Review Current Practical Skills Assessment In Machining Course Based On Psychomotor Domain

Azri Bin Azman

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia azri@kktmbp.edu.my

Awaluddin Bin Mohamed Shaharoun

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia awaludin@ic.utm.my

Morina Binti Abdullah Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

morina@ic.utm.my

Abstract — The acquisition of psychomotor skills is a key

competency in engineering field. In manufacturing courses, engineering workshop practices and laboratory work provide students with practical skills (hands-on activities) thus enhance knowledge prior to their future career.

This paper discuss the current levels of practical skills acquired by students’ in engineering workshop machining classes with reference to Engineering Accreditation Council (EAC), Malaysian Qualification Agency (MQA) and (Ministry of Education) MOE standards. The findings will be apply to teaching and learning method related accordingly to the specific taxonomy for further enhancement in machining courses.

Keywords——engineering workshop practices, practical skills, assessment, psychomotor domain

I. INTRODUCTION Generally, the learners’ concern is to acquire skills from

their studies, which they can subsequently apply in their workplaces and businesses. Therefore, an institution called KKTM Balik Pulau,in Penang, Malaysia was established to offer Diploma programmes that are relevant to market needs which lead to creating workers of different categories to enhance movement towards professional growth [1]. It was observed that nations that do not inherit skilled human resources and technological infrastructures are unable to develop knowledge industries and cannot participate in the global knowledge economy [2].

The course materials are the vital tools used in instructional delivery based on the principles of learning theories with the aim to create desirable conditions that will facilitate effective self-learning [2]. This means that students are notified of the skills they are expected to have by the end of a unit. The course content is created in a way that will ensures learners to acquire the skills and competencies necessary to compete in the 21st century knowledge economy. These will then prepare such learners to respond to increasing demands of the working life.

This study was conducted to ascertain the extent to which KKTM students have master the practical activities embedded in their course modules. Designing the practical skills or the psychomotor skills learning outcomes are very important because the learners competencies would be assessed and are reflected as their workplace performances.

Most researches are focusing primarily on academic performance, which is generally related to cognitive domain [3], [4] and [5]. Very few researches have been devoted to exploring student learning outcome at the psychomotor domain in machining courses. This paper discusses on psychomotor skills/activities that are implemented in the workshop courses offered. The aim of this paper is in addressing the gap identified in the machining workshop courses.

II. BACKGROUND OF STUDY The program learning outcomes for KKTM Balik Pulau, is as shown in Table 1.

TABLE 1: PROGRAM LEARNING OUTCOMES (PLO) FOR ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY COURSES IN KKTM BALIK PULAU PLO Diploma in Engineering Technology Domain

1 Apply knowledge of mathematics, science, engineering fundamentals and engineering specialization principles to well-defined practical procedures and practices

Cognitive

2 Analyse well-defined engineering problems and formulae solutions to well-defined technical problems in the specified discipline

Cognitive

3 Conduct investigations of well-defined problems and assist in the formulation of systems, components or processes to meet specified needs

Psychomotor

4 Apply appropriate techniques, resources and engineering tools to well-defined engineering activities, with an awareness of the limitations

Psychomotor

5 Demonstrate an awareness of and consideration for societal health, safety, legal and cultural issues and their consequent responsibilities

Affective

6 Communicate effectively with the engineering community and society at large Affective

7 Demonstrate leadership qualities and to work effectively in a diverse technical team Affective

8 Demonstrate an understanding of professional ethics, responsibilities and norms of engineering technology practices

Affective

9 Acquire management or entrepreneurial knowledge and skills Affective

10 Demonstrate an understanding of the impact of engineering practices, taking into account the need for sustainable development

Affective

11 Recognize the need for professional development and to engage independent and lifelong learning Affective

PLO 3 and PLO 4 are the related statements to psychomotor domain. The course learning outcomes (CLO) for machining courses are described as per Table 2. TABLE 2: COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES (CLO) FOR ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY MACHINING COURSES IN KKTM BALIK PULAU

