THE CURRENT SITUATION OF TEACHING FUNDAMENTAL PHYSICFOLLOWING CDIO APPROACH

The article presents the surveying of the teaching situation of Fundamental Physics to meet the output standards in university which use the CDIO approach to teach students of engineering major, as well as information on the application of methods, form of evaluation in the teaching process of Fundamental Physics.


ISSN: 2320-5407
Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(02), 773-778 774 The first questions group About the training program, output standards (OS), detailed outline, content and volume of Fundamental Physicsmodule including 04 questions: With the training program question "Is the school's training program following the CDIO model or not?" based on the answers of 101/107 lecturers participating in the answer, the result is that 4/10 universities build training programs following CDIO approach, 5/10 universities build some training programs based on CDIO approach, 01/10 universities CDIO build training programs not based on CDIO approach.
With the question of output standards "Could you tell us about the output standards of the training program at the university you are teaching?" based on the answers of 101/107 lecturers responded, the results are as follows: According to the survey results, 10/10 have built the output standards of the training program.
About the output standardsof the fouruniversities which build training program based on CDIO, all most standards are following the CDIO standards (including 12 standards) in an explicit and systematic manner.
About the output standards of the five universitieswhich havesome standards based on CDIO approach, the output standards are built in accordance with CDIO standards.
About the output standards of one university which does not build the training program according to CDIO, they build the output standards according to the training requirements of the university. There are clear training objectives, can be evaluate.
In general, through the survey data at 10 universities, the output standards of the training program are structured as follows: a) Technical knowledge and argument (including basic scientific knowledge, basic technical knowledge, specialized technical knowledge, other supporting knowledge) b) Professional skills and personal qualities (including the ability of technical analysis and problem-solving, experience and discover knowledge, systematically thinking about the personal abilities and attitudes, skills and professional attitude) c) Teamwork and communication skills d) Develop skills in conceptualizing, designing, implementing and operating systems With the question about the detailed subject outline, based on the answer sheets, we summarize and the results are as follows: According to the survey results on the detailed training sector, 10/10 universities have completed build and put into use the detailed outline of the Fundamental Physicsmodule.
About the number of training credits, 8/10 universitieshave 3 training credits inFundamental Physics, corresponding to 45 periods. Particularly, Hanoi University of Technology and Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology have 4 credits, corresponding to 60 periods.
About the name of the module, there are 5/10 universities that use the name physics 1 instead of Fundamental Physics1; Physics 2 for Fundamental Physics 2.
About the conditions to join the modules: 6/10 universities require students to participate in Analytics 1 (or Advanced Math 1) and 4/20 universities choose to study both modules in parallel.
About the output standards of the Fundamental Physics, based on the training requirements of each university, each specific subject, the universitywill aim to build a different standard.
About the structure of the training module: There are 6/10 universities with only train mechanics, electricity, magnetism, no thermodynamics, optics, modern physics, nuclear physics (this subject is classified in the basic subject of the sector), for example university Ho Chi Minh City Technology (Hutech) 775 There are 7/10 universities that do not teach nuclear physics, atomic physics There are 4/10 universities with full 4 modules of mechanics, electricity, magnetism, optics, modern physics. Have skills in collecting and processing information 65 64,35 The methods that are frequently used in teaching Fundamental Physics are: Presentation, problem-given teaching (both approximately 80%). The project-based teaching method is used regularly by 16% of lecturers in teaching and 84% rarely used in teaching. The form of seminar is chosen by 20% of lecturers to use regularly in teaching, but also up to 18% of lecturers have never used this method. The role-play method is used regularly by 14% of lecturers, equivalent to 36% use it occasionally. Teamwork method that 28% lecturers rarely use and 56% teachers occasionally use, case study method is regularly used by 20% of lecturers, and 25% lecturers rarely use. Through the survey questionnaires, lecturers all mentioned difficulties in using teaching methods that are the uneven number of students attending school, large class sizes, or there are cases where lecturers think they have applied but bring low efficiency.

With the question "In teachers' school, the goal of teaching Fundamental Physics is to help students
Among the teaching methods that we survey, the project-based teaching method; Case studies teaching method play a very important role in teaching with CDIO approach.
With the project-based teaching method, it can help achieve the output standards according to the CDIO outline such as: Making hypotheses; Design -deployment skills; Written communication skills; Presentation skills.
With the case study teaching method, this method can help to achieve the output standards according to the CDIO outline such as: Propose solutions; Estimation and qualitative analysis.
With the question "The extent of using the positive technique used by teachers in teaching Fundamental Physics (please numbering according to the level of use in the box: 1. regularly, 2. occasionally, 3. rarely), we describe by figure 2. Chart 2  Through the survey results, it was found that 06/10 universities chose the objective testing form, most of them were universities with a large number of students (accounting for 60% of the surveyed universities). The advantage is that the above universities have built a list of exam questions with a variety of questions, scores by machine tohave fast results, but the downside is that it cannot assess reasoning skills, expressing or creative ideas. In the learning process of students (out of 6 universities surveyed, 4 universities weighted 30% of the mid-term test score, the other 2 universities weighted 50%, the universities combined cost extra points for attendance, discussion, online check through the chapters learned) 3/10 universities do exam in the form of essay, the advantage is that it can evaluate skills of reasoning, analyzing interpretation, creative ideas, but the time of marking is long and partly depends on the intentions of the judge. In 3 universities in the form of essay (there are 02 universities that summarize the course by weight 50% of the final test score plus 50% of the process score (including midterm test; one university uses 60% weight of the final exam and 40% of the mid-term exam). 01/10 university do exam in the form of multiplechoice tests and combined essay, this form of exam covering all the content of the program's knowledge, relative assessment of the competencies needed to be achieved of students.
Thus, universities have been teaching in the direction of CDIO approach, although the program, detailed outline, output standards, but the methods of testing and evaluating the results have differences (in terms of weights, on the evaluation process ...) there are still shortcomings in the stage of testing and evaluating the results of learners, there is still no comprehensive form of evaluation and the full capacity of learners according to the spirit of CDIO initiative is thatwhat comprehensive knowledge, skills, attitudes will engineering students gain when leaving university and at what level of competencies? That is still an open question in surveyed universities.

Conclusion:-
Through the survey results, some of the following results have been recorded Lecturers are fully aware, seriously notice the importance of the training in universities. Interested in the output standards of the training program based on the CDIO approach.

778
The school has facilities and equipment for teaching Fundamental Physics, creating favor conditions for students to self-study.
Teachers have innovated teaching and evaluating of Fundamental Physics subject following CDIO 2 and 11 standards.
Students have enjoyed the results of teaching innovation and evaluation of teachers in Fundamental Physics following CDIO approach..
Lecturers of Fundamental Physics in universities have not fully identified the CDIO initiative. Lecturers who still have certain difficulties in teaching Fundamental Physics will be effective in the direction of CDIO approach.