nach oben

Technology, Knowledge and Learning

Erschienen in:

09.01.2024 | Original research

Impact of Embedded Learning Strategy Activities: Student Engagement and Performance

verfasst von: Alan da Silveira Fleck, Tingting Zhu

Erschienen in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning | Ausgabe 3/2024

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Many college students struggle to adopt effective study strategies. Although many academic support centers disseminate resources on study strategies and help students to strengthen these skills, students do not fully utilize the resources or support. This study explored using an online asynchronous discussion (OAD) board as a space to embed five study strategies for students to practice in the context of the subject matter. The biweekly OADs, enabled in the learning management system (LMS), were designed to alternate with biweekly quizzes. Log files with student activity and quiz scores were extracted from the course’s page on the LMS. Engagement metrics including number of views and participations on the OADs and the quality of their engagement were used to assess the effectiveness of the study-strategy OADs. Results show that students who participated in the OADs before each quiz had a statistically higher quiz score compared to the ones who did not post in the OADs. The mixed effect models show a positive and statistically significant association between OAD participation levels and quiz performance. In addition, an increase in both views and participation levels in the OADs was associated with higher exam marks. In both cases, the quality of student participation was the most important predictor for grades. An email intervention shows that a short reminder email is more effective than long customized emails. In summary, this study demonstrates the utility of OADs as a space for students to view and practice multiple study strategies in the context of the course content.

Vorheriger Artikel Voluntary E-Learning Exercises Support Students in Mastering Statistics

Nächster Artikel The Power of a Human Bridge: Motivating Older Adults to Long-Term Engagement with Touchscreen Devices in a SDT-Based Learning Session

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

The link to the rubric: https://topr.online.ucf.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Lowe_2011_discussion_rubric.pdf.

Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Complete). Pearson.

Ash, S. L., & Clayton, P. H. (2009). Generating, deepening, and documenting learning: The power of critical reflection in applied learning. Journal of Applied Learning in Higher Education, 1, 25–48. https://doi.org/10.57186/jalhe_2009_v1a2p25-48CrossRef

Biasutti, M. (2017). A coding scheme to analyse the online asynchronous discussion forums of university students. Technology Pedagogy and Education, 26(5), 601–615. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2017.1365753CrossRef

Biwer, F., de Bruin, A., & Persky, A. (2022). Study smart – impact of a learning strategy training on students’ study behavior and academic performance. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 28(1), 147–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-022-10149-zCrossRef

Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444.CrossRef

Blignaut, S., & Trollip, S. R. (2003). Developing a taxonomy of faculty participation in asynchronous learning environments—An exploratory investigation. Computers & Education, 41(2), 149–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(03)00033-2CrossRef

Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Handbook I: Cognitive domain. David McKay.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated Cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032CrossRef

Callender, A. A., & McDaniel, M. A. (2009). The limited benefits of rereading educational texts. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.07.001CrossRef

Cathro, V., O’Kane, P., & Gilbertson, D. (2017). Assessing reflection understanding skill development through reflective learning journals. Education and Training, 59(4), 427–442. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-01-2017-0008CrossRef

Chan, C. K. Y., & Lee, K. K. W. (2021). Reflection literacy: A multilevel perspective on the challenges of using reflections in higher education through a comprehensive literature review. Educational Research Review, 32, 100376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100376CrossRef

Chen, B., Chang, Y.-H., Ouyang, F., & Zhou, W. (2018). Fostering student engagement in online discussion through social learning analytics. The Internet and Higher Education, 37, 21–30.CrossRef

Colliot, T., Kiewra, K. A., Luo, L., Flanigan, A. E., Lu, J., Kennedy, C., & Black, S. (2022). The effects of graphic organizer completeness and note-taking medium on computer-based learning. Education and Information Technologies, 27(2), 2435–2456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10693-yCrossRef

Colvin, C., Rodgers, T., Wade, A., Dawson, S., Gasevic, D., Shum, S. B., Nelson, K. J., Alexander, S., Lockyer, L., & Kennedy, G. (2015). Student retention and learning analytics: A snapshot of Australian practices and a framework for advancement. Final report.

Cook, E., Kennedy, E., & McGuire, S. Y. (2013). Effect of teaching metacognitive learning strategies on performance in general chemistry courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 90(8), 961–967. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed300686hCrossRef

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative. Educational Research.

Dart, S., & Spratt, B. (2021). Personalised emails in first-year mathematics: Exploring a scalable strategy for improving student experiences and outcomes. Student Success, 12(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.1543CrossRef

Dawson, S., Jovanovic, J., Gašević, D., & Pardo, A. (2017). From prediction to impact: Evaluation of a learning analytics retention program. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, 474–478. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027385.3027405

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Health & Co Publishers.

