Project based learning
Project based learning (PBL) has now been adopted by many engineering education regulating bodies and universities around the world. This node aims to assist staff who are new entrants to this exciting and highly promising pedagogy.
To begin the node, click start.
START
Guidelines for Teaching Engineering through Project based learning
This first section will provide a collation of key ideas from several published research papers on PBL to as well as research and experience-based insights of the author to guide staff in their practice.
Click start to begin.
START
Index
1. Introduction
2. Essence of Engineering as a discipline
3. The Phenomenon of Learning
4. Project Based Learning
Index
5. Fundamental Pedagogical Assumptions
6. Elements of PBL Courses
7. Project Based Assessment
1.0 Introduction
Many new engineering education regulating bodies and universities world over are now enthusiastic about using project based learning (PBL). However, currently the phrase seems to be in use to convey different meanings.
While for some, mere inclusion of project work in a course qualifies it to have been delivered using PBL, education literature uses the phrase for a more transformed way of teaching where project work is the main learning engagement even for developing conceptual foundations.
1.0 Introduction
In the last decade, many institutes have been trying to adopt PBL pedagogy, especially in engineering courses. Fortunately, in the past few years, many training programs on pedagogy are being organized to expose engineering and other faculty members to this exciting body of knowledge.
However, research is required to understand the impact of these training programs. This guide aims to help staff who are new entrants to this exciting and highly promising pedagogy.
READ MORE
2.0 Essence of Engineering as a discipline
The Engineering Professors’ Council (EPC), United Kingdom identified the following primary competencies for engineers:
Transform existing systems into conceptual models.
Transform conceptual models into determinable models.
Use determinable models to obtain system specifications.
2.0 Essence of Engineering as a discipline
The Engineering Professors’ Council (EPC), United Kingdom identified the following primary competencies for engineers:
Select optimum specifications and create physical models.
Apply the results from physical models to create real target systems.
Critically review real target systems and personal performance.
3.0 The Phenomenon of Learning
Learning is a natural multi-faceted process that progresses through making and rendition of meaning at progressively deepening levels.
It is driven by voluntary and/or involuntary efforts made in response to stimulating experiences.
3.0 The Phenomenon of Learning
A student's approach to learning has two components:
How the student approaches the task
01
Why the student wants to approach the task
strategy
02
motive
3.0 The Phenomenon of Learning
John Biggs (1988) proposed that there are three common approaches to learning. Click to learn about each learning approach.
Surface Approach
3.1
Achieving (or Strategic) Approach
3.3
Deep Approach
3.2
3.1 Surface Approach
The student’s motive to learn is to only carry out the task because of external positive or negative consequences; if they fail life will be unpleasant but if they do well in the subject they will win the instructor’s favour.
A typical surface strategy is rote learning, and surface-motivated students focus on what appears to be the most important items and memorises them. Because of this focus, they do not see interconnections between the meanings and implications of what is learned.
3.2 Deep Approach
The deep motive is based on internal motivation or curiosity. In the deep approach, there is a personal commitment to learning, which means that the student relates the content to personally meaningful contexts or to existing prior knowledge.
Deep processing involves processes of a higher cognitive level than rote learning; searching for analogies, relating to previous knowledge, and theorising about what is learned.
3.3 Achieving (or Strategic) Approach
The achieving motive is like the surface approach in that it is focused on the product (getting an “A” or winning an award). The strategy is to maximize the chances of obtaining high marks. While this hopefully involves a high level of effort to learn the topic (like the deep strategy), the learning is the means, not the end.
READ MORE
3.3 Achieving (or Strategic) Approach
There are two main influences on the student’s development of a certain learning approach: personal factors and the teaching context:
On the personal side, some factors in the student’s background or personality seem to be associated with a Surface approach and others with a Deep approach.
On the teaching side, time pressures, stress from exams, and standardised tests encourage a Surface approach.
3.4 Use of PBL to encourage a deep approach to learning
Various studies have shown that learner centric methods like project work, laboratory work, discussions with other students, thinking and work oriented lectures, and teaching peers/juniors were rated as the most effective educational experiences.
READ MORE
Project Based Learning and other methods of inquiry-based learning are increasingly being recognized as the way forward to transform the education system.
