| Australian Journal of Educational Technology 2001, 17(3), 313-329. |
AJET 17 |
A longitudinal analysis of computer usage by commencing students in Deakin University's undergraduate engineering and technology programs over the period 1998 to 2001 revealed that; access to computers was at high levels; mean computer usage for off campus students had not changed significantly, but had risen significantly for on campus students; while access to the Internet / WWW had not increased significantly, reported regular use of the Internet / WWW had risen significantly; while most students continued to report their source of Internet / WWW access as either home or university, the proportion reporting home as their source of access had risen significantly; and the reported regular use of email rose significantly. Other results are also presented.These results imply that commencing engineering and technology students are well placed to adopt online delivery and support of teaching and learning. However, while it might now be reasonable to assume that all students have access to computers and the Internet, the experiences of on campus students in computer laboratories with broadband network access will be different from off campus students accessing the Internet via a dialup modem connection. A small proportion of commencing students were unaware of the computing facilities provided by the university; an orientation program covering computing facilities and services would benefit all commencing students.
For engineering and technology education, computer applications can include computer programming, numerical analysis, computer simulation, Computer Aided Design (CAD), Computer Aided Manufacture (CAM), electronic communications, information retrieval and computer aided learning and assessment. The use of computers in education is particularly relevant to engineering education, as the computer has become one of the central tools of the practicing engineer, whether it be for CAD, project planning, process control, budgeting, data communications or software development.
The Deakin University engineering and technology programs are offered in flexible delivery mode, and a key emerging issue in flexible delivery of education programs is the development and delivery of online study programs. Ryan (1998) notes that 'flexible delivery' and 'Web based delivery' have become synonyms, as well as the 'inevitability' of online delivery in education - "Time and tide are inexorable forces. Teaching and learning online is equally unstoppable..." (Ryan, 1998, 14).
Ubell (2000) notes a US government report estimating that by 2002, 15 percent of American higher education is likely to be delivered online, and that in 1999, 40 percent of the money spent on corporate training in America was for online education. The same source identifies engineers as key consumers of online education, based on the short half life of technical knowledge and the need for the engineering workforce to continually refresh their knowledge and skills base:
E-learning, especially for engineers and executives in technology industries, has emerged as one of the fastest moving trends in higher education... As any engineer knows, there is tremendous pressure to keep pace with the latest technology and the newest ways of doing business...Yet few engineers have the luxury of attending classes on well groomed college campuses (Ubell, 2000, 60)
The university centrally supports and provides (on a CD-ROM) at no cost to students, application software for email, computer conferencing, virus protection, bibliographic database management and access to online research databases. On campus students have access to computer labs where all required software has been installed. Where a software package is to be used in a study unit, a key selection criterion is the availability of a low cost, student edition of the package, so that purchase of the package can be made compulsory for off campus students. This may involve negotiation with software suppliers for special student pricing, or for the 'leasing' of software that off campus students must return at the end of the semester.
The aim is that off campus students are not required to attend the campus to complete their studies that require the use of computer applications. Computer programming exercises are coded, compiled, run and debugged remotely by off campus students. Program listings and evidence of program performance would typically be submitted for assessment. Similar requirements exist for numerical analysis and computer simulation exercises. CAD exercises require students to draft their draE&trgb=ffffff&ft=0&incr=F&st=396 and submit their drawing files on floppy disk. CAM exercises require students to develop and validate their machine control programs remotely and submit them on floppy disk so that actual parts can be machined in a flexible manufacturing cell. A recent development at Deakin University allows students to submit their CAM files via the Internet directly to a computer that controls the flexible manufacturing cell, and then watch live video, via the Internet, of their part being machined (Ferguson & Florance, 1999). The School of Engineering and Technology has also developed a number of special purpose Computer Aided Learning (CAL) packages covering areas as diverse as taking measurements with a micrometer to understanding moral decision making (Palmer & Tulloch, 2001).
Over a number of years one of the authors has conducted surveys of commencing engineering and technology students to assess their level of access to computers and their usage of computers. A philosophy of flexible delivery of engineering education supported by computer based learning materials and/or online delivery will only be effective if students have access to the required computer systems and the ability to use such systems effectively. While it might be considered as an accepted fact that levels of computer access and usage would be high among commencing science and engineering students, a previous study of commencing chemistry students at Deakin University showed that while the rate of access to computers was high, this did not necessarily translate into uniformly high levels of computer usage or IT competence (Lim & Lee, 2000). The increasing but non-uniform access to, and use of, computers is documented elsewhere (Flowers, Pascarella & Pierson, 2000). To gain an appreciation of the changes in computer usage over time of the commencing engineering and technology students at Deakin University, a longitudinal comparison of the collected data was undertaken to test the stated hypotheses.
In addition to these surveys, the same questionnaire used for the commencing class in 1998 was also administered to the level four unit SEB421 - Strategic Issues in Engineering, in 1998. SEB421 is normally taken in the final semester of final year, and while the results obtained are not directly comparable to those from the commencing groups, they do provide a comparison of the difference in responses between students just commencing their studies and those just prior to the completion of their studies.
Survey questions that were common to all questionnaires included the following areas:
| Unit | Year | Enrolment | Returns | Response rate |
| SEB121 | 1998 | 141 | 76 | 53.9% |
| SEB121 | 1999 | 179 | 122 | 68.2% |
| SEB121 | 2001 | 178 | 101 | 56.7% |
| SEB421 | 1998 | 42 | 26 | 61.9% |
| Year | Mean respondent age | Standard deviation |
| 1998 | 22.2 years | 7.47 |
| 1999 | 21.1 years | 6.82 |
| 2001 | 20.0 years | 4.81 |
Table 3 gives the gender proportions for the SEB121 groups. The three sample groups were large and random, so the Chi-square test of homogeneity was applicable. The gender proportions were not significantly different between the three groups (
22 = 3.14, p > 0.2). These gender proportions compare to the reported overall commencing female participation rate in Australian engineering undergraduate studies of approximately 14.4 percent (Department of Education Training and Youth Affairs, 1999).
| Year | Proportion of female respondents | Proportion of male respondents |
| 1998 | 22.4% | 77.6% |
| 1999 | 13.1% | 86.9% |
| 2001 | 14.9% | 85.1% |
These results indicate that valid comparisons can be made between the three groups of commencing students.
22 = 5.53, p > 0.06). As the samples were large and random, the large sample inference about two proportions test could be applied to pairs of year groups. A significant difference was found between the 1998 and 2001 results (Z = 2.00, p < 0.046), lending some weight to the proposition that more recent commencing students are more likely to have access to a computer, and that the proportion of students with access to a computer has reached 100 percent.
| Year | Have access to a computer | Do not have access to a computer |
| 1998 | 96.0% | 4.0% |
| 1999 | 99.2% | 0.8% |
| 2001 | 100.0% | 0.0% |
These results are broadly in agreement with computer access rates of 91 to 100 percent reported by students in an Australian, on campus, undergraduate applied science course (Ash, 1996), and 98 percent from a recent survey of first year chemistry students (also at Deakin University) (Lim & Lee, 2000). While it is recommended to students entering the undergraduate engineering programs at Deakin University that they have access to a computer, it has not been made a mandatory requirement for entry on the basis of equity and access; principally due to concerns that off campus students may not necessarily have access to and/or be able to afford a computer. The results here suggest that for the students who elect to undertake engineering studies, access to computers is not a significant issue.
| Year | On and off campus | On campus only | Off campus only |
| 1998 | 10.6 (13.36) hours | 6.0 ( 7.90) hours | 23.3 (16.89) hours |
| 1999 | 9.1 ( 9.56) hours | 7.0 ( 5.69) hours | 19.8 (16.20) hours |
| 2001 | 13.1 (12.49) hours | 11.7 (11.21) hours | 24.8 (16.60) hours |
However, a closer examination revealed there was a marked difference between the reported computer usage of on and off campus students; on campus usage appeared to be rising, while off campus usage did not. Considering the three groups of off campus student data, there was no significant difference in computer usage (H = 0.85, p > 0.65). Considering the three groups of on campus student data, there was a significant difference in computer usage (H = 27.83, p < 9.1x10-7).
On campus students in the Deakin University engineering programs are principally those entering directly from secondary school with a nominal age of 18 years at the commencement of their studies (these 'conventional entry' students are not normally permitted to study in the off campus mode until they reach 20 years of age). Off campus students are principally mature age (defined as 20 years or older at the commencement of their studies), with a wide variation in age, previous studies and personal circumstances. It is their personal circumstances that lead to mature age students normally studying in the off campus mode; many of these students live remotely from the university and/or have full time employment and/or are returning to study to upgrade their qualifications to improve their career prospects and/or are participating in employer sponsored study programs. It is theorised that the much higher mean reported computer usage for mature age students is related to their employment status and occupational use of computers.
It is interesting to note that while the reported off campus computer usage has not varied significantly during the study period, the reported on campus computer usage has varied significantly, almost doubling during the study period. This suggests that the exposure to and use of computers by leaving secondary school students is increasing rapidly.
| Year | Internet / WWW access | Regular Internet / WWW user |
| 1998 | 84.2% | 46.1% |
| 1999 | 90.2% | 52.1% |
| 2001 | 92.1% | 82.0% |
Table 6 gives the proportions of respondents in the SEB121 groups who indicated that they had access to the Internet / WWW and who indicated that they were 'regular' users of the Internet / WWW. There appeared to be increasing access to the Internet / WWW over time, however, all the access proportions were relatively high and, based on the large sample inference about two proportions test, even the difference between the 1998 and 2001 results were not significant (Z = -1.64, p > 0.1). While the self assessment by respondents as to what constitutes regular Internet / WWW usage may be somewhat subjective, the results showed a marked increase in regular usage over time, and, based on the Chi-square test of homogeneity, this increase was significant (22 = 29.54, p < 3.9x10-7). These results are broadly in agreement with 86.6 percent of Deakin University first year chemistry students reporting themselves as knowing how to use the WWW (Lim & Lee, 2000).
Those respondents that indicated they had Internet / WWW access were asked to indicate the source of that access by selecting from Home, University or 'Other'. Figure 1 gives the proportion of respondents indicating each of these sources of access for the SEB121 groups. The majority of students indicated their source of access as either Home or University. Over the period of the study the proportion of respondents indicating their source of access as 'Other' remained small. The remaining 95-97 percent of respondents indicated either Home or University as their source of Internet / WWW access, and, based on the Chi-square test of homogeneity, the relative proportions of these two sources did change significantly over the period of the study (24 = 11.54, p < 0.022). From 1998 to 2001 there was a greater than 60 percent increase in the proportion of students indicating that Home was the source of their Internet / WWW access at the commencement of their studies. This increase mirrors the more than 70 percent increase over the same period in respondents reporting themselves as regular Internet / WWW users.
Figure 1: Reported source of Internet / WWW access
From Table 4 and 6 it is noted that, while all respondents (by 2001) indicated that they had access to a computer, a small proportion of commencing students (7.9 percent) believed they did not have access to the Internet / WWW when, in fact, all students, both on and off campus, are provided a computer account through Deakin University that permits access to the Internet, and all on campus students have access to a large number of both PC and Mac workstations in on campus computer laboratories. Closer inspection of the data reveals that all off campus respondents indicated they had access to the Internet / WWW, even though this means that they must organise their own access through their workplace or a private Internet Service Provider (ISP). So a significant minority of commencing on campus students are unaware of the computing facilities provided for them by the university. This result is broadly in agreement with 3.7 percent of Deakin University first year chemistry students reporting themselves as unaware of the on campus computer laboratories (Lim & Lee, 2000). This perhaps represents the fact that at the commencement of their studies, some on campus students are still orienting themselves to university life, and do not yet fully appreciate what resources are on offer to them. An induction program in computing for on campus students could be beneficial, a conclusion also reached by Lim & Lee (2000).