2014 International Conference on Teaching and Learning in Computing and Engineering

978-1-4799-3592-5/14 $31.00 © 2014 IEEE

DOI 10.1109/LaTiCE.2014.40

171

CLO

Conventional Turning

Conventional Milling CNC Turning CNC Milling

Yr 1 / Semester 1

Yr 1 / Semester 2 Yr 1 / Semester 2 Yr 2 / Semester

3 Description

1 Select appropriate cutting tools Identify and differentiate various types of accessories, CNC Turning machines and their applications

2 Apply appropriate cutting conditions based on selected materials

Select appropriate cutting tools, cutting conditions to machine selected materials

3 Perform turning operations with proper safety procedures

Perform machining simulation prior to actual machining tasks

Carry out machining simulation prior to actual machining tasks

4 Perform inspection according to the specification

Perform CNC Turning / milling operations with proper safety procedures

5 - -

Perform inspection on the component according to the specification

Perform quality control and dimensional inspection on the component according to the specification

Student enrolled in these courses, are expected to acquire these outcomes by the end of their third year of their studies.

III. OBJECTIVES OF STUDY The objectives of this paper are to review and identify the gaps of the current practical skills that related to psychomotor domain to the national quality standards. Secondly is in aligning the PLOs and CLOs accordingly and eventually the alignment of the Teaching and Learning (T & L) method. Lastly, the effective assessment methods are also discussed. These findings will be used to identify the psychomotor domain level by using Ferris and Aziz psychomotor domain model.

A. GOVERNING COUNCIL Malaysian engineering education mainly guided by

accrediting body, Engineering Accreditation Councils (EAC) of Malaysia and the Malaysian Qualification Agency (MQA) Department of the Ministry of Education Malaysia (MOE). EAC is the body appointed by Board of Engineers Malaysia (BEM) for accreditation of engineering program in Malaysia. Accreditation policy required engineering graduates to have the necessary attributes, skills and competencies reflected in the graduate outcomes specified in EAC Manual. According to study done by Basri [6] and Abdullah [7], Malaysian employers agreed that more than 70% of the attributes for engineers in EAC manual are important. Table 3 shows the attributes required by EAC.

TABLE 3: ENGINEERING ATTRIBUTES REQUIRED BY EAC (MALAYSIA)

Attributes

A Ability to acquire and apply knowledge of science and engineering fundamentals

B Ability to communicate effectively, not only with engineers but also with the community at large

C In-depth technical competence in a specific engineering discipline D Ability to undertake problem identification, formulation and solution

E Ability to utilise a systems approach to design and evaluate operational performance

F Understanding of the principles of sustainable design and development

G Understanding of professional and ethical responsibilities and commitment to them

H Ability to function effectively as an individual and in a group with the capacity to be a leader or manager as well as an effective team member

I Understanding of the social, cultural, global and environmental responsibilities as professional engineer and the need for sustainable development

J Expectation of the need to undertake the lifelong learning and possessing/acquiring the capacity to do so

EAC attributes clearly indicate the integration of laboratory work in the curriculum. This justifies the important of learning outcomes for a laboratory work. Since learning to operate machines involves several intricate procedures, a detailed task analysis [10] is required for complex learning [8]. The provision of adequate scaffolding in the form of instance worked examples, coaching, feedback, process worksheets, expert advice and referenced sources is necessary to help direct the learner and support learning [10].

TABLE 4: MQA AND MOE LEARNING OUTCOMES (LO)

MQA LO Domains MOE LO Domains

1 Knowledge (C) Knowledge of the discipline-content (C)

2 Practical skills (P) Practical skills (P) 3 Social skills and responsibilities (A) Thinking and scientific skills (C)

4 Ethics, professionalism and humanities (A) Communication skills (A)

5 Communication, leadership and team skills (A)

Social skills, teamwork and responsibility (A)

6 Scientific methods, critical thinking and problem solving skills (C)

Value, ethics, moral and professionalism (A)

7 Lifelong learning and information management skills (A)

Information management and lifelong learning skills (A)

