic influences and experiences, however, seemed to play a more important role. Our results can inform university instruction and support successful co-operation in engineering.
topic conceptual knowledge
ontologies
engineering education
higher education
cluster analysis
url https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/feduc.2020.00066/full
work_keys_str_mv AT sarahisabellehofer engineeringstudentsthinkingabouttechnicalsystemsanontologicalcategoriesapproach
AT frankreinhold engineeringstudentsthinkingabouttechnicalsystemsanontologicalcategoriesapproach
AT friederloch engineeringstudentsthinkingabouttechnicalsystemsanontologicalcategoriesapproach
AT birgitvogelheuser engineeringstudentsthinkingabouttechnicalsystemsanontologicalcategoriesapproach
_version_ 1724628020372701184