Dong, F. M. (2014). Teaching learning strategies: Connections to bloom’s taxonomy. Journal of Food Science Education, 13(4), 59–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4329.12043CrossRef

Endres, T., Leber, J., Boettger, C., Rovers, S., & Renkl, A. (2021). Improving lifelong learning by fostering students’ learning strategies at university. Psychology Learning and Teaching-Plat, 20(1), 144–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725720952025CrossRef

Evans, T., & Jeong, I. (2023). Concept maps as assessment for learning in university mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 113(3), 475–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-023-10209-0CrossRef

Eyler, J. R. (2018). How humans learn: The science and stories behind effective college teaching. West Virginia University Press.

Firetto, C., Starrett, E., Montalbano, A., Yan, L., Penkrot, T., Kingsbury, J., & Hyatt, J. (2023). The impact of effective study strategy use in an introductory anatomy and physiology class. Frontiers in Education. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1161772CrossRef

Frazier, L. C., & Eick, C. (2015). Approaches to critical reflection: Written and video journaling. Reflective Practice, 16(5), 575–594. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2015.1064374CrossRef

Gallagher, K. M. (2022). Using “make & take quizzes” to improve exam performance and engage students in effective study strategies. Teaching of Psychology, 49(2), 124–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628320957991CrossRef

Geller, J., Toftness, A. R., Armstrong, P. I., Carpenter, S. K., Manz, C. L., Coffman, C. R., & Lamm, M. H. (2018). Study strategies and beliefs about learning as a function of academic achievement and achievement goals. Memory, 26(5), 683–690. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2017.1397175CrossRef

Grabinger, R. S., & Dunlap, J. C. (1995). Rich environments for active learning: A definition. ALT-J, 3(2), 5–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/0968776950030202CrossRef

Guerrero-Higueras, Á. M., DeCastro-García, N., Matellán, V., & Conde, M. Á. (2018). Predictive models of academic success: A case study with version control systems. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, 306–312. https://doi.org/10.1145/3284179.3284235

Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687CrossRef

Ifenthaler, D., & Yau, J.Y.-K. (2020). Utilising learning analytics to support study success in higher education: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(4), 1961–1990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09788-zCrossRef

Jorczak, R. (2014). Differences in classroom versus online exam performance due to asynchronous discussion. Online Learning Journal. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v18i2.408CrossRef

Jovanovic, J., Gasevic, D., Dawson, S., Pardo, A., & Mirriahi, N. (2017). Learning analytics to unveil learning strategies in a flipped classroom. Internet and Higher Education, 33, 74–85.CrossRef

Kapur, M. (2016). Examining productive failure, productive success, unproductive failure, and unproductive success in learning. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 289–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1155457CrossRef

Kapur, M., & Bielaczyc, K. (2012). Designing for productive failure. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(1), 45–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.591717CrossRef

Kapur, M., Hattie, J., Grossman, I., & Sinha, T. (2022). Fail, flip, fix, and feed—Rethinking flipped learning: A review of meta-analyses and a subsequent meta-analysis. Frontiers in Education, 7, 956416. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.956416CrossRef

Kay, R. H. (2006). Developing a comprehensive metric for assessing discussion board effectiveness. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(5), 761–783. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00560.xCrossRef

Khan, H. M. (2020). Correlation of learning strategies with academic performance in students of Basic Medical Sciences. Rawal Medical Journal, 45(3), 720–724.

Kiewra, K. A. (2002). How classroom teachers can help students learn and teach them how to learn. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_3CrossRef

Kobayashi, K. (2006). Combined effects of note-taking/-reviewing on learning and the enhancement through interventions: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychology, 26(3), 459–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500342070CrossRef

Kong, S. T., & Stocco, C. S. (2022). Teaching study skills to college students using checklist training. Behavioral Interventions, 37(4), 1149–1165. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1897CrossRef

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2CrossRef

Kurtz, G., Kopolovich, O., Segev, E., Sahar-Inbar, L., Gal, L., & Hammer, R. (2022). Impact of an instructor’s personalized email intervention on completion rates in a massive open online course (MOOC). Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 20(3), 325–335.CrossRef

Lawrence, J., Brown, A., Redmond, P., & Basson, M. (2019). Engaging the disengaged: Exploring the use of course-specific learning analytics and nudging to enhance online student engagement. Student Success, 10(2), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.v10i2.1295CrossRef

Lee, J.-E., & Recker, M. (2021). The effects of instructors’ use of online discussions strategies on student participation and performance in university online introductory mathematics courses. Computers & Education, 162, 104084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104084CrossRef

Leflay, K., & Groves, M. (2013). Using online forums for encouraging higher order thinking and “deep” learning in an undergraduate Sports Sociology module. Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport & Tourism Education, 13, 226–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2012.06.001CrossRef