8 Entrepreneurship and managerial skills (A)

Managerial and entrepreneurial skills (A)

9 - Leadership skills (A)

Table 4 shows the LO domains outlined by MQA and by MOE. The domain of learning for each LO domain is indicated in brackets where (C) is for the knowledge or cognitive domain, (P) is the skill or psychomotor domain and (A) is for the affective domain. Learning outcomes can serve as a benchmark to measure a success of an institution. Learning outcomes as ‘being something that student can do now that they could not do previously’ are changes in people as a result of a learning experience [13]. Learning outcomes can be used in a way that meets the needs of all stakeholders in learning institutions (i.e. the student, the lecturer and external parties).

172

B. PSYCHOMOTOR DOMAIN The psychomotor domain is a skill based domain.

Students’ practical skills in the engineering workshop / laboratory are associated with the psychomotor domain. This domain focuses on manual task that require the manipulation of objects and physical activities [12]. According to [10] and [12], human mind and body are link together while performing those activities. The widely accepted classifications for the psychomotor domain are Simpson’s [10] and Dave’s [11] taxonomies. However, Ferris and Aziz have developed another psychomotor domain according to engineering discipline.

Ferris and Aziz (2005) [15] have introduced seven levels of psychomotor domain hierarchy related to laboratory experiment in engineering education (refer to Table 5). According to [14] , this psychomotor domain model is specific for engineering students and could be used to assess the physical actions of engineers [16].

TABLE 5: FERRIS AND AZIZ PSYCHOMOTOR DOMAIN LEVEL

Level Description

1 Recognition of tools and materials

Ability to recognize the tools of the trade and the materials.

2 Handling of tools and materials

Ability to handle (pick, move and set down) the tools and materials and to handle objects without damage to either the object or other objects in its environment or hazard to any person.

3 Basic operation of tools

Ability to perform the elementary, specific detail tasks such as to hold the tool appropriately for use, to set the tool in action.

4 Competent operation of tools

Ability to fluently use the tools for performing a range of tasks of the kind for which the tools were designed.

5 Expert operation of tools

Ability to use tools rapidly, efficiently, effectively and safety to perform work tasks on regular basis.

6 Planning of work operations

Ability to take a specification of a work output required and performs the necessary transformation of description of the finished outcome into a sequence of tasks that need to be performed.

7

Evaluations of outputs and planning means for improvement

Able to look at a finished output product and review that product for quality. Ability to identify particular deficiencies and the actions which could be taken to correct the faults or to prevent the faults through appropriate planning.

IV. METHODOLOGY This section explains the methodology used in collecting

and analyzing data. Document analyses are used in identifying the gap of competencies. In this study, machining courses syllabus documents were critically analyzed and mapped with MQA and MOE standard document in identifying the current level of psychomotor skills. A document gives information about the investigated phenomenon and exists independently. According to [16] asserted that “For case studies, the most important use of documents is to corroborate and augment evidence from other sources”.

Steps in Document analysis starts with;

1. Collect and compile detailed syllabus of machining courses.

2. Analyze and map detailed syllabus between statutory standard from MQA, EAC and MOE.

3. Confirm and identify the current level of psychomotor skills.

4. Ensure the psychomotor skills conform to statutory standard.

5. Summarize and conclude the result of document analysis

V. PRELIMINARY FINDINGS The section will discuss the findings through the

mapping between PLOs and CLOs with psychomotor domain level. The practical skills studied in this paper relate to the recognition of components, handling of tools and materials, basic operation of tools and competent operation of tools in the psychomotor domain level proposed by [19]. The mapping of learning outcome mapped of machining courses during semester 1, semester 2 and semester 3. Table 6 – 7 shows the mapping result. TABLE 6: CONVENTIONAL TURNING / MILLING (YEAR 1 / SEMESTER 1 / 2) MAPPED WITH PSYCHOMOTOR DOMAIN LEVEL

CLO Description Ferris & Aziz Domain CLO1 Select appropriate cutting tools Level 1

