research-article

Public Access

A comparative study of online and face-to-face embedded systems learning course

Authors:

Soyeon Caren Han,

Shouvojit Sarker,

Byeong Ho KangAuthors Info & Claims

ACE '18: Proceedings of the 20th Australasian Computing Education Conference

Pages 63 - 72

https://doi.org/10.1145/3160489.3160499

Published: 30 January 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Embedded Systems are integrated into our daily life in many ways. Embedded systems education requires at least two major components: (1) a teacher with expertise in both hardware and software; (2) a hands-on experimental environment. Recent developments in educational tool kits for learning embedded systems, such as Ardu-EZ, increase the feasibility of teaching embedded systems online; but conclusive evidence about the efficiency of teaching embedded systems online is still very rare. This paper presents a comparative study of face-to-face and online delivery modes of an embedded systems course with a focus on students' learning experience. During our experiment, an embedded systems course was taught in both face-to-face and online modes with identical content. The results show that online learning mode can be a viable alternative to the traditional face-to-face course for embedded systems education if required components such as student-teacher interaction, sufficient independent learning skills for the students, well-designed teaching materials, and tangible support are provided.

References

[1]

T. Anderson. The theory and practice of online learning. Athabasca University Press, 2008.

Digital Library

[2]

T. Anderson and J. Dron. Learning technology through three generations of technology enhanced distance education pedagogy. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-learning, 15(2), 2012.

[3]

T. Anderson, R. Liam, D. R. Garrison, and W. Archer. Assessing teacher presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2):1--17, 2001.

[4]

R. Balogh. Educational robotic platform based on arduino. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Robotics in Education, RiE2010. FEI STU, Slovakia, pages 119--122, 2010.

[5]

M.-H. Cho and B. J. Kim. Students' self-regulation for interaction with others in online learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 17:69--75, 2013.

[6]

S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, and C. Wylie. Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.

[7]

N. R. Council et al. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school: Expanded edition. 2000.

[8]

R. A. Croxton. The role of interactivity in student satisfaction and persistence in online learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(2):314, 2014.

[9]

D. R. Garrison and N. D. Vaughan. Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. John Wiley & Sons, 2008.

[10]

A. L. Griffith. Persistence of women and minorities in stem field majors: Is it the school that matters? Economics of Education Review, 29(6):911--922, 2010.

[11]

P. Guglielmino and L. Guglielmino. Are your learners ready for e-learning. The AMA handbook of e-learning. New York: American Management Association, 2003.

[12]

J. O. Hamblen and G. M. Van Bekkum. An embedded systems laboratory to support rapid prototyping of robotics and the internet of things. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(1):121--128, 2013.

Digital Library

[13]

I. Ibrahim, R. Ali, M. Z. Adam, and N. Elfidel. Embedded systems teaching approaches & challenges. In Engineering Education (ICEED), 2014 IEEE 6th Conference on, pages 34--39. IEEE, 2014.

[14]

Q. Jabeen, F. Khan, M. N. Hayat, H. Khan, S. R. Jan, and F. Ullah. A survey: Embedded systems supporting by different operating systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.07899, 2016.

[15]

S. D. Johnson, S. R. Aragon, N. Shaik, and N. Palma-Rivas. Comparative analysis of learner satisfaction and learning outcomes in online and face-to-face learning environments. Journal of interactive learning research, 11(1):29, 2000.

[16]

A. Kumar, S. Fernando, and R. C. Panicker. Project-based learning in embedded systems education using an fpga platform. IEEE transactions on education, 56(4):407--415, 2013.

Digital Library

[17]

T. MacNeil. Assessing the gap between community development practice and regional development policy. Community organizing; Canadian experiences, pages 149--163, 1997.

[18]

R. Mason and M. Weller. Factors affecting students' satisfaction on a web course. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(2), 2000.

[19]

T. Mayes. Theoretical perspectives on interactivity in e-learning. Interactions in online education: Implications for theory and practice, pages 9--26, 2006.

[20]

M. Nikolic, D. Majstorovic, I. Kastelan, and N. Pjevalica. An approach to improvement of students learning of computer system engineering. In Proceedings of the E2LP Workshop at FedCSIS, pages 17--20, 2014.

[21]

T. Noergaard. Embedded systems architecture: a comprehensive guide for engineers and programmers. Newnes, 2012.

[22]

R. Oshana. Software engineering for embedded systems: Methods, practical techniques, and applications. Newnes, 2013.

[23]

B. Östlund. Prerequisites for interactive learning in distance education: Perspectives from swedish students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 2008.

[24]

N. Pellas. The influence of computer self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation and self-esteem on student engagement in online learning programs: Evidence from the virtual world of second life. Computers in Human Behavior, 35:157--170, 2014.

[25]

L. Price, J. T. Richardson, and A. Jelfs. Face-to-face versus online tutoring support in distance education. Studies in Higher Education, 32(1):1--20, 2007.

[26]

H. Ritchie and T. J. Newby. Instruction: Classroom lecture/discussion vs. live televised instruction: A comparison of effects on student performance, attitude, and interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(3):36--45, 1989.

[27]

A. P. Rovai. Development of an instrument to measure classroom community. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(3):197--211, 2002.

[28]

P. Schaber, K. Wilcox, A. L. Whiteside, L. Marsh, and D. C. Brooks. Designing learning environments to foster affective learning: Comparison of classroom to blended learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 4(2):12, 2010.

