Explicit Research Skill Development within Problem/Project Based Learning Approach
Said Al-Sarawi1,
Mahmoud Al-Qutayri2, and
Mohammed Ismail2, 3
1 School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, The University of Adelaide, SA Australia
2 College of Engineering, Khalifa University, UAE
3 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The Ohio State University
alsarawi@eleceng.adelaide.edu.au,
mqutayri@kustar.ac.ae,
ismail@kustar.ac.ae
Summary
Problem based learning was first introduced in the Medical School of McMaster University, Canada,
in the late 1960s. This learning approach allows for active learning by students and allows for
a dynamic interaction between students and facilitators, in contrast to traditional passive
teacher-centred approach where the lecture is the prime source of knowledge that mainly rely on
unidirectional transfer of knowledge from the expert (lecturer) to the novice (student) [1].
A large number of disciplines have subsequently moved to use this approach or a modified version [2]
of this learning approach in the development of part of a course, a whole course, or a whole
program [3]. The design of these problems is usually well structured as follows [4]:
- The student starts with clarifying terms and concepts which are not clear
- Then define the problem or possible sub-problems
- Based on the collected information analyse the problem or problems
- Provide a list of possible explanations
- From this list formulate learning objectives and set priorities to be addressed
- Then look for additional information outside the group set of knowledge
- Report back outcomes and synthesise possible solutions
The typical emphasis in problem-BL is the process of getting to the solution rather than the
solution itself, while in case of project-BL the emphasis is both on the process and the final
solution exampled by engineering projects. This paper portrays project-BL as a superset of problem-BL
and hence the PBL acronym is used interchangeably to imply either project-BL or problem-BL [5]
In some cases, PBL was used as a blanket approach to cover an entire faculty/division or a
university [6]. Implementation of this learning approach took a variety of forms and evaluations of
these approaches have been reported in numerous studies [6]. In these studies, it is widely reported
that substantial preparation in terms of training potential facilitators is required [7]for PBL
cases/problems to have positive impact when implemented in classes [8]. In addition, studies of
students’ perspectives of limitations of PBL found that it does not accommodate for low achieving
students because tasks associated with some of these problems/cases require higher order problem
solving skills [1, 9]. Furthermore, one of the driving forces behind PBL is that it allows the
development of active learners that develop autonomous learners/learning/decision making by
building on skills that the student already have or acquire through attempting PBL cases. However,
the process that a student can use to develop these skills and work autonomously is not well
explained by the PBL approach.
One way to make clear and explicit the cognitive processes required in PBL is combining its
approaches with the Research Skill Development (RSD) framework [10].The RSD allows students to not
only utilise their existing knowledge and skills, but also help them learn how to develop these
skills and acquire knowledge through an explicit and easy to follow framework. The framework has
six facets that have been identified from the literature and modified according to Bloom’s
taxonomy [11]. Based on this framework, the students [12]:
- embark on inquiry and so determine a need for knowledge or understanding,
- find/generate needed information/data using appropriate methodology,
- critically evaluate information/data and the process to find/generate this information/data,
- organise information collected/generated, and manage the research process
- synthesise and analyse and apply new knowledge, and
- communicate knowledge and the processes used to generate it, with an awareness of ethical, social and cultural issues.
The facets of inquiry should not be considered as linear and sequential; rather students will move
recursively between them depending on the task or problem at hand. The RSD framework elaborates
these six facets into a five-level continuum, of student autonomy, which ranges from the minimal
autonomy of a closed inquiry that requires a high degree of structure or guidance (Level 1), to an
open-inquiry within self-determined guidelines in accordance with the discipline (Level 5). The RSD
framework is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Research Skill Development Framework [12].
By combining the explicit nature of the research skill development framework discussed above with
the problem based learning it allows student to not only find information or use current skills,
rather have a better understanding on how these skills and knowledge can be develop in the context
of increasing autonomy required by students. Furthermore, the interaction between RSD and PBL is not
only restricted to Engineering discipline rather to other disciplines where research skills are a
needed part of student centred learning.