CLO2 Apply appropriate cutting conditions based on selected materials Level 2

CLO3 Perform turning / milling operations with proper safety procedures Level 2

CLO4 Perform inspection according to the specification Level 3

TABLE 7: CNC TURNING AND CNC MILLING (YEAR 1 & 2 / SEMESTER 2 & 3) MAPPED WITH PSYCHOMOTOR DOMAIN LEVEL

CLO Description Ferris & Aziz Domain

CLO1 Identify and differentiate various types of accessories, CNC Turning / Milling machines and their applications

Level 1

CLO2 Select appropriate cutting tools, cutting conditions to machine selected materials Level 2

CLO3 Perform machining simulation prior to actual machining tasks Level 3

CLO4 Perform CNC Turning /Milling operations with proper safety procedures Level 3

CLO5 Perform inspection on the component according to the specification Level 4

Document has been mapped from [21],[23], [22], [24] with the document of Ministry of Education (MOE). The preliminary findings showed that the highest level of psychomotor for manual machining is at level 3. CNC machining activities reached level 4. This is due to the difficulties and complexity of the activities involved. The machining courses spend about 80 hours per semester on hands-on activities in the workshop. The assessment instruments also indicated about 90% were assessed based on project, formative practical test and summative practical final. According to [19], psychomotor domain levels proposed by [17] are suitable and appropriate to be used in this study for engineering technology diploma students’ courses. This is stated by [17] where the psychomotor domain proposed by [15] is specific for engineering students.

173

Table 6 mapping result shows the psychomotor domain level (PDL) for conventional turning and milling courses equivalent to level 3. Level 3 is referred to the basic operation of tools mainly, the student ability to perform the elementary, specific detail tasks. These result shows the practical skills implemented in the machining courses are compliance to its learning outcomes. Refer to Table 7, the result is different since it has five CLOs’. The extra CLO added in in performing machining simulation prior to actual machining tasks. With the addition, the PDL increased to Level 4 with the increase level of difficulty and complexity of the activities involved. TABLE 8: TIME IN HOURS OF MACHINING COURSES AT KKTM BALIK PULAU

Year / Semester

Course Lecture / Semester

(hrs)

Practical / Semester

(hrs)

Hours / Week

Yr 1 / 1 Yr 1 / 2

Conv. Turning Conv. Milling

10 11

80 79 5

Yr 1 / 2 Yr 2 / 1

CNC Turning CNC Milling

18 18

54 54 4

Table 8 shown the hours spend for practical skills in machining courses for students’ in gaining knowledge and experiences in machining operation. Conventional machining (manual hands-on) hours spend is more than hours spend for operating computer numerical control (CNC) machining. TABLE 9: ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT FORMAT OF MACHINING COURSES

NO SUBJECT COURSEWORK FINAL

1 Type of Instruments

Theory Test (10%)

Practical Project (50%)

Final Practical (40%)

2 Type of Items Structure Project Practical

Duration of Assessment 1hrs 55hrs 5hrs

3 Total Mark 100% 100% 100%

According to Table 9(example of assessment method), it shows that the percentage of practical is 90% and the theory about 10%. From this assessment method, enough exposure was given to the students’ on hands-on activities which related to the psychomotor skills. Therefore, the result shows that the assessment method and instrument used are aligned to the PLO’s and CLO’s.

VI. DISCUSSION AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT This section discusses the preliminary findings on the

practical skills. Document analyses identify the relationship between PLOs and CLOs’ according to the psychomotor domain. The use of [17] psychomotor domain level is suitable for mapping and alignment between CLOs’ and teaching and learning method and assessment method. The findings from the preliminary research have identified that the level of psychomotor domain [19] in the machining courses at KKTM Balik Pulau, Penang, Malaysia was as the levels of the national standards. The items for each level can

be identified from PLOs and CLOs of the each machining courses. These findings’ have satisfied and aligned with the national standard such as EAC, MQA and MOE. The [15] psychomotor domain model can be used by lecturers as a guideline in identifying the levels of students’ skills in performing the engineering workshop / workshop practices / laboratory tasks.

