Enhancing Student Engagement in Multidisciplinary Groups in Higher Education

  • Michael Opoku AgyemanEmail author
  • Haiping Cui
  • Shirley Bennett
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11913)


Recently, there has been a rise in the integration of curriculum from different disciplines in higher education (HE) in response to the multidisciplinary nature of the skillset required by modern job market. In cases where the curriculum is delivered to students from the same discipline, it is intuitive for students to easily identify with the relevance the module. However, the aforementioned will not be as straightforward in situations where a curriculum/module from a particular discipline is taken by multidisciplinary groups of students. Consequently, there is a risk of disengagement of student groups from one or more of those disciplines. This report evaluates a strategy to enhance student engagement in modules taught to multidisciplinary groups in HE. For this purpose, a real-world case study of a module taken by Computer Science, Electrical and Electronics Engineering and Mechatronics Engineering Students at University of Northampton is used. Firstly, the report reviews the key problems in relation to student engagement. A review of recent literature is then presented to evaluate the state-of-the art approaches. An action plan/intervention is then proposed in response to the problem statement and findings from literature. Furthermore, an initial study based on an evaluation of the implemented action plan is then presented before a final conclusion remark.


Computing education Student engagement Problem-Based learning Learning in groups 


  1. 1.
    Bédard, D., et al.: Problem-based and project-based learning in engineering and medicine: determinants of students’ engagement and persistance. Interdisc. J. Prob.-Based Learn. 6(2), 8 (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Prince, M.: Does active learning work? a review of the research. J. Eng. Educ. 93(3), 223–231 (2004). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Trowler, P., Trowler, V.: Student engagement evidence summary (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Parnas, D.L.: Education for computing professionals. Computer 23(1), 17–22 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McCracken, M., et al.: A multi-national, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming skills of first-year CS students. In: Working Group Reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    England, R.E., Meier, K.J., Fraga, L.R.: Barriers to equal opportunity: educational practices and minority students. Urban Aff. Q. 23(4), 635–646 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Finn, J.D., Voelkl, K.E.: School characteristics related to student engagement. J. Negro Educ. 62(3), 249–268 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Talbott, E., et al.: Making sense of minority student identification in special education: school context matters. Int. J. Special Educ. 26(3), 150–170 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dermo, J.: e-Assessment and the student learning experience: A survey of student perceptions of e-assessment. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 40(2), 203–214 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schmoker, M.: Focus: Elevating the Essentials to Radically Improve Student Learning (2018)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eccles, J.S., Wigfield, A., Schiefele, U.: Motivation to succeed. (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Willis, D.: Academic involvement at university. Higher Educ. 25(2), 133–150 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hidi, S., Renninger, K.A.: The four-phase model of interest development. Educ. Psychol. 41(2), 111–127 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pirot, L., Ketele, D.: L’engagement académique de l’étudiant comme facteur de réussite à l’université Étude exploratoire menée dans deux facultés contrastées. Revue Des Sci. De L’Éduc. 26(2), 367–394 (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pirker, J., Riffnaller-Schiefer, M., Gütl, C.: Motivational active learning: engaging university students in computer science education. In: Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Innovation & Technology in Computer Science Education (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Attle, S., Baker, B.: Cooperative learning in a competitive environment: classroom applications. Int. J. Teach. Learn. Higher Educ. 19(1), 77–83 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Burden, P.R., Byrd, D.M.: Methods for Effective Teaching. p. 160 (1994)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Freeman, S., et al.: Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 111(23), 8410–8415 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Norman, G.R., Schmidt, H.G.: Revisiting ‘effectiveness of problem-based learning curricula: theory, practice and paper darts’. Med. Educ. 50(8), 793–797 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Albanese, M.A., Mitchell, S.: Problem-based learning: a review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Acad. Med.-Philadelphia 68, 52 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Reeves, J., Arnold, B.J.: Applying student engagement techniques to multidisciplinary online engineering laboratories. In: ASEE Annual Conference and ExpositionGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vernon, D.T., Blake, R.L.: No title, Does problem-based learning work? a meta-analysis of evaluative research (1993)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Qin, Z., Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T.: Cooperative versus competitive efforts and problem solving. Rev. Educ. Res. 65(2), 129–143 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hartley, J., Davies, I.K.: Note-taking: a critical review. Program. Learn. Educ. Technol. 15(3), 207–224 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ruhl, K.L., Hughes, C.A., Schloss, P.J.: Using the pause procedure to enhance lecture recall. Teacher Educ. Special Educ. 10(1), 14–18 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kemp, N., Grieve, R.: Face-to-face or face-to-screen? Undergraduates’ opinions and test performance in classroom vs. online learning. Front. Psychol. 5, 1278 (2014)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ferreira, B., et al.: Designing personas with empathy map. In: Seke (2015)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
  29. 29.
    Gibbs, G.: Learning in Groups: Tutor Guide. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Development (1995)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Seethamraju, R., Borman, M.: Influence of group formation choices on academic performance. Assess. Eval. Higher Educ. 34(1), 31–40 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Best, J.W., Kahn, J.V.: Research in Education (2016)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Keller, R.T.: Predictors of the performance of project groups in R & D organizations. Acad. Manag. J. 29(4), 715–726 (1986)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kitzinger, J.: Qualitative research: introducing focus groups. BMJ 311(7000), 299–302 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gibbs, G.: The assessment of group work: lessons from the literature. Assessment Standards Knowledge Exchange, 1–17 (2009)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gibbs, G.: Learning in groups: tutor guide (1995)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Prensky, M.: The motivation of gameplay: The real twenty-first century learning revolution. Horizon 10(1), 5–11 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gibbs, G.: Using Assessment to Support Student Learning (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of NorthamptonNorthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations