See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/317858323
USING GROUP WORK AS A LEARNING STRATEGY OF LAPLACE TRANSFORM BY
ENGINEERING STUDENTS
Article · January 2017
DOI: 10.21506/j.ponte.2017.6.29
READS
CITATIONS
285
2
2 authors, including:
Deonarain Brijlall
Durban University of Technology
67 PUBLICATIONS 262 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
teaching and learning of fractions View project
Mathematical Literacy curriculum development View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Deonarain Brijlall on 10 August 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
Using group work as a learning strategy of Laplace Transform by
Engineering students
Deonarain Brijlall (corresponding author)
Department of Mathematics, Durban University of Technology, South Africa, deonarainb@dut.ac.za
Adhir Maharaj
Department of Mathematics, Durban University of Technology, South Africa, adhirm@dut.ac.za
ABSTRACT: This qualitative study explored a didactical approach based on collaborative
learning in a third-year Mathematics module. The rationale for carrying out this exploration was to
empower students to become active, responsible and critical learners. The study was carried out
with 56 third-year Electrical Engineering students at a South African university of technology, who
were divided into fourteen groups of four members and engaged in mathematics tasks structured
in the form of activity sheets guided by social constructivism. Written responses, classroom activity
observations and questionnaires contributed to the data. The activities involved three tasks on
Laplace Transforms. Findings emanating from the data analysis indicated that this approach to
collaborative learning provided positive attributes which aided effective Mathematics learning and
learning in general.
INTRODUCTION
After carrying out a study on using groupwork as a learning strategy on first year engineering
students, Brijlall (2014) found that the successes were great. In that study we explored the impact
collaborative learning of Hyperbolic Functions. Due to better the benefits which arose from that
study we are carrying out this strategy in teaching other topics in Mathematics. This paper deals
with the learning of Laplace Transforms.
Collaborative learning allows learners to think critically, make decisions and promote
communication skill. Such learning makes learners to understand each other and also promote their
linguistic skill. ‘Peers are often seen to be better teachers of ideas than teachers, because they
understand each other’ (Vithal, Adler & Keitel, 2005). We agreed with this view, because we had
observed that learners understood each other easily when they explained to one another and they
were able to ask questions they wanted clarity to a problem. ‘When interacting in groups, the
participants purposefully implement social constructivist learning theory, a theory contending that
knowledge is socially constructed by consensus among knowledgeable peers’ (Barkley et al.,
2005). This is true because the learners are expected to actively help and support one another.
Members share resources and support and encourage each other’s effort to learn. Groups are very
important because of the purpose they have to serve using groups engage students actively in their
own learning and to do so in a supportive and challenging social context suggested by Barkley et
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
al. (2005). During collaborative learning in problem solving, the teacher within collaborative
approaches is to provoke cognitive conflict, since these approaches hold that conceptual growth
occurs as learners resolve conflicting points of view and different approaches to tasks (Vithal et
al., 2005). We also believe that this study is necessary because ‘Neurologists and cognitive
scientists agree that people quite literally ‘build’ their own minds through-out life by actively
constructing the mental structures that connect and organize isolated bits of information’. The
important concept is that learners actively make the connections in their own brains and minds that
produce learning for them (Barkley et al., 2005). When I read about social connections, I found
that Vygotsky invented the term ‘Zone of proximal development’ (ZPD) to indicate ‘the distance
between the actual development level as determined by independent problem solving and the level
of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in
collaborative with more capable peers (Barkley et., 2005). Many studies (Brijlall, Maharaj & Jojo,
2009; Brijlall & Maharaj, 2009a; 2009b; 2011) were carried out to address this ZPD in various
topics in Mathematics.
NOTE: This paper will be just adapted for the sake of discussion in ME 207. Other details were
revised in accordance with the current set up in the subject. It is not intended for publication and
only for dissemination to ME 2nd year students, A.Y 2020-2021.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Laplace Transforms
The concept of the Laplace Transform was introduced to engineering students in the ME 207
module. Laplace Transforms are crucial for this career field as it is one of the techniques used to
solve linear differential equations, which describe vibrations in machines. In this assessment, the
formal definition of the Laplace Transform was tested together with its applications. Please refer
to your Study Guide for the concepts and procedures in solving problems in Laplace
transformation. Likewise, kindly watch all the recordings and tutorial links for your guidance.
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
METHODOLOGY
All students agreed to participate in this exploration. Each of the groups was given tasks to
complete. Each group consisted of four members (3-5 members for range). The students were
assigned to groups depending on their choice.