4.0 Project Based Learning
Click to read an introduction on project based learning and how it has been integrated in the learning at Olin College.
Introduction to PBL
4.1
PBL at Olin College
4.2
4.1 Introduction to PBL
Adapting from the kindergarten model, MIT Media lab has developed an educational approach of lifelong kindergarten based on a set of four guiding principles for helping young people develop as creative thinkers: projects, passion, peers, and play.
They believe that the best way to cultivate creativity is to support people working on projects based on their passions, in collaboration with peers and in a playful spirit.
4.1 Introduction to PBL
A central goal of PBL is to facilitate the deeper learning process and support students’ acquisition of complex cognitive competencies, e.g., rigorous content knowledge and critical thinking skills. The projects engage students in the problem definition, design process, contextual understanding and systems thinking approaches.
4.1 Introduction to PBL
Students learn to work in teams, and to plan and carry out different tasks that are required during a project. They come to understand their own and their team-mates strengths and skills. Students are expected to draw information from a variety of sources and be able to filter and summarize the relevant points. They are also expected to communicate to different audiences in oral, visual and written forms.
READ MORE
4.1 Introduction to PBL
PBL has often been reported to be associated with enhanced rigour. However, it does not automatically ensure rigour as without careful planning, it can also result in low levels of rigour and encourage “doing for the sake of doing” without students experiencing deeper conceptual understanding.
CHALLENGES OF PBL
4.1 PBL at Olin College
At Olin College, USA, one of the main curricular innovations is several large interdisciplinary courses starting from the 1st semester. Often mathematics and engineering faculty team-teach courses using a PBL approach.
Many conventional courses have been replaced by such integrated courses. The concepts are carefully chosen by the faculty for inclusion in the syllabus and many concepts, conventionally included in syllabus, not considered important by the faculty from the long-term perspective, are not included in the syllabus.
4.1 PBL at Olin College
The Olin model is also characterized by a relatively smaller group of highly committed faculty and students. Olin admits only highly motivated students who demonstrate their ability to work well on projects during a pre-admission immersive induction program called “candidates’ weekend.”
At Olin, currently about 75% courses use a PBL model for teaching. It has gradually increased over the last 3 decades. Typically, PBL courses at Olin also include about 25% concepts, that may not be delivered using PBL approach. This can sometimes go up to 50%.
5.0 Fundamental Pedagogical Assumptions
Engineering institutes and faculty aiming to use PBL in their courses first need to transform their fundamental assumptions related to their and students’ role and responsibilities in teaching –learning process. They also need ‘to change their beliefs about the role of project in the education process.
Learning Facilitators
5.2
Projects
5.1
Learning Outcomes
5.3
Students as active participants
5.4
5.1 Projects
Projects are seen as the central vehicle of instruction. Projects are not seen as the culmination of learning (as they often are in standard classrooms), but instead are the process through which learning takes place.
5.2 Learning Facilitators
As learning facilitators, teachers are essentially students’ experience and engagement designers. Their role is to facilitate the progress through the cycles of work.
They need to ask planned questions and give cues to make thinking visible, giving students authority to define and address problems and encouraging them to be authors and producers of knowledge.
Readiness for learning new content has to be developed before students are exposed to that content.
READ MORE
5.3 Learning Outcomes
The learning outcomes for cognitive as well as psychomotor domains are well defined.
5.4 Students as active participants
Students are seen as active participants in the construction of knowledge.
Faculty is sure that their students are intellectually ready for learning through this approach:
Students enjoy building tangible artefacts.
Students have the required prerequisite knowledge and skills or the ability to quickly acquire the same through self-learning
5.4 Students as active participants
Students can put together different values, information, and ideas, and can accommodate them within their own schema through comparison, relation and elaboration.
Students have developed the interest and ability to try to build generic abstract knowledge from specific concrete experiences.
6.0 Elements of PBL Courses
After transforming their fundamental pedagogical assumptions and beliefs as mentioned above, the staff should carefully plan for the following elements in order to effectively implement PBL in their courses. A slip on any of these elements may be counter-productive for learning and result in students’ disengagement or disinterest in learning.