Lew, M. D. N., & Schmidt, H. G. (2011). Self-reflection and academic performance: Is there a relationship? Advances in Health Sciences Education, 16(4), 529–545. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9298-zCrossRef

Liebendörfer, M., Göller, R., Gildehaus, L., Kortemeyer, J., Biehler, R., Hochmuth, R., Ostsieker, L., Rode, J., & Schaper, N. (2022). The role of learning strategies for performance in mathematics courses for engineers. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(5), 1133–1152. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.2023772CrossRef

Lim, L.-A., Gentili, S., Pardo, A., Kovanović, V., Whitelock-Wainwright, A., Gašević, D., & Dawson, S. (2021). What changes, and for whom? A study of the impact of learning analytics-based process feedback in a large course. Learning and Instruction, 72, 101202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.04.003CrossRef

Lyons, T., & Evans, M. M. (2013). Blended learning to increase student satisfaction: An exploratory study. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 18(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/10875301.2013.800626CrossRef

Machado, C. T., & Carvalho, A. A. (2020). Concept mapping: Benefits and challenges in higher education. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 68(1), 38–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377363.2020.1712579CrossRef

Matcha, W., Gasevic, D., Uzir, N. A., Jovanovic, J., Pardo, A., Lim, L., Maldonado-Mahauad, J., Gentili, S., Perez-Sanagustin, M., & Tsai, Y.-S. (2020). Analytics of learning strategies: Role of course design and delivery modality. Journal of Learning Analytics, 7(2), 45–71.CrossRef

McCabe, J. A. (2018). What learning strategies do academic support centers recommend to undergraduates? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 7, 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.10.002CrossRef

McQueen, H. A., Shields, C., Finnegan, D. J., Higham, J., & Simmen, M. W. (2014). Peerwise provides significant academic benefits to biological science students across diverse learning tasks, but with minimal instructor intervention. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 42(5), 371–381. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20806CrossRef

Morehead, K., Rhodes, M. G., & DeLozier, S. (2016). Instructor and student knowledge of study strategies. Memory, 24(2), 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2014.1001992CrossRef

Mvududu, N., & Kanyongo, G. (2011). Using real life examples to teach abstract statistical concepts. Teaching Statistics, 33(1), 12–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9639.2009.00404.xCrossRef

Ng, K. K., Luk, C. H., Wang, F. L., & Luk, L. (2015). The impact of online discussion platform on students’ academic performance. In S. K. S. Cheung, L. Kwok, H. Yang, J. Fong, & R. Kwan (Eds.), Hybrid learning: Innovation in educational practices (pp. 199–208). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20621-9_16CrossRef

Nikolayeva, I., Yessad, A., Laforge, B., & Luengo, V. (2020). Does an e-mail reminder intervention with learning analytics reduce procrastination in a blended University course? In C. Alario-Hoyos, M. J. Rodríguez-Triana, M. Scheffel, I. Arnedillo-Sánchez, & S. M. Dennerlein (Eds.), Addressing global challenges and quality education: 15th European conference on technology enhanced learning (pp. 60–73). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57717-9_5CrossRef

Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 937–949. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660271003CrossRef

O’Connell, S. D., & Lang, G. (2018). Can personalized nudges improve learning in hybrid classes? Experimental evidence from an introductory undergraduate course. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 50(2), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.1408438CrossRef

Osborne, D. M., Byrne, J. H., Massey, D. L., & Johnston, A. N. B. (2018). Use of online asynchronous discussion boards to engage students, enhance critical thinking, and foster staff-student/student-student collaboration: A mixed method study. Nurse Education Today, 70, 40–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.08.014CrossRef

Persky, A. M., & Hudson, S. L. (2016). A snapshot of student study strategies across a professional pharmacy curriculum: Are students using evidence-based practice? Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 8(2), 141–147.CrossRef

Radovic, S., Firssova, O., Hummel, H., & Vermeulen, M. (2023). Improving academic performance: Strengthening the relation between theory and practice through prompted reflection. Active Learning in Higher Education, 24(1), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874211014411CrossRef

Ramos, C., & Yudko, E. (2008). “Hits” (not “Discussion Posts”) predict student success in online courses: A double cross-validation study. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1174–1182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.003CrossRef

Roach, K., Tilley, E., & Mitchell, J. (2018). How authentic does authentic learning have to be? Higher Education Pedagogies, 3(1), 495–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2018.1462099CrossRef

Rodriguez, F., Yu, R., Park, J., Rivas, M. J., Warschauer, M., & Sato, B. K. (2019). Utilizing Learning Analytics to Map Students’ Self-Reported Study Strategies to Click Behaviors in STEM Courses. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (pp. 456–460). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3303772.3303841