The growing proportion of students with Internet / WWW (and presumably computer) access at home is important. While Deakin University provides on campus students with free access to computer workstations and the Internet, this access is only available while the student is on campus and has free time between classes and other study activities. The literature suggests that some students do not necessarily view the physical presence of on campus computer labs as equating to 'having access to computers'. Althaus (1997) notes that students who do not have their own computing equipment must make special trips to computer labs and vie with other students for access to computers. Interestingly, the same source quotes an engineering student explaining their lack of participation in a class computer exercise as follows:
I didn't dislike it, it was just inconvenient for me. I am an engineering major, and spend 30-40 hours/week doing problem sets. I do not have a computer w/modem in my room, and I only go to the computer lab to solve problems or write programs. (Althaus, 1997, 170)There are important considerations in the use of the Internet / WWW by students that go beyond mere access to computing facilities and the Internet. Even when everyone is 'online', not everyone may have the same type of connection. On campus students may have the benefit of high speed, dedicated networking, whereas the only option for an off campus student may be a dialup modem line that does not support the data transfer rate required for high quality interactive multimedia programs (Ingram, 1996). Additionally, simply having the requisite computer resources doesn't automatically grant access to the information superhighway. If one is unfamiliar with computers or the Internet, attempting to navigate this new medium can be frustrating and frightening. A survey of 158 postgraduate students, composed of roughly equal numbers of on and off campus students, reported that even though more than 90 percent of students had access to a computer, 75 percent of all students stated a need for training in the use of the Internet (Brogan, 1997).
22 = 30.37, p < 2.6x10-7).
| Year | Regular email user | Not a regular email user |
| 1998 | 40.8% | 59.2% |
| 1999 | 38.8% | 61.2% |
| 2001 | 73.3% | 26.7% |
| Observed correlation | SEB121 1998 | SEB121 1999 | SEB121 2001 |
| Age and study mode | Z = -6.31 p < 2.8x10-10 | Z = -9.74 p = 0.0 | Z = -6.17 p < 7.1x10-10 |
| Regular use of email and Internet / WWW | 21 = 47.54 p < 5.4x10-12 | 21 = 59.29 p < 1.4x10-14 | 21 = 37.50 p < 9.2x10-10 |
These observed correlations were as expected. As noted above, for commencing students, virtually all conventional entry (18 year old) students will study on campus, and many mature age students will study off campus to best suit their work, family or other commitments. Respondents reporting familiarity with or regular use of one online tool (email or Internet / WWW) could reasonably be expected to also be regular users of the other. It is an anecdotal observation of the authors that a majority of the on campus members of the student group in question now use a WWW based interface to access their email, permitting them to access their email from any location at which they can operate a WWW browser, rather than using a dedicated email client program that can only be operated where the client program is installed.
| Questionnaire category | SEB121 response | SEB421 response |
| Have access to a computer | 96.0% | 100% |
| Mean hours per week computer usage | 10.6 (13.36) hours | 12.0 (10.28) hours |
| Internet / WWW access | 84.2% | 100% |
| Regular Internet / WWW user | 46.1% | 92.3% |
| Regular email user | 40.8% | 76.9% |
However, while it might now be reasonable to assume that all students have access to computers and the Internet / WWW, it should be kept in mind during the development of computer based and/or online teaching learning resources that there are various classes of access. Students accessing materials in an on campus computer laboratory with wide band Internet access will have a different experience to off campus students paying time and/or volume charges to an ISP for modem based dialup access to the Internet.
Additionally, in this study and a similar one of commencing chemistry students at Deakin University, a small but not insignificant proportion of commencing students were unaware of the computing facilities provided for on campus students by the university. Given the importance of computing in engineering and technology studies, an orientation program covering computing facilities and services provided by the university would be of benefit to all commencing students.