In the case of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) higher education the above framework has
been applied over a number of years albeit in an incremental way. The primary venue for the application
of the framework is in junior as well as senior design (final year) projects. In addition, it was also
applied to the minor thesis component of Masters of Engineering program at the University of Adelaide.
In the case of junior projects they tend to be group oriented while the senior ones are carried out
either by an individual or a group of students over two semesters
In both sets of projects, the students embark from a short statement of the problem to be solved then
continue on the inquiry path that involves an iterative process and which culminates in a full
specifications document that details what needs to be achieved. This includes any new concepts that
need to be learnt. Finding/generating the necessary information/data and critically reviewing/analysing
it is a substantial phase of the project execution. This phase requires the student to organize the
information and use it to propose and evaluate a variety of designs. This process inculcates the
fundamental skills of conducting research.
The body of knowledge that the student consolidated, regarding the problem that needs to be solved,
is then applied to perform complete synthesis, verification and validation of the system. A comprehensive
report is then compiled and an oral presentation is delivered. The level of success with this approach
depends on a number of factors including the student ability, nature of the design problem, and
instructor commitment. The choice of the design problem is very important and a year level dependent.
At senior years, the problem must have an open-ended component in order to encourage conducting
research and seeking new solutions.
Implementing a reward scheme that encourages successful undergraduate students to publish their work
in conferences, journals ... etc has a very positive impact on the research skill development process.
In case of Khalifa University, this rewarding process coupled with active encouragement of the instructors,
resulted in 10%-15% (depending on the cohort) of undergraduate students on ECE programs publishing at
least one paper in a peer reviewed conference out of their project work.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Dr John Willison from Centre for Learning and Professional Development,
University of Adelaide for his useful discussion and suggestions.
References
- H.-J. So and B. Kim, "Learning about problem based learning: Student teachers integrating technology,
pedagogy and content knowledge," Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 25, pp. 101-106, 2009.
- A. M. Liceaga, et al., "Incorporating a Modified Problem-Based Learning Exercise in a Traditional
Lecture and Lab-Based Dairy Products Course," Journal of Food Science Education, vol. 10, pp. 19-22, 2011.
- T. Winning and G. Townsend, "Problem-based learning in dental education: what’s the evidence for and
against . . . and is it worth the effort?," Australian Dental Journal, vol. 52, pp. 2-9, 2007.
- J. Bligh, "Problem-based learning in medicine: an introduction," Postgrad Medical Journal,
vol. 71, pp. 323-326, 1995.
- S. F. Al-Sarawi, "Application of project/problem-based learning in microelectronics," in New Trends
and Technologies in Computer-Aided Learning for Computer-Aided Design, A. Rettberg and C. Bobda, Eds.,
ed: Springer, 2005, pp. 49-62.
- S. Krishnan, "Student Experiences of Problem-Based Learning in Engineering: Learning Cultures of PBL
Teams," PhD, School of Education, Victoria University, Melbourne, 2009.
- K. Hoffman, et al., "Problem-Based Learning Outcomes: Ten Years of Experience at the University of
Missouri—Columbia School of Medicine," Academic Medicine, vol. 18, pp. 617-25, 2006.
- S.-H. Park and P. A. Ertmer, "Impact of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) on Teachers' Beliefs regarding
Technology Use," Journal of Research on Technology in Education, vol. 40, pp. 247-267, 2008.
- M. Bhattacharya, et al., "PBL Approach: A Model for Integrated Curriculum," in Australian Association
for Research in Education, Article no. BHA04803., 2004.
- J. Willison and K. O'Regan, "Commonly known, commonly not known, totally unknown: a framework
for students becoming researchers," Higher Education Research and Development, vol. 26, pp. 393-409, Dec 2007.
- B. S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 1: Cognitive Domain: Addison Wesley Publishing
Company, 2nd Ed., 1984.
- J. Willison. (2011, 16th of October, 2011). RSD Facets. Available:
http://www.adelaide.edu.au/clpd/rsd/framework/Dec09_RSDFramework.pdf
|
|