The following diagram summarises the core elements of an effective PBL course.
6.0 Elements of PBL Courses
Cycles of work / Continuous Reflection
Resources
Briefing & Debriefing
Problem design
Logbook
Elements of PBL Courses
Use of diagrams
Loremipsum
Process
Loremipsum
Guidance & Scaffolding
Loremipsum
Task
Cognitive/ Collaborative Learning
Loremipsum
Incremental Development
Rigour
+ info
6.1 Problem design
Projects should be complex, open-ended, and realistic; have multiple solutions and methods for reaching solutions; and resonate with students’ experience. The projects should involve an active, in-depth process over time, in which students generate questions, find and use resources, ask further questions, and develop their own answers.
6.1 Problem design
The projects should have a real-world context, use real-world processes, tools, and quality standards, make a real impact, and/or is connected to students’ own concerns, interests, and identities. They should require students to apply relevant theory and encourage students to integrate the knowledge gained from multiple courses.
They should be designed to maximize the probability that students will encounter the big ideas specified in the learning outcomes and syllabus and should lead students to confront and resolve conflicting ideas to prevent “doing for the sake of doing.”
6.1 Problem design
Some projects should allow for the consideration of not only technical aspects, but also economic, socio-cultural and ethical factors. The project should require students to demonstrate what they learn by creating tangible prototypes that are presented or offered to people beyond the classroom.
The Project brief or aim should not narrowly specify the solution or what should be built. The projects should give students the freedom to explore the context, define boundaries, research various sources and come up with a range of alternative solutions.
6.1 Problem design
Projects should allow for some freedom of expression and some experimentation allowing students to make some choices about the prototypes they create, how they work, and how they use their time, guided by the teacher and depending on their PBL experience.
6.2 Task
Projects must be planned in terms of various tasks where each task explicates what will be accomplished and carefully embeds the content to be studied. These tasks should be engaging, challenging, and doable.
6.3 Process
The steps necessary to complete the task should include activities that require analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of information. In order to avoid the risk of “doing without conceptual understanding,” rigorous reading of good quality text/literature and good practice with diverse problems must be integral to each project task.
6.4 Cooperative/Collaborative learning
The project tasks must employ rounds of peer reviews or group brainstorming sessions.
6.5 Resources
Various learning resources like data, study material, and models of good work must be well identified and shared with students in advance. Students must be given enough time to use the resources, reason well and pursue a problem in depth.
6.6 Increment Oriented Development Approach
The artefact to be built should be viewed as an evolving network of components and in each increment/iteration, components and links are created, modified, replaced, enhanced, and integrated in order to provide added/more sophisticated functionality. Architecture of the tangible artefact to be completed through project activities should gradually grow incrementally, even involving iterations.
6.6 Increment Oriented Development Approach
In early years of engineering education, it is advisable to have well-planned and well-structured ladder of increments and iterations. In later years, when the students are more conversant with the engineering concepts and project-based learning, the structure can be more flexible.
Conceptual schemas for student projects of increasing complexity for teaching a few computer science courses, e.g., Object oriented Programming, Database Management, Software engineering, etc., were reported earlier (Goel, 2010, Goel, 2011).
6.6 Increment Oriented Development Approach
One such conceptual schema, having 5 levels of growing complexity, for evolving project complexity through “Software engineering” course with respect to increasing complexity of software requirements is as follows:
Fixed, direct, independent and well-defined requirements
Fixed, direct, independent and ill-defined requirements
Fixed, direct, inter-dependent and ill-defined requirements
Fixed, derived, inter-dependent and ill-defined requirements
Evolutionary, derived, inter-dependent and ill-defined requirements
6.7 Repeated use of diagrammatic representations for generic problem solving
A few visual techniques for generic problem solving must be repeatedly used for problem analysis and/or solution development. These include concept maps, flow charts, affinity diagrams, systems diagrams (e.g., Unified Modelling Language (UML) diagrams), cause and effect diagrams, etc.
6.8 Briefing and Debriefing
Proper briefing must be planned “to set the stage” for each project, task, and session. The project brief can be ambiguous in order to allow students to research further information, think through the situation and decide as a team the tasks, the direction and the outcomes they want to achieve.
6.8 Briefing and Debriefing
In early years of engineering education, the session briefs should be more focused and aim to link the tasks with specific theoretical concepts and also their other applications. Session briefs should also link to the specific learning material. Each session, task, or project must also have conclusive debriefing that should aim to consolidate the key learning in the dimensions of knowledge, skills, and attitude.
6.9 Cycles of work and Continuous Critique & Reflection
Time should be built into projects for students to reflect deeply on the work they are doing and how it relates to larger concepts specified in the learning outcomes and syllabus. Project work is designed so that there are cycles of work and revision and adequate time to complete them offering frequent opportunities for debriefing and reflection.
READ MORE
6.10 Rigour
Rigour is enhanced when students have the opportunity to struggle with a problem before teachers provide them with directive hints or solutions. Other indicators of rigour include: requiring students to explain or justify their thinking; giving them opportunities to summarize, synthesize, and generalize; having them compare and contrast different answers, solutions and interpretations; and asking them to apply knowledge to new situations.
6.11 Logbook
Students should be encouraged to record their rough notes, ideas and design decisions in their logbook for each project. They should record their own reflections on learning, project meetings and evaluations of self and team members. The logbooks should be checked by their tutors and feedback must be given to students at several points during the project.
6.12 Guidance and Scaffolding
The teaching approach uses a well-planned scaffolding of activities, and progressive learning in order to support deep learning. A learning scaffold can be thought of as any method or resource that helps a learner to “accomplish more difficult tasks than they otherwise are capable of completing on their own.”
6.12 Guidance and Scaffolding
Learning environments should scaffold students by reducing the complexity of the practices, while retaining their key elements. A key element of scaffolding is that the scaffold needs to be tailored to a student’s current level of understanding (not too much assistance and not too little).
6.12 Guidance and Scaffolding
To tailor a scaffold to a student’s skill level or content knowledge, a teacher needs to engage in ongoing assessment of the student. Scaffolding should be faded over time as students learn to apply their new knowledge or skills on their own. More support and structure need to be provided in the first year, compared to later years.
7.0 Project Based assessment
Formative and summative assessments should be provided in each course. All the assessments should be related to the project, and follow the main stages of a design process. Formative and summative assessments should be provided in each project.
Assessment rubrics should provide clear criteria of how marks are allotted in the design projects. The rubrics should provide students a good idea of what is expected.
7.0 Project Based assessment
Assessments need to take into account the range of acceptable solutions, and judge them according to the most important criteria of appropriateness to the context of the problem, how well the problem has been investigated, understood and resolved, the clarity of the problem definition, whether the solution space has been sufficiently explored, and how creative and innovative the solution is.
7.0 Project Based assessment
It must also judge individual student’s conceptual understanding of the embedded theoretical concepts. In doing so, it is imperative to assess individual student’s theoretical understanding of the embedded concepts.
While a Project Based Learning approach offers a great way forward to educate engineers, a superficial implementation without its proper understanding, expert teaching staff, curriculum restructuring, appropriate assessment, etc., can turn out to be counter-productive
References and further reading
Goel, Sanjay. “Design of Interventions for Instructional Reform in Software Development Education for Competency Enhancement.” PhD Thesis (2010).Quint, Janet, and Barbara Condliffe. “Project-Based Learning: A Promising Approach to Improving Student Outcomes. Issue Focus.” MDRC (2018). Condliffe, Barbara, Mary G. Visher, Michael R. Bangser, S. Drohojowska, and Larissa Saco. “Project-based learning: A literature review.” New York, NY: MDRC (2016).
Arora, Ritu, and Sanjay Goel. “Software engineering approach for teaching development of scalable enterprise applications.” In 2009 22nd Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training, pp. 105-112. IEEE, 2009.
Congratulations!
You have completed the 'Guidelines for Teaching Engineering through Project based Learning' node!
To learn more about excellence in teaching and learning at TEDI-London, and to progress in your teaching and learning development, return to the toolkit.
If you would like to review this node, click start over.
START OVER?
