ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION - Volume 11 - Issue 1 - A Hands-on Guided-inquiry Materials Laboratory that Supports Student Agency

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Đào

The paper presents a hands-on guided-inquiry materials laboratory designed to support student agency within modern engineering education. It contrasts “recipe-based” confirmatory labs with higher levels of inquiry, explaining how structured and guided inquiry enable students to make goal-directed decisions that affect experimental outcomes. The discussion connects student agency to ABET expectations for experimentation, data analysis, interpretation, and engineering judgment, summarizing evidence and research on scaffolding and open-ended laboratory design.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages28

Reading Time1 h 11 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Inquiry hierarchy in engineering labs

Student agency and ABET alignment

Designing open-ended laboratory experiences

Scaffolding evidence and outcomes

| | Ad | vances in Engineering Edu | cation | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2023: VOLUME 11 ISSUE 1 77 ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION A Hands-on Guided-inquiry Materials Laboratory that Supports Student Agency Key words: Remote laboratory [syn: Virtual laboratory], Inquiry based learning, Collaborative learning, Mechanical engineering, Experimental design, ABET INTRODUCTION The instructional laboratory experience is a hallmark of the modern engineering curriculum. Engineering students typically encounter a variety of lab experiences in different contexts, often designed with different outcomes in mind including reinforcement of lecture concepts, motivation to continue in or pursue a particular major, and development of skills in instrumentation, data analysis, teamwork, and communication (Feisel and Rosa, 2005; Holmes and Smith, 2019) . Feiseland Rosa (2005) emphasized the importance of experimental design, creativity, and learning from failure as important outcomes of instructional labs in engineering. More recently, the new ABET accreditation framework requires that students demonstrate “an ability to develop and conduct appropriate experimentation, analyze and interpret data, and use engineering judgment to draw conclusions”(ABET, 2018) . In mechanical engineering, civil engineering, and materials science, some of these lab experiences involve material testing, and usually use the relevant ASTM standard as a template. A traditional“recipe-based” lab guides students through a standardized experiment using well-documented methods leading to predictable results, often for the purpose of demonstrating or confirming a concept learned in lecture. The activities that students may engage in during the activity are heavily constrained by the ASTM standard, available equipment, safety considerations, and time. Similar confirmatory lab activities in introductory physics have proven ineffective at even reinforcing lecture concepts, and the limits on student agency preclude achievement of the objectives emphasized by ABET (Holmes et al. , 2017; Holmes and Wieman, 2016) . The confirmation inquiry activities just described lie at the foundation of the hierarchy of inquiry proposed by Banchi and Bell (2008) . In a structured-inquiry activity (the next level of the hierarchy), the instructor provides the question or goal and method of investigation, while students discover the result and draw conclusions. A guided-inquiry activity allows students to choose or design the method of investigation for a question provided by the instructor. Finally, an open-inquiry leaves the task of developing the question to the students. The purpose and value of engineering laboratories is often stated in general terms like “relating theory to practice” or bringing the “real world” into the classroom (Feisel and Rosa, 2005) . But surely if making connections between the textbook and physical phenomena was the only goal, then canned lecture demonstrations would be a cheaper and more efficient alternative. What distinguishes 78 2023: VOLUME 11 ISSUE 1 ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION A Hands-on Guided-inquiry Materials Laboratory that Supports Student Agency designing and conducting experiments from watching demonstrations is the opportunity for students to make goal-directed decisions whose outcomes affect the success of the endeavor. We propose that student agency is a critical component of successful student-centered pedagogy (Benedict et al., 2020) . We adopt the definition of agency described by Holmes et al. (2020) as goal-directed decision-making, specifically focusing on decision-making agency, which is highly relevant to an engineering context, as opposed to epistemic agency (freedom in what questions to ask or how to create new knowledge), which is more relevant to a basic science context. Learning activities which leave room for students to make decisions may support st

FAQs

Why are guided-inquiry materials labs important in engineering education?

They help students exercise goal-directed decision-making during experiments, which supports inquiry objectives and student-centered learning outcomes.

How does the paper contrast recipe-based labs with inquiry-based labs?

Recipe-based labs constrain choices through standardized ASTM-based procedures, while inquiry-based labs progressively shift control of method design toward students.

What role does student agency play according to the paper?

Student agency is framed as goal-directed decision-making that can improve motivation, buy-in, self-efficacy, and better reflect professional working conditions.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Đào