[29]

K. Swan. Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of interaction. Education, Communication & Information, 2(1):23--49, 2002.

[30]

G. Walton, S. Childs, and E. Blenkinsopp. Using mobile technologies to give health students access to learning resources in the uk community setting. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 22(s2):51--65, 2005.

[31]

R. Wegerif. The social dimension of asynchronous learning networks. Journal of asynchronous learning networks, 2(1):34--49, 1998.

[32]

M. Wolf. Computers as components: principles of embedded computing system design. Elsevier, 2012.

Digital Library

[33]

M. Wolf. High-performance embedded computing: applications in cyber-physical systems and mobile computing. Newnes, 2014.

Digital Library

[34]

W. Wolf and J. Madsen. Embedded systems education for the future. Proceedings of the IEEE, 88(1):23--30, 2000.

[35]

N. Wu and K. Zeng. Embedded system based first-year engineering course with aid of online simulation and social media. In the 9th First Year Engineering Experience (FYEE) Conference, 2016.

[36]

T.-Y. Yen and W. Wolf. Hardware-software co-synthesis of distributed embedded systems. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.

Cited By

Arai YRoppongi KHatakeyama SNoda YSaito SFukuhara KImai SInomata T(2024)Plug‐and‐Play Connection of Multiple Sensors with Different I/Fs for In‐Vehicle NetworksIEEJ Transactions on Electrical and Electronic Engineering10.1002/tee.24241Online publication date: 2-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1002/tee.24241
Yan WZhang WLiu L(2022)Online Learning of Embedded Technology Course in the Post-Epidemic Era: A Case Study of Chinese InstituteProceedings of the 7th International Conference on Distance Education and Learning10.1145/3543321.3543342(127-132)Online publication date: 20-May-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3543321.3543342
Jin K(2022)Student Engagement during Virtual v.s. Face-To-Face Active Learning Activities in Three IT CoursesProceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Information Technology Education10.1145/3537674.3554752(150-156)Online publication date: 21-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3537674.3554752
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

A comparative study of online and face-to-face embedded systems learning course

Recommendations

Designing and implementing online discussion forums: an Australian case study

Effective online learning requires both teachers and students to move beyond traditional face-to-face and correspondence modes and adopt strategies that take advantage of the flexibility and connectivity in the virtual or online classroom. In higher ...
Can forming a virtual learning community enhance learning on a face-to-face learning programme?

A Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) was set up in support of the curriculum at a new medical school, which delivers a five-year undergraduate face-to-face programme. We set out to evaluate the effectiveness of the VLE without any preconceptions, ...
Online learning versus blended learning: an exploratory study
L@S '14: Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference

Due to the recent emergence of massive open online courses (MOOCs), students and teachers are gaining unprecedented access to high-quality educational content. However, many questions remain on how best to utilize that content in a classroom ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ACE '18: Proceedings of the 20th Australasian Computing Education Conference

January 2018

127 pages

ISBN:9781450363402

DOI:10.1145/3160489

Conference Chairs:
Raina Mason
Southern Cross University, Australia
,
Simon
University of Newcastle, Australia

Copyright © 2018 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

The University of Newcastle, Australia
CORE - Computing Research and Education
Southern Cross UNIVERSITY: Southern Cross UNIVERSITY
SIGCSE: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 30 January 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology
Office of Naval Research

Conference

ACE 2018

Sponsor:

Southern Cross UNIVERSITY
SIGCSE

ACE 2018: 20th Australasian Computing Education Conference

January 30 - February 2, 2018

Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

Acceptance Rates

ACE '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 14 of 36 submissions, 39%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 161 of 359 submissions, 45%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

6
Total Citations
View Citations
696
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)114
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)14

Reflects downloads up to 02 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Arai YRoppongi KHatakeyama SNoda YSaito SFukuhara KImai SInomata T(2024)Plug‐and‐Play Connection of Multiple Sensors with Different I/Fs for In‐Vehicle NetworksIEEJ Transactions on Electrical and Electronic Engineering10.1002/tee.24241Online publication date: 2-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1002/tee.24241
Yan WZhang WLiu L(2022)Online Learning of Embedded Technology Course in the Post-Epidemic Era: A Case Study of Chinese InstituteProceedings of the 7th International Conference on Distance Education and Learning10.1145/3543321.3543342(127-132)Online publication date: 20-May-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3543321.3543342
Jin K(2022)Student Engagement during Virtual v.s. Face-To-Face Active Learning Activities in Three IT CoursesProceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Information Technology Education10.1145/3537674.3554752(150-156)Online publication date: 21-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3537674.3554752
Koniarik JDlhopolcek DUkrop MBecker BQuille KLaakso MBarendsen ESimon (2022)Experience with Abrupt Transition to Remote Teaching of Embedded SystemsProceedings of the 27th ACM Conference on on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Vol. 110.1145/3502718.3524821(386-392)Online publication date: 7-Jul-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3502718.3524821
Byun JPark JKim DJo CJeon J(2022)Effective In-Vehicle Network Training Strategy for Automotive EngineersIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2022.315826910(29252-29266)Online publication date: 2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3158269
Basu DHeckman SMaher MSherriff MMerkle LCutter PMonge ASheard J(2021)Online Vs Face-to-face Web-development Course: Course Strategies, Learning, and EngagementProceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education10.1145/3408877.3432438(1191-1197)Online publication date: 3-Mar-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3408877.3432438

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten