Universitas Indonesia Conferences, The 4th International Conference of Vocational Higher Education

Font Size: 
The Capstone Course using Inquiry Teaching Method Influences on the University Students' Inquiry Ability
Jen-Chia Chang, Hsi-Chi Hsiao, Su-Chang Chen, Dyi-Cheng Chen

Last modified: 2019-06-29


The purpose of this study was to apply inquiry-based teaching method to the capstone course of electrical engineering and computer science department at technological university, and evaluate its effectiveness after 12 weeks experimental teaching to the senior students at technological university in Taiwan. The findings of this research were concluded as follows: (1) The experimental group’s inquiry ability was significantly improved after 12-week experimental teaching, whilst not significantly different to the control group. (2) The experimental teaching received high level of satisfaction from the participant students. (3) From interviewing the teacher in experimental group, using inquiry teaching method with basic searching ability and motivation is better than PBL (Problem-Based Learning) for students on problem-solving.



Aceytuno, M., & Barroso, M. (2015). The development of inquiry-based learning (IBL) methodology in undergraduate higher education. Proceedings of the Multidisciplinary Academic Conference, 1-8.

Bybee, R. W. (2004). Scientific inquiry and science teaching. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (pp.1-14). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.

Cheng, P. H., Yang, Y. T. C., Chang, S. H. G., & Kuo, F. R. R.. (2015). 5E mobile inquiry Learning approach for enhancing learning motivation and scientific inquiry ability of university students. IEEE Transactions on Education, 99, 1-7.

Conard, C., & Dunek, L. (2012). Cultivating inquiry-driven learners: A college education for the 21st century. Baltimore: John Hopkins UP.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Lexington. MA: D.C.

Heath. Felder, R. M., Woods, D. R., Stice, J. E. & Rugarcia, A. (2000). The future of engineering education: Teaching methods that work. Chemical Engineering Education, 34(1), 26–39.

Fisher, R., & Williams, M. (2004). Unlocking creativity - A teacher's guide to creativity across the curriculum. London: David Fulton Publishing.

Franz, D. P., Hopper, P. F., & Kritsonis, W. A. (2007). National impact: Creating teacher leadersthrough the use of problem-based learning. National Forum of Applied Educational Research Journal, 20(3), 1-9.

Gardner, H. (1997). Extraordinary minds: Portraits of exceptional individuals and an examination of our extraordinariness. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Guilford, J. P. (1959). Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Guilford, J. P. (1986). Creative talents: Their nature, uses and development. New York: Bearly. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Son’s.

Heywood, J. (2014). Conclusion: Engineering at the Crossroads: Implications for Educational Policy Makers. In Johri, A. & Olds, B. M. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of engineering education research (pp. 731-748). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Hsiao, H. C. (1997). The improvement of creativity and productivity of technical workers through partnership between university and industry. Taipei, Taiwan: The International Conference on Creativity Development in Technical Education and Training.