The instructions on the activity sheet were as follows:
1. Select a group leader.
2. You are required to discuss each question in the activity.
3. At the end of 10 minutes all members are required to write a solution for each task and
discuss the solution.
4. The group leader must submit a written solution to the lecturer.
The activity sheet had three tasks which involved Laplace Transforms (Figure 1):
Figure 1: The tasks given to the groups
Note: Kindly refer to the study guide for the mentioned “Table 1”
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
The classroom design did not support collaborative learning as the desks and chairs were elongated
and fixed to the floor. Students turned around while discussing the tasks with other members of the
group. The group session was an hour long and was utilized for group discussion. At the end of the
session, the students were provided with a questionnaire, which they had to complete at home, and
then the completed questionnaire was returned to the researcher (Note: The given scenario is
applicable for a face-to-face set up). The questionnaire contained the following questions:
1. Could you explain why did you enjoy/not enjoy the activity?
2. Do you feel you learn better in groups or as individuals? Explain fully?
3. Did you feel you had sufficient/insufficient time to complete the activity? Explain fully?
4. Were the questions clear and concise?
Each member is responsible in analyzing the results of their work. Pertinent solutions to every
item should be presented and evaluate carefully.
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
Kindly present the discussion of the data according to the tasks that each student attempted. The
tasks should be arranged in order in Figures 2-4. Each group should accomplish all the given
tasks.
Referring to item 1, identify the strengths and weaknesses encountered while solving the problem.
List at least four (4) assessments or challenges that the group experienced (e.g., difficulty in
executing steps in solving Laplace transform; lack of readings and theories).
1.
Figure 2: Written response by students for item 1. (kindly upload the scanned solution in presentable
form)
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
Referring to item 2 (see solution in Figure 3), identify the strengths and weaknesses encountered while
solving the problem. List at least four (4) assessments or challenges that the group experienced (e.g.,
difficulty in executing steps in solving Laplace transform; lack of readings and theories).
1.
Conclusion to the performance of the group in evaluating items 1 and 2: (at least three sentences)
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
Figure 3: Written response by students for item 2. (kindly upload the scanned solution in
presentable form)
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
In item 3 (Figure 4) note the following observations about the student’s responses. List at least
four (4) assessments or challenges that the group experienced (e.g., difficulty in executing steps in
solving Laplace transform; lack of readings and theories).
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
Figure 4: Written response by students for item 3. (kindly upload the scanned solution in
presentable form)
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
In this section, each group member will answer the questions shown previously and the leader will summarize the
presentation of each response accordingly. For quick reference, the questions are as follows:
1. Could you explain why did you enjoy/not enjoy the activity?
2. Do you feel you learn better in groups or as individuals? Explain fully?
3. Did you feel you had sufficient/insufficient time to complete the activity? Explain fully?
4. Were the questions clear and concise?
[Group response to question 1. Write the name of each member per response]
[Group response to question 2. Write the name of each member per response]
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
[Group response to question 3. Write the name of each member per response]
[Group response to question 4. Write the name of each member per response]
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
CONCLUSION
Assess the overall performance of the group in doing this collaborative work. Provide a
paragraph containing ten (10) sentences for minimum requirement.
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
REFERENCES
Barkley, E.F., Cross, K.P. & Major, C.H. (2005). Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for
college faculty, 1st edn., Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Brijlall, D. (2014) Exploring the Gurteen Knowledge Café approach as an innovative teaching for learning
strategy with first-year Engineering students. Groupwork, 24(3), 26-45.
Brijlall D., Maharaj A. & Jojo Z.M.M., 2006, ‘The development of geometrical concepts through design
activities during a Technology education class’, African Journal of Research in SMT Education 10(1), 37-
45.
Brijlall, D. & Maharaj, A., (2009a). ‘An APOS analysis of students' constructions of the concept of
continuity of a single-valued function’ in editors? Proceedings of the Seventh Southern Right Delta
Conference on the Teaching and Learning of Undergraduate Mathematics and Statistics,
Stellenbosch, South Africa, 30 November 2009 – 4 December 2009, pp. 36-49.
. (2009b), ‘Using an inductive approach for definition making: Monotonicity and boundedness of
sequences’, Pythagoras 70, 68-79.
. (2011), ‘A framework for the development of mathematical thinking with pre-service teachers: The
case of continuity of functions’, US-China Education Review B 1(5), 654-668.
Vithal, R., Adler, J. & Keitel, C., 2005, Researching Mathematics Education in South Africa: Perspectives,
practice and possibilities, Human Sciences Research Council, Pretoria.
345
Vol. 73 | No. 6 | Jun 2017 International Journal of Sciences and Research