Guidelines for Teaching Engineering through Project based Learning
t1848029
Created on February 27, 2021
Start designing with a free template
Discover more than 1500 professional designs like these:
View
Visual Presentation
View
Terrazzo Presentation
View
Colorful Presentation
View
Modular Structure Presentation
View
Chromatic Presentation
View
City Presentation
View
News Presentation
Explore all templates
Transcript
Project based learning
Project based learning (PBL) has now been adopted by many engineering education regulating bodies and universities around the world. This node aims to assist staff who are new entrants to this exciting and highly promising pedagogy.
To begin the node, click start.
START
Guidelines for Teaching Engineering through Project based learning
This first section will provide a collation of key ideas from several published research papers on PBL to as well as research and experience-based insights of the author to guide staff in their practice.
Click start to begin.
START
Index
1. Introduction
2. Essence of Engineering as a discipline
3. The Phenomenon of Learning
4. Project Based Learning
Index
5. Fundamental Pedagogical Assumptions
6. Elements of PBL Courses
7. Project Based Assessment
1.0 Introduction
Many new engineering education regulating bodies and universities world over are now enthusiastic about using project based learning (PBL). However, currently the phrase seems to be in use to convey different meanings.
While for some, mere inclusion of project work in a course qualifies it to have been delivered using PBL, education literature uses the phrase for a more transformed way of teaching where project work is the main learning engagement even for developing conceptual foundations.
1.0 Introduction
In the last decade, many institutes have been trying to adopt PBL pedagogy, especially in engineering courses. Fortunately, in the past few years, many training programs on pedagogy are being organized to expose engineering and other faculty members to this exciting body of knowledge.
However, research is required to understand the impact of these training programs. This guide aims to help staff who are new entrants to this exciting and highly promising pedagogy.
READ MORE
2.0 Essence of Engineering as a discipline
The Engineering Professors’ Council (EPC), United Kingdom identified the following primary competencies for engineers:
Transform existing systems into conceptual models.
Transform conceptual models into determinable models.
Use determinable models to obtain system specifications.
2.0 Essence of Engineering as a discipline
The Engineering Professors’ Council (EPC), United Kingdom identified the following primary competencies for engineers:
Select optimum specifications and create physical models.
Apply the results from physical models to create real target systems.
Critically review real target systems and personal performance.
3.0 The Phenomenon of Learning
Learning is a natural multi-faceted process that progresses through making and rendition of meaning at progressively deepening levels.
It is driven by voluntary and/or involuntary efforts made in response to stimulating experiences.
3.0 The Phenomenon of Learning
A student's approach to learning has two components:
How the student approaches the task
01
Why the student wants to approach the task
strategy
02
motive
3.0 The Phenomenon of Learning
John Biggs (1988) proposed that there are three common approaches to learning. Click to learn about each learning approach.
Surface Approach
3.1
Achieving (or Strategic) Approach
3.3
Deep Approach
3.2
3.1 Surface Approach
The student’s motive to learn is to only carry out the task because of external positive or negative consequences; if they fail life will be unpleasant but if they do well in the subject they will win the instructor’s favour.
A typical surface strategy is rote learning, and surface-motivated students focus on what appears to be the most important items and memorises them. Because of this focus, they do not see interconnections between the meanings and implications of what is learned.
3.2 Deep Approach
The deep motive is based on internal motivation or curiosity. In the deep approach, there is a personal commitment to learning, which means that the student relates the content to personally meaningful contexts or to existing prior knowledge.
Deep processing involves processes of a higher cognitive level than rote learning; searching for analogies, relating to previous knowledge, and theorising about what is learned.
3.3 Achieving (or Strategic) Approach
The achieving motive is like the surface approach in that it is focused on the product (getting an “A” or winning an award). The strategy is to maximize the chances of obtaining high marks. While this hopefully involves a high level of effort to learn the topic (like the deep strategy), the learning is the means, not the end.
READ MORE
3.3 Achieving (or Strategic) Approach
There are two main influences on the student’s development of a certain learning approach: personal factors and the teaching context:
On the personal side, some factors in the student’s background or personality seem to be associated with a Surface approach and others with a Deep approach.
On the teaching side, time pressures, stress from exams, and standardised tests encourage a Surface approach.
3.4 Use of PBL to encourage a deep approach to learning
Various studies have shown that learner centric methods like project work, laboratory work, discussions with other students, thinking and work oriented lectures, and teaching peers/juniors were rated as the most effective educational experiences.
READ MORE
Project Based Learning and other methods of inquiry-based learning are increasingly being recognized as the way forward to transform the education system.
4.0 Project Based Learning
Click to read an introduction on project based learning and how it has been integrated in the learning at Olin College.
Introduction to PBL
4.1
PBL at Olin College
4.2
4.1 Introduction to PBL
Adapting from the kindergarten model, MIT Media lab has developed an educational approach of lifelong kindergarten based on a set of four guiding principles for helping young people develop as creative thinkers: projects, passion, peers, and play.
They believe that the best way to cultivate creativity is to support people working on projects based on their passions, in collaboration with peers and in a playful spirit.
4.1 Introduction to PBL
A central goal of PBL is to facilitate the deeper learning process and support students’ acquisition of complex cognitive competencies, e.g., rigorous content knowledge and critical thinking skills. The projects engage students in the problem definition, design process, contextual understanding and systems thinking approaches.
4.1 Introduction to PBL
Students learn to work in teams, and to plan and carry out different tasks that are required during a project. They come to understand their own and their team-mates strengths and skills. Students are expected to draw information from a variety of sources and be able to filter and summarize the relevant points. They are also expected to communicate to different audiences in oral, visual and written forms.
READ MORE
4.1 Introduction to PBL
PBL has often been reported to be associated with enhanced rigour. However, it does not automatically ensure rigour as without careful planning, it can also result in low levels of rigour and encourage “doing for the sake of doing” without students experiencing deeper conceptual understanding.
CHALLENGES OF PBL
4.1 PBL at Olin College
At Olin College, USA, one of the main curricular innovations is several large interdisciplinary courses starting from the 1st semester. Often mathematics and engineering faculty team-teach courses using a PBL approach.
Many conventional courses have been replaced by such integrated courses. The concepts are carefully chosen by the faculty for inclusion in the syllabus and many concepts, conventionally included in syllabus, not considered important by the faculty from the long-term perspective, are not included in the syllabus.
4.1 PBL at Olin College
The Olin model is also characterized by a relatively smaller group of highly committed faculty and students. Olin admits only highly motivated students who demonstrate their ability to work well on projects during a pre-admission immersive induction program called “candidates’ weekend.”
At Olin, currently about 75% courses use a PBL model for teaching. It has gradually increased over the last 3 decades. Typically, PBL courses at Olin also include about 25% concepts, that may not be delivered using PBL approach. This can sometimes go up to 50%.
5.0 Fundamental Pedagogical Assumptions
Engineering institutes and faculty aiming to use PBL in their courses first need to transform their fundamental assumptions related to their and students’ role and responsibilities in teaching –learning process. They also need ‘to change their beliefs about the role of project in the education process.
Learning Facilitators
5.2
Projects
5.1
Learning Outcomes
5.3
Students as active participants
5.4
5.1 Projects
Projects are seen as the central vehicle of instruction. Projects are not seen as the culmination of learning (as they often are in standard classrooms), but instead are the process through which learning takes place.
5.2 Learning Facilitators
As learning facilitators, teachers are essentially students’ experience and engagement designers. Their role is to facilitate the progress through the cycles of work.
They need to ask planned questions and give cues to make thinking visible, giving students authority to define and address problems and encouraging them to be authors and producers of knowledge.
Readiness for learning new content has to be developed before students are exposed to that content.
READ MORE
5.3 Learning Outcomes
The learning outcomes for cognitive as well as psychomotor domains are well defined.
5.4 Students as active participants
Students are seen as active participants in the construction of knowledge.
Faculty is sure that their students are intellectually ready for learning through this approach:
Students enjoy building tangible artefacts.
Students have the required prerequisite knowledge and skills or the ability to quickly acquire the same through self-learning
5.4 Students as active participants
Students can put together different values, information, and ideas, and can accommodate them within their own schema through comparison, relation and elaboration.
Students have developed the interest and ability to try to build generic abstract knowledge from specific concrete experiences.
