Students’ perception of intensive engineering subject delivery by an Australian academic at an Indian University

CONTEXT: Intensive teaching formats, also known by various synonyms- accelerated, block, time-shortened, compressed, condensed, have been widely used to teach undergraduate engineering subjects both at domestic and, most commonly, at international partner institutions. The durations of these intensive teaching forms also vary- over one or more weeks, over one or more weekends, over several evenings and/or a combination of them. The extent to which the subject delivery is ‘intensified’ also varies from discipline to discipline, subject to subject, and institution to institution. Even though intensive teaching formats are becoming common place in engineering education, it is still unclear how they impact on student learning, particularly in engineering subjects that require huge amount of mathematical problem solving skills, which usually take a longer period of time and rigorous practice to be developed. This study investigates an important aspect of student learninghow local engineering students perceive the intensive teaching of engineering subjects by international academics. Case study is conducted at an Indian partner institution where a week-long intensive teaching was adopted to teach an undergraduate civil engineering subject by an Australian academic staff. PURPOSE: This study aims to explore some important research questions- what do local engineering students think of intensive teaching by international academics? Are there any particular issues we need to worry about? Answers to these questions are based on a case study at an Indian institution taught by an Australian academic. APPROACH: In order to understand what offshore engineering students think of intensive teaching of engineering subjects, this study adopted questionnaire approach to collect original data from students at an Indian institution by asking them about their perceptions through a series of statements. Five-point Likert-scale questionnaire was developed and responses were collected. Both quantitative and qualitative responses were analysed in order to elicit engineering students’ perceptions of intensive teaching. RESULTS: The analysis of the responses showed that the students perceived intensive teaching mode quite favourable as compared with similar experiences in Australia. It might be due to local socio-cultural context such as consequences of bias, social desirability and social acquiescence. Nonetheless, three issues, which were somewhat similar to other experiences elsewhere, were identified. First, students felt that they did not have sufficient time (1 week delivery was too short) to practise and develop problem solving skills in an engineering subject. Second, students found it difficult to concentrate and engage in learning sessions for long hours. Third, it was important to modify learning resources to include local context (standards, data and issues) when taught by an international academic staff. CONCLUSIONS: This finding highlights the importance of addressing common issues in order to further improve the ‘intensive’ off-shore delivery of engineering subjects, particularly extending intensive duration, having sufficient breaks in between learning hours, learning resources to include local context (local standards, data, problems, field visits) when taught by off-shore academics and ensuring assessment tasks are appropriate for intensive format.