Ash, G. (1996). Occasional Papers in Open and Distance Learning - Computer information technology survey for the School of Agriculture (No. 19). Wagga Wagga: Open Learning Institute, Charles Sturt University.
Briggs, H. (1995). Towards student-centred engineering education at Deakin University. Paper presented at the 12th Biennial Forum of the Open and Distance Learning Association of Australia, Vanuatu.
Brogan, M. (1997). Off-campus and off-line? Access to the Internet of postgraduate TESOL students at Deakin University. In T. Evans & V. Jakupec & D. Thompson (Eds), Research in Distance Education, 4, 115-127. Geelong: Deakin University Press.
Department of Education Training and Youth Affairs. (1999). Selected Higher Education Statistics (Higher Education Statistics Collection 6262.HEDS98A). Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
Ferguson, C., & Florance, J. (1999). Internet Access to a Flexible Manufacturing Cell. Paper presented at the Second World Manufacturing Congress - International Symposium on Manufacturing Systems, University of Durham, UK.
Flowers, L., Pascarella, E. T., & Pierson, C. T. (2000). Information technology use and cognitive outcomes in the first year of college. Journal of Higher Education, 71(6), 637-667.
Ingram, A. L. (1996). Teaching with technology. Association Management, 46(6), 38-47.
Lim, K. F., & Lee, J. (2000). IT skills of university undergraduate students enrolled in a first year unit. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(3), 215-238. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet16/lim.html
Palmer, S., & Tulloch, W. (2001). The evolution of on-line teaching and learning in engineering at Deakin University. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 13(1), 91-109.
Ryan, Y. (1998). Time and tide: Teaching and learning online. Australian Universities' Review, 41(1), 14-19.
Ubell, R. (2000). Engineers turn to e-learning. IEEE Spectrum, 37(10), 59-63.
Please note that participation is voluntary, all data will remain anonymous and confidential. The results may be published, but only in an aggregate form, results will not be related to any individual student.
By completing this form you consent to participate in this survey.
| 1. General | |
| Please state your age at your last birthday | [ ] Yrs |
| Please indicate your gender (circle M or F) | M F |
| Please indicate your study mode (circle On or Of campus) | On Off |
2. Computer Usage | |
| Have you used a computer before? (circle Y or N) | Y N |
| Do you use a computer regularly? (circle Y or N) | Y N |
| If no, please go to question 3 | |
| If yes, what type? (circle one) | PC / Mac / Other |
| If 'Other', please specify type | ................. |
| How many hours per week (on average) do you spend using a computer? | [ ] Hrs |
3. Computer Access | |
| Do you have access to a computer? (circle Y or N) | Y N |
| If no, please go to question 4 | |
| If yes, who does the computer belong to? (circle one) | |
| You / Your family / Your employer / A friend / Other | |
| If 'Other', please specify who it belongs to | .............. |
4. Internet Usage | |
| Do you regularly use e-mail? (circle Y or N) | Y N |
| If yes, do you use your own e-mail account, or do you use someone else's? (circle one) | Own Acct / Someone else's |
| Do you regularly use the World Wide Web? (circle Y or N) | Y N |
| Have you ever created a Web page? (circle Y or N) | Y N |
| Do you have access to the Internet/WWW? (circle Y or N) | Y N |
| If yes, where do you have access? (circle one) | |
| Home / Work / School / University / Other | |
| If 'Other', please specify where you have access | ............... |
5. Other | |
| What do you think computers most useful for? ............................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... | |
| What task do you use computers for most? .................................................................. ........................................................................................................................................ | |
| What computer program do you use the most? ............................................................. | |
Thank you for your time and cooperation
| Authors: Stuart Palmer, Senior Lecturer, School of Engineering and Technology Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, 3217, Australia Email: spalm@deakin.edu.au Web: http://www.deakin.edu.au/~spalm/ Sharyn L. Bray, School of Engineering and Technology, Deakin University Please cite as: Palmer, S. R. and Bray, S. L. (2001). Longitudinal study of computer usage in flexible engineering education. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 17(3), 313-329. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet17/palmer.html |