Ryan, M. (2013). The pedagogical balancing act: Teaching reflection in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(2), 144–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2012.694104CrossRef

Salame, I., & Thompson, A. (2020). Students’ views on strategic note-taking and its impact on performance, achievement, and learning. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.1321aCrossRef

Schroeder, N. L., Nesbit, J. C., Anguiano, C. J., & Adesope, O. O. (2018). Studying and constructing concept maps: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 431–455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9403-9CrossRef

Sinha, T., & Kapur, M. (2021). When problem solving followed by instruction works: Evidence for productive failure. Review of Educational Research, 91(5), 761–798. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211019105CrossRef

Song, L., & McNary, S. W. (2011). Understanding students’ online interaction: Analysis of discussion board postings. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 10(1), 1–14.

Theobald, M. (2021). Self-regulated learning training programs enhance university students’ academic performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation: A meta-analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 66, 101976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2021.101976CrossRef

Vemu, S., Denaro, K., Sato, B. K., Fisher, M. R., & Williams, A. E. (2022). Moving the needle: Evidence of an effective study strategy intervention in a community college biology course. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 21(2), ar24. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.21-08-0216CrossRef

Wang, Y.-M. (2019). Enhancing the quality of online discussion—Assessment matters. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 48(1), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239519861416CrossRef

Widyahastuti, F., Riady, Y., & Zhou, W. (2017). Prediction Model Students’ Performance in Online Discussion Forum. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information and Education Technology, 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3029387.3029393

Winne, P. H. (2013). Learning strategies, study skills, and self-regulated learning in postsecondary education. In M. B. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 28, pp. 377–403). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5836-0_8CrossRef

Wise, A. F., Zhao, Y., & Hausknecht, S. N. (2013). Learning analytics for online discussions: A pedagogical model for intervention with embedded and extracted analytics. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1145/2460296.2460308

Yang, M. M., Zhang, Y., & Yang, F. (2018). How a reflection intervention improves the effect of learning goals on performance outcomes in a complex decision-making task. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33(5), 579–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-017-9510-0CrossRef

Yeong, F. M., Chin, C. F., & Tan, A. L. (2020). Use of a competency framework to explore the benefits of student-generated multiple-choice questions (MCQs) on student engagement. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 15(2), 83–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2019.1684924CrossRef

Zavaleta Bernuy, A., Han, Z., Shaikh, H., Zheng, Q. Y., Lim, L.-A., Rafferty, A., Petersen, A., & Williams, J. J. (2022). How can Email Interventions Increase Students’ Completion of Online Homework? A Case Study Using A/B Comparisons. In LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference, pp. 107–118. https://doi.org/10.1145/3506860.3506874

Titel: Impact of Embedded Learning Strategy Activities: Student Engagement and Performance
verfasst von: Alan da Silveira Fleck
Tingting Zhu
Publikationsdatum: 09.01.2024
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning / Ausgabe 3/2024
Print ISSN: 2211-1662
Elektronische ISSN: 2211-1670
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-023-09715-0

Tracing the Ontological Beliefs of Norwegian Educators Concerning Technology use in Early Childhood Education and Care

Open Access
Original research

The Power of a Human Bridge: Motivating Older Adults to Long-Term Engagement with Touchscreen Devices in a SDT-Based Learning Session

Open Access
Original research

An Analysis of Comprehension Strategies and Visuals Within Grade 6–8 Science Textbooks in the United States

Original research

Co-Creation of Learning Technologies in School–University–Industry Partnerships: An Activity System Perspective

Original research

Introduction to the Special Issue: Misalignment, Misinterpretation, and Misappropriation of Literacy Research to Practice and Policy

Original research

The Contribution of FLIGBY to the Entrepreneurial Learning Outcomes

Original research

Premium Partner

Marktübersichten

Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen.

Zur Marktübersicht

Bildnachweise

MKVS GbR/© MKVS GbR, Nordson/© Nordson, ViscoTec/© ViscoTec, BCD Chemie GmbH, Merz+Benteli/© Merz+Benteli, Robatech/© Robatech, Hermann Otto GmbH/© Hermann Otto GmbH, Ruderer Klebetechnik GmbH, Xometry Europe GmbH/© Xometry Europe GmbH, Scheugenpflug/© Scheugenpflug, Sika/© Sika, Medmix/© Medmix, Kisling AG/© Kisling AG, Dosmatix GmbH/© Dosmatix GmbH, Innotech GmbH/© Innotech GmbH, Hilger u. Kern GmbH, VDI Logo/© VDI Wissensforum GmbH, Dr. Fritz Faulhaber GmbH & Co. KG/© Dr. Fritz Faulhaber GmbH & Co. KG, BEINLICH PUMPEN GMBH/© BEINLICH PUMPEN GMBH