Experiential Learning is defined by Wheeler (2008, 63) as a method of education, a “type of learning [that] occurs when students participate, reflect, and use analytical skills to gain useful insights from an activity, and then incorporate these experiences into their daily living”. He explored two methods of experiential learning, namely project-based learning (PjBL) and problem-based learning (PBL), which share many characteristics, but are different. Krauss and Boss (2013, 10) state that “project-based learning overlaps with problem-based learning”; that there are “more similarities than differences”; and that “similar pedagogic concerns influenced the development of both”.
A project is usually assigned to students individually or groups of six to eight students, when project-based learning (PjBL) is used. The primary objective of PjBL is to engage students in a relevant and substantial investigation, either individually or collaboratively. The emphasis is on “information search and retrieval, knowledge application, and critical thinking”(Wheeler 2008, 63). Projects assigned are “based on commonly encountered [complex] real-world problems and situations”. The activities of students revolve around the “design, problem solving, decision-making, and investigation” concerning the project and PjBL typically ends “with the delivery of a realistic project plan and formal presentation”.
Krauss and Boss (2013, 10) indicate that “problem-based learning emerged in medical schools during the 1950s”, because medical students experienced difficulty to “make the leap from academic work to effective clinical practice”. Wheeler (2008, 63) defines PBL as “an instructional method that challenges students to ‘learn to learn,’ working cooperatively in groups to seek solutions to real world problems”. It is small group oriented, requiring of “students meet regularly to investigate, explain and resolve multiple, real-world problems”. Problems assigned to students “often describe a situation requiring an explanation and resolution”, such as business cases. Krauss and Boss (2013, 10) affirm this by indicating that teaching physicians developed clinical scenarios that mirrored challenges of daily physician practice which medical students had to resolve. The learning shifted from memorizing text books to problem solving, which became the standard in many disciplines.
Krauss and Boss (2013, 10) point out that John Dewey, the education and social reformer, in 1916, argued that students are not receptacles to pour knowledge into, but that intellectual engagement is a necessity. They state that “both problem- and project-based learning press students beyond knowledge acquisition” to active engagement and critical thinking resulting in constructing own meaning and the ability to apply what learned.
Both PjBL and PBL employ open-ended questions, scenarios and/or challenges. “Neither state the steps to a solution” caution Krauss and Boss (2013, 7 & 10) by stating “be wary of project plans that call for too many scripted steps”, because “step-by-step projects leave little room for students to wrestle with uncertainty, raise new questions, or solve problems in novel ways”. Furthermore, “overplanning is a symptom of teacher-directed instruction” and students are unlikely to be challenged and “to reach their full potential as capable, creative learners”.
Krauss and Boss (2013, 11) state that the biggest difference between PjBL and PBL “have to do with the focus, duration, and outcomes of each”. The processes for PjBL are more diffuse, the learning path and work products are likely to be unique, and teams often exceed the standards for minimally accepted outcomes of the projects. Krauss and Boss (2013, 12) state that “a good project sets up conditions in which students are compelled to inquire”.
Krauss, J. and Boss, S. 2013. Thinking through project-based learning, guiding deeper inquiry. Thousand Oaks: Corwin (Sage).
Wheeler, R. 2008. Experiential learning: impact of two instructional methods on student – instructor interaction, student critical thinking, and student course evaluations. Journal for Advancement of Marketing Education, 12, Summer, 63-78.
Comments