The development of procedural knowledge in students, i.e., the ability to effectively solve domain problems, is the goal of many instructional initiatives in engineering education. The present study examined learning in a rich learning environment in which students read text, listened to narrations, interacted with simulations, and solved problems using instructional software for thermodynamics. Twenty‐three engineering and science majors who had not taken a thermodynamics course provided verbal protocol data as they used this software. The data were analyzed for cognitive processes. There were three major findings: (1) students expressed significantly more cognitive activity on computer screens requiring interaction compared to text‐based screens; (2) there were striking individual differences in the extent to which students employed the materials; and (3) verbalizations revealed that students applied predominantly lower‐level cognitive processes when engaging these materials, and they failed to connect the conceptual and procedural knowledge in ways that would lead to deeper understanding. The results provide a baseline for additional studies of more advanced students in order to gain insight into how students develop skill in engineering.

Conceptual and procedural knowledge are two mutually-supportive factors associated with the development of engineering skill. The present study extends previous work on undergraduate learning in engineering to provide further validation for an assessment paradigm capable of quantifying engineering students' conceptual and problem-solving knowledge. Eight students who were enrolled in an introductory thermodynamics course and four who were enrolled in the course sequel provided verbal protocol data as they used instructional software. They were compared to existing data from a cohort of eleven science and engineering majors who had not taken thermodynamics. The results replicated earlier findings showing more cognitive activity on computer screens requiring overt user interaction compared to text-based screens. The data also indicated that higher-versus lower-performing students, based on course grades, engaged in more higher-order cognitive processing. There was no evidence that students gained deeper cognitive processing as they advanced through the engineering curriculum.

One hundred and three patients referred to a neurological outpatient clinic were examined to assess the relationship between persistent headache, not due to significant physical illness, and emotional disturbance. Overall, the patients showed slightly more evidence of emotional disturbance than a general practice population but less than psychiatric outpatients. Thus, with cut-off points of 4/5 and 9/10 on the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ 28) the whole group had 52% or 20% of psychiatric 'cases' respectively. On the Crown-Crisp Experiential Index the 70 females had mean total scores of 37.19 +/- 11.11 and the 33 males had scores of 31.79 +/- 11.36. In addition the childhood experiences measured by the Parental Bonding Instrument appeared to be normal. Seven patients had significant depressive illness, according to the Levine-Pilowsky Depression Questionnaire. Statistically significant differences in psychological state did not emerge between the diagnoses of cluster headache, classical migraine, common migraine, tension headache or combined headache. However, negative correlations were found between the duration of illness and measures of anxiety. It is concluded that although the emotional state contributes to the development of pain and headache in some patients, there are others in whom comparable headaches are unlikely to be due to emotional factors. Selection effects are held to be important and some of the emotional changes will vary at different phases of a chronic disorder. A new symptom may initially cause anxiety but when a condition persists some patients will be increasingly concerned or depressed whilst others develop tolerance for the situation.

No abstract

where he currently serves as the Ray Butler Distinguished Educator. Since returning to the faculty after several different administrative assignments, including Departmental Chairman, Assistant Dean, and Director of the TTU Teaching, Learning and Technology Center, he has focused upon engineering student learning research with an eye upon how to use these findings to improve traditional and computer-based learning.