6.0 Elements of PBL Courses
After transforming their fundamental pedagogical assumptions and beliefs as mentioned above, the staff should carefully plan for the following elements in order to effectively implement PBL in their courses. A slip on any of these elements may be counter-productive for learning and result in students’ disengagement or disinterest in learning.
The following diagram summarises the core elements of an effective PBL course.
6.0 Elements of PBL Courses
Cycles of work / Continuous Reflection
Resources
Briefing & Debriefing
Problem design
Logbook
Elements of PBL Courses
Use of diagrams
Loremipsum
Process
Loremipsum
Guidance & Scaffolding
Loremipsum
Task
Cognitive/ Collaborative Learning
Loremipsum
Incremental Development
Rigour
+ info
6.1 Problem design
Projects should be complex, open-ended, and realistic; have multiple solutions and methods for reaching solutions; and resonate with students’ experience. The projects should involve an active, in-depth process over time, in which students generate questions, find and use resources, ask further questions, and develop their own answers.
6.1 Problem design
The projects should have a real-world context, use real-world processes, tools, and quality standards, make a real impact, and/or is connected to students’ own concerns, interests, and identities. They should require students to apply relevant theory and encourage students to integrate the knowledge gained from multiple courses.
They should be designed to maximize the probability that students will encounter the big ideas specified in the learning outcomes and syllabus and should lead students to confront and resolve conflicting ideas to prevent “doing for the sake of doing.”
6.1 Problem design
Some projects should allow for the consideration of not only technical aspects, but also economic, socio-cultural and ethical factors. The project should require students to demonstrate what they learn by creating tangible prototypes that are presented or offered to people beyond the classroom. The Project brief or aim should not narrowly specify the solution or what should be built. The projects should give students the freedom to explore the context, define boundaries, research various sources and come up with a range of alternative solutions.
6.1 Problem design
Projects should allow for some freedom of expression and some experimentation allowing students to make some choices about the prototypes they create, how they work, and how they use their time, guided by the teacher and depending on their PBL experience.
6.2 Task
Projects must be planned in terms of various tasks where each task explicates what will be accomplished and carefully embeds the content to be studied. These tasks should be engaging, challenging, and doable.
6.3 Process
The steps necessary to complete the task should include activities that require analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of information. In order to avoid the risk of “doing without conceptual understanding,” rigorous reading of good quality text/literature and good practice with diverse problems must be integral to each project task.
6.4 Cooperative/Collaborative learning
The project tasks must employ rounds of peer reviews or group brainstorming sessions.
6.5 Resources
Various learning resources like data, study material, and models of good work must be well identified and shared with students in advance. Students must be given enough time to use the resources, reason well and pursue a problem in depth.
6.6 Increment Oriented Development Approach
The artefact to be built should be viewed as an evolving network of components and in each increment/iteration, components and links are created, modified, replaced, enhanced, and integrated in order to provide added/more sophisticated functionality. Architecture of the tangible artefact to be completed through project activities should gradually grow incrementally, even involving iterations.
6.6 Increment Oriented Development Approach
In early years of engineering education, it is advisable to have well-planned and well-structured ladder of increments and iterations. In later years, when the students are more conversant with the engineering concepts and project-based learning, the structure can be more flexible. Conceptual schemas for student projects of increasing complexity for teaching a few computer science courses, e.g., Object oriented Programming, Database Management, Software engineering, etc., were reported earlier (Goel, 2010, Goel, 2011).
6.6 Increment Oriented Development Approach
One such conceptual schema, having 5 levels of growing complexity, for evolving project complexity through “Software engineering” course with respect to increasing complexity of software requirements is as follows:
Fixed, direct, independent and well-defined requirements
Fixed, direct, independent and ill-defined requirements
Fixed, direct, inter-dependent and ill-defined requirements
Fixed, derived, inter-dependent and ill-defined requirements
Evolutionary, derived, inter-dependent and ill-defined requirements
6.7 Repeated use of diagrammatic representations for generic problem solving
A few visual techniques for generic problem solving must be repeatedly used for problem analysis and/or solution development. These include concept maps, flow charts, affinity diagrams, systems diagrams (e.g., Unified Modelling Language (UML) diagrams), cause and effect diagrams, etc.
