Interactive Teaching Intervention For Civil Engineering Education: An Action Research Study

The increasing demand for outcome-based education in civil engineering has promoted a shift from the lecture-centred instruction toward an interactive and student-centred learning approaches. KNS2133 Structural Analysis with specifically the Moment Distribution Method (MDM) for statically indeterminate structures, remains a challenging topic for the undergraduate students due to its fundamental concepts, multi-step procedures and displacement-based reasoning requirements. This study presents an action research investigation into the implementation of an interactive, technology-enhanced teaching intervention for MDM within a Structural Analysis course. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the students’ learning experiences, perceived learning outcomes and motivation responses following the intervention. The specific objectives are to: (i) examine the students’ conceptual understanding and procedural confidence in applying MDM, (ii) evaluate the effectiveness of interactive teaching strategies and digital tools and (iii) assess students’ motivation, engagement and overall evaluation of the learning experience. A descriptive action research design was adopted in this study by involving the undergraduate civil engineering students enrolled in KNS2133 Structural Analysis at Universi Malaysia Sarawak. About 80% of the enrolled students voluntarily take part in this statistic survey. The intervention incorporated step-by-step worked examples, QR-based diagnostic activities and integration of live digital tools such as Whiteboard.fi and eLEAP to facilitate real-time interaction and formative feedback. Data were collected using a post-lesson Google Form survey and analyzed using descriptive statistics. The findings indicate that strong positive student perceptions across conceptual understanding, teaching effectiveness, technology integration and perceived learning outcomes. Students reported with high confidence in stiffness computation, MDM tabulation and internal force determination, while comparative lower confidence was being observed in constructing shear force and bending moment diagrams. These substantial findings highlight areas for further instructional reinforcement. The novelty of this study lies in its context-specific application of technology-supported interactive teaching to a traditional structural analysis method, providing empirical classroom-level evidence to support the pedagogical integration of active learning strategies in civil engineering education.

interactive teaching, action research, structural analysis, moment distribution method

1. Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Felder, R. M. & Brent, R. (2016). Teaching and Learning STEM: A practical guide. Jossey-Bass (Wiley). https://ipa-pasca.unpak.ac.id/pdf/Teaching-and-Learning-STEM-A-Practical-Guide.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Borrego, M., Froyd, J. E. & Hall, T. S. (2010). Diffusion of engineering education innovations: A survey of awareness and adoption rates in U.S. engineering departments. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(3), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01056.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Mills, J. E. & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Engineering education—Is problem-based or project-based learning the answer? Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 3, 2–16. http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/10589/20050128-0000/www.aaee.com.au/journal/2003/mills_treagust03.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., Moreno, R. & Reisslein, M. (2013). Pedagogical agent signaling of multiple visual engineering representations: The case of the young female agent. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(2), 319–337. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20009 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Prince, M. & Vigeant, M. (2006). Using inquiry-based activities to promote understanding of critical engineering concepts. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition. https://peer.asee.org/using-inquiry-based-activities-to-promote-understanding-of-critical-engineering-concepts [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. De Campos, L. C., Dirani, E. A. T., Manrique, A. L. & van Hattum-Janssen, N. (Eds.). (2012). Project approaches to learning in engineering education: The practice of teamwork. Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-958-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Guerra, A. O. & Holgaard, J. E. (2013). Students’ perspectives on education for sustainable development in a problem-based learning environment. In Re-Thinking the Engineer: Proceedings of EESD 2013. University of Cambridge. https://www-csd.eng.cam.ac.uk/system/files/documents/guerra-a.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Begum, M. (2010). Book review: Research on PBL practice in engineering education. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 4(2), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1180 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Case, J. M. & Light, G. (2011). Emerging methodologies in engineering education research. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 186–210. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00008.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O., Frey, D. D. & Leifer, L. J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103–120.https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00832.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Johri, A. & Olds, B. M. (2011). Situated engineering learning: Bridging engineering education research and the learning sciences. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 151–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00007.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Tembrevilla, G., Phillion, A. & Zeadin, M. (2024). Experiential learning in engineering education: A systematic literature review. Journal of Engineering Education, 113(1), 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20575 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Streveler, R. A. & Smith, K. A. (2013). Conducting rigorous research in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 103–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00882.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Litzinger, T. A., Lattuca, L. R., Hadgraft, R. G. & Newstetter, W. C. (2011). Engineering education and the development of expertise. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 123–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00006.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Hysteresis Behaviour and Energy Dissipation of Niger Delta Soil under Cyclic Loading Conditions
• Exploring Bamboo Leaf Ash as Supplementary Cementitious Material for Enhanced Performance in Compressive and Tension in Mortar Strength as Construction Materials
• Effect of Using a Combination of 50% Coal Dust 50 % Course Sand as Filler in Bituminous Mix Design
• A Review of the Current State of Lean Construction in Nairobi City County
• Adaptation of Crumb Rubber Modified Asphalt Predictive Models for Nigerian Climatic Conditions: A Transfer Learning Approach