With these findings, the next phases of the research are following the triangulation method according to [18] which is the observation and interview method. The findings obtain will then use for future development related to psychomotor skills in machining courses.

REFERENCES

[1] Olakulehin, F.K , Effectiveness of proficiency skills development using open and distance learning system in Nigeria, 2009.

[2] Manjulika, S, Reddy V. V, Towards virtualization: Open and Distance Learning, Jan 2002.

[3] Rahman, M.H., Developing course materials for open and distance learning: BOU perspective, Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 7 (4), 55-60, 2006.

[4] Daymount, T. & Blau, G., Student performance in online and traditional sections of an undergraduate management course. Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management, 275–294, 2008.

[5] Oladejo, M.A., Ige, N. A., Fagunwa, A. O., and Arewa. O.O., Socio-demographic Variables and Distance Learners’ Academic Performance at the University of Ibadan, Nigeria. European Journal of Scientific Research, 46 (4), 540-553., 2010.

[6] Basri H., Omar M.Z.., Zainal M., Abang Abdullah A.A., Badrulhisham A.A., Abdul Hamid H., Nik Abdullah N.M., Azmi H. & Zaidi M.R., “The Future of Engineering Education in Malaysia”, 2007.

[7] Abdullah S., Zaharim A., , Harris S.M., , Omar M.Z., Basri H., Nik Mohamed N.A., Engineering Education: Using Technical Attributes to Analyse the Employers' Expectation of Future Engineering Graduates in Malaysia., 2007.

[8] Van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Kirschner, P. A. , Ten steps to complex learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 2007.

[9] Clark, R. C., Multimedia learning in e-courses. In R. E. Mayer (ed), The Cambridge handbook for multimedia learning (pp. 589 – 616), New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

[10] E. J. Simpson, The classification of educational objectives in psychomotor domain, vol. 3. Washington D. C: Gryphon House, 1972.

[11] Dave, R. H., Developing and Writing Behavioral Objectives. (R. J. Armstrong, ed.). Tucson, Arizona: Educational Innovators Press. 1975.

[12] Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1973). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, the Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook II: Affective Domain. New York: David McKay Co., Inc.

[13] Watson, R., Stimpson, A., Topping, A., Porock, D. Clinical competence in nursing: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of Advanced Nursing 39(5), 421e431, 2002.

[14] D. Kennedy, A. Hyland and N. Ryan, "Writing and using learning outcomes: a practical guide,” Bologna Handbook. European University Association, 2006.

[15] T. L. Ferris and S. Aziz, “A psychomotor skills extension to Bloom's Taxonomy of education objectives for engineering education,” Exploring Innovation in Education and Research. Tainan, Taiwan, 2005.

174

[16] M. Hoffmann, “Using Bloom's Taxonomy of learning to make engineering course comparable,”. IEEE Transactions, pp. 205-209, 2008.

[17] A. Chapman, “Benjamin Bloom's Taxonomy of learning domains - cognitive, affective, psychomotor domains,” 2006.

[18] Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2003.

[19] K. R. Salim, M. Puteh & S. M. Daud. (2009). A Review of the Current Laboratory Practice in Malaysian University: A Preliminary Study. March 2009.

[20] Felder, R. M. & Brent, R., Designing and Teaching Courses to Satisfy the ABET Engineering Criteria. Journal of Engineering Education, 92 (1), 7 - 25. 2003.

[21] Dasar Pembangunan Kurikulum Program Sijil dan Diploma, Caw. Pengajian Bahagian Kemahiran dan Teknikal MARA, Edisi Januari 2012.

[22] Engineering Accreditation Council (2012). Engineering Programme Accreditation Manual, 2012.

[23] Bahagian Kemahiran dan Teknikal (BKT) MARA, Detailed Assessment Book, Diploma in Manufacturing Engineering Technology, July 2012.

[24] Malaysia Qualification Agency. Malaysian Qualification Framework 2012.

175