6.8 Briefing and Debriefing
Proper briefing must be planned “to set the stage” for each project, task, and session. The project brief can be ambiguous in order to allow students to research further information, think through the situation and decide as a team the tasks, the direction and the outcomes they want to achieve.
6.8 Briefing and Debriefing
In early years of engineering education, the session briefs should be more focused and aim to link the tasks with specific theoretical concepts and also their other applications. Session briefs should also link to the specific learning material. Each session, task, or project must also have conclusive debriefing that should aim to consolidate the key learning in the dimensions of knowledge, skills, and attitude.
6.9 Cycles of work and Continuous Critique & Reflection
Time should be built into projects for students to reflect deeply on the work they are doing and how it relates to larger concepts specified in the learning outcomes and syllabus. Project work is designed so that there are cycles of work and revision and adequate time to complete them offering frequent opportunities for debriefing and reflection.
READ MORE
6.10 Rigour
Rigour is enhanced when students have the opportunity to struggle with a problem before teachers provide them with directive hints or solutions. Other indicators of rigour include: requiring students to explain or justify their thinking; giving them opportunities to summarize, synthesize, and generalize; having them compare and contrast different answers, solutions and interpretations; and asking them to apply knowledge to new situations.
6.11 Logbook
Students should be encouraged to record their rough notes, ideas and design decisions in their logbook for each project. They should record their own reflections on learning, project meetings and evaluations of self and team members. The logbooks should be checked by their tutors and feedback must be given to students at several points during the project.
6.12 Guidance and Scaffolding
The teaching approach uses a well-planned scaffolding of activities, and progressive learning in order to support deep learning. A learning scaffold can be thought of as any method or resource that helps a learner to “accomplish more difficult tasks than they otherwise are capable of completing on their own.”
6.12 Guidance and Scaffolding
Learning environments should scaffold students by reducing the complexity of the practices, while retaining their key elements. A key element of scaffolding is that the scaffold needs to be tailored to a student’s current level of understanding (not too much assistance and not too little).
6.12 Guidance and Scaffolding
To tailor a scaffold to a student’s skill level or content knowledge, a teacher needs to engage in ongoing assessment of the student. Scaffolding should be faded over time as students learn to apply their new knowledge or skills on their own. More support and structure need to be provided in the first year, compared to later years.
7.0 Project Based assessment
Formative and summative assessments should be provided in each course. All the assessments should be related to the project, and follow the main stages of a design process. Formative and summative assessments should be provided in each project.
Assessment rubrics should provide clear criteria of how marks are allotted in the design projects. The rubrics should provide students a good idea of what is expected.
7.0 Project Based assessment
Assessments need to take into account the range of acceptable solutions, and judge them according to the most important criteria of appropriateness to the context of the problem, how well the problem has been investigated, understood and resolved, the clarity of the problem definition, whether the solution space has been sufficiently explored, and how creative and innovative the solution is.
7.0 Project Based assessment
It must also judge individual student’s conceptual understanding of the embedded theoretical concepts. In doing so, it is imperative to assess individual student’s theoretical understanding of the embedded concepts. While a Project Based Learning approach offers a great way forward to educate engineers, a superficial implementation without its proper understanding, expert teaching staff, curriculum restructuring, appropriate assessment, etc., can turn out to be counter-productive
References and further reading
Goel, Sanjay. “Design of Interventions for Instructional Reform in Software Development Education for Competency Enhancement.” PhD Thesis (2010).Quint, Janet, and Barbara Condliffe. “Project-Based Learning: A Promising Approach to Improving Student Outcomes. Issue Focus.” MDRC (2018). Condliffe, Barbara, Mary G. Visher, Michael R. Bangser, S. Drohojowska, and Larissa Saco. “Project-based learning: A literature review.” New York, NY: MDRC (2016). Arora, Ritu, and Sanjay Goel. “Software engineering approach for teaching development of scalable enterprise applications.” In 2009 22nd Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training, pp. 105-112. IEEE, 2009.
Congratulations!
You have completed the 'Guidelines for Teaching Engineering through Project based Learning' node!
To learn more about excellence in teaching and learning at TEDI-London, and to progress in your teaching and learning development, return to the toolkit.
If you would like to review this node, click start over.
START OVER?