Search

Students' understanding of foundational concepts in fundamental courses is important as it is a pre-requirement for proceeding to any advanced and specific courses in any degree programme. Despite high passing rates in most universities, students actually do not really have a good understanding of the course content, especially in fundamental courses. This paper aims to discuss how the pre-test of basic knowledge in mathematics and physics learnt during pre-university or matriculation level can be used to determine and predict student achievement in the fundamental courses of the two subjects. The pre-test questions were distributed to the first-year students at the beginning of semester one (1) of their study at the Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. In this study, two fundamental courses were selected from first- and second-year programmes, namely, Static & Dynamic (KH 1044) and Fluid Mechanics (KH 2134), respectively. A total of 35 students from the test sample of 43 students successfully obtained the pre-test scores of over 40%, while only one student scored more than 80%. However, students who did well in the pre-test did not necessarily obtain good results in the final examination of both fundamental courses and vice versa. Therefore, necessary action or improvement to the teaching and learning process of the identified courses need to be taken to ensure that students have deep understanding of the subjects before they proceed to the advanced courses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study uses descriptive data to assess students' perceptions about the differences between the two programmes offered by the Department of Civil and Structural Engineering (JKAS). The programmes offered are Civil and Structural Engineering (CSE) and Civil and Environmental Engineering (CEE). Confusion about the name may be the key issue affecting programme selection by prospective students in their application for placement in the department, thus curtailing their keenness to join the department out of fear of choosing the wrong programme. A total of 95 respondents consisting of new intake students of Semester 1 Year 1 of the 2014-2015 session engaged in the questionnaire survey process conducted in this research. Data obtained were analysed using the percentage of the score on a Microsoft Excel 2010 spreadsheet. The results showed that the students may have understood and may have had some basic knowledge about the field of study and the syllabus offered designed exclusively for each programme. Therefore, from the perspective of the students, efforts aimed at rebranding the programme names were not necessary. However, there were some existing courses that were identified and proposed for rebranding as their names were misleading for the students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]