Learning in vivo

Live Projects and Scaffolded WIL

“A live project comprises the negotiation of a brief, timescale, budget and product between an educational organisation and an external collaborator for their mutual benefit. The project must be structured to ensure that students gain learning that is relevant to their educational development.” say Anderson and Priest (2020). They elaborate, that they ‘tried to make this definition representative of the common factors’, as well as ‘to be as inclusive as possible’, of scope (wealth, variations, and diverse motivations for) of live project practice that they have observed. Live Projects are “pedagogic means to extend the institutional confines of the design studio”, and may also be referred to as ‘Design Build Projects’, ‘Live Build Projects’, ‘Real Projects’ and ‘Service Learning’. Similarly, the University of Sheffield School of Architecture (2020) state that ”Live Projects set real constraints, responding to budget, brief and time. In each project students and clients work together to define the project and develop a brief”.

Tezcan, Durakovic, Smith, Lloyd, and D'arcy (2020: 522) report on re-framing the scholarly discussions about the ‘design studio’, and the nuances of design studio teaching strategies and pedagogy. They observe that “the live project model is commonly adopted by universities globally as a means of offering architecture students the opportunity for workplace practice-learning”, and argue “live projects form an embedded, scaffolded core subject in design studio education, rather than discreet, standalone offerings”. They indicate that work-integrated learning (WIL) “is an umbrella term for the integration of academic theory with workplace application”, and state that scaffolded WIL “involves a sequence of WIL experiences that structure core disciplinary subjects within a program curriculum”. Scaffolding is not merely a rickety structure, but a well-designed curriculum to move students toward career readiness and professional practice. The live project model resembles both the workplace and professional practice; and “it promotes deep, transformational and authentic learning” (Tezcan et al., 2020: 524).

Tezcan et al. (2020), however, do express concern about (among others) the financial constraints pertaining live projects, in particular the potential accumulation of costs incurred by both students and universities, which may result in depletion of resources. Adaptation of the South African sector education and training authority (SETA) funding disbursement is recommended. Pursuing of live projects for reconstruction and development should further be pursued.

About Live Projects. 2020 The University of Sheffield School of Architecture. Electronically accessible from http://www.liveprojects.org/about/2/

Anderson, J & Priest, C. 2020. About (web page), Live Projects Network. Electronically accessible from https://liveprojectsnetwork.org/about/

Tezcan, N.; Durakovic, I.; Smith, C.; Lloyd, E. & D'arcy, S. 2020. Scaffolded, simulated work-integrated learning in design education: Beyond the live project. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 21(5), 521-529. Electronically accessible from https://www.ijwil.org/files/IJWIL_21_5_521_529.pdf

Key component of experiential education is reflection, not activity

Snow, Wardley, Carter and Maher (2019: 80) state that the term experiential education “is often misunderstood or misapplied through reductionist thinking to any learning that involves activity”; on the contrary, it is defined as “a pedagogical approach that encourages collective and personal critical reflection and development”. They engaged in seeking to answer questions about the feasibility of designing online experiential learning opportunities and how this can contribute to deepening professional practice in Nursing, Education, Business and Community Studies. They remark that “The key component of experiential education documented in the literature is action on the part of the student that promotes learning through reflection” (emphasis added). However, experience itself is not necessarily educative, especially when reflection is omitted. Experiential learning comprises, as per Kolb’s cycle of four stages, namely: concrete experience (CE), reflective observation (RO), abstract conceptualization (AC), and active experimentation (AE). Snow, Wardley, Carter and Maher (2019) report that collaborative activities through online synchronous and asynchronous technologies have been found to support the development of competence. They share lived experiences about four undergraduate-level professional programmes that involve experiential learning to varying degrees.

The first scenario pertains to a part-time blended learning programme from Registered Practical Nurse (RPN) to a Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BScN) degree. The RPN to BScN programme comprises theory courses delivered online and clinical (experiential) courses occurring in clinical practice settings. Each clinical module includes an online course site, which houses resources and “serves as an environment where students are required to reflect and think critically on their learning with their clinical instructor and other students”. The reflection principally through writing, with tools such as discussion boards, blogs, and course-specific email. This “blend of clinical learning with carefully designed online writing activities is a powerful combination”. Case studies and problem-based learning activities in the theory modules further serve as a form of experiential learning. The clinical or experiential, on the other hand are “enhanced through online activities and assignments that require critical thinking through reflection”.

The table below summarises the other three scenarios:

Scenario	Reflective Observation	Abstract Conceptualization	Active Experimentation	Concrete Experience
2.    Typical blended learning cycle, teacher education, science	The first lesson of each unit face-to-face, in which the previous experience deconstructed and explored and a new cycle established.	Asynchronous online activities were used to engage with theory related to learning objectives.	Each lesson design was unique to the student and specific community context.	Students did online video presenta-tions of their lessons & received feedback from their classmates.
3.    Typical learning cycle, occupational health & safety	Interactive learning based on content of module	Research paper	Discussion posts, blog entries & case studies	Community-based marketing outreach message
	Simulations and videos posted by professor with questions to address in blogs	Conceptualizing workforce-relevant knowledge related to the group topic	Reflecting, applying knowledge, and evaluating peers	Content presented online; three-tiered monitoring and measurement systems (peers, professor, and community members)
4.    Typical learning cycle, work place-ment courses	Discussion posts and a final reflective essay for each course	Developing a career plan (COMS 2101); information interview (COMS 3101)	Discussion posts, journal summaries, & self/supervisor evaluations	Placements with a community partner (100 hours for COMS 2101, 100 hours for COMS 3101)

It is the experience of the authors that “the practical realities of experiential education in higher education are challenging, and faculty interested in developing experiential learning opportunities for students must negotiate institutional policies, external regulatory bodies, and, at times, even concerns about legitimacy within their departments”.

Snow, K., Wardley, L., Carter, L. & Maher, P. 2019. Lived Experiences of Online and Experiential Learning Programs in Four Undergraduate Professional Programs. Collected Essays on Learning & Teaching: Pedagogical Innovation: Adapting Practice to Evolving Cultures, Section II, Vol. 12, p79-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v12i0.5388

Proposed decision-making chart with regard to work-integrated learning (WIL)

Much has been published about the range of work-integrated learning (WIL) options with regard to learning design within the South African context. However, many appear to cling to workplace learning (WPL), while complaining that there are not sufficient placement opportunities. [I maintain that while the advisory bodies of programmes at tertiary intuitions are not representative of the occupational field, such institutions cannot naively cling to workplace learning, but are obliged to seek alternative WIL options.] The Council on Higher Education (CHE) further stipulated a number of quality criteria pertaining WPL or work-based learning (WBL), which in turn entail availability of certain resource, matters that needed to have been considered at application stage to offer the qualification.

Project-based learning (PjBL), however, does not offer an easy alternative. Academic cannot merely 'convert' the WPL materials and suggest to students to 'find' their own opportunity/place to complete a project approximating the prerequisite WPL. Proper PjBL requires significant support from the occupational field, probably as much as what WPL would have.

Simulated work experiences (SWEs) are not a simple alternative either. The required virtual materials need to exist, or need to be made (requiring adequate budget). The necessary infrastructure, technology, access, networks and data are further issues that could stand in the way of SWEs.

I've put together a Download Proposed decision-making chart with regard to work-integrated learning (WIL) with the aforementioned in mind:

Experiential learning can be accomplished on-line

Bates (2014) contested a colleague who believed that experiential learning cannot be done online that “experiential learning is [indeed] like most design models: it is independent of the mode of delivery. What matters is how well it is done.” Bates points out that there is a range of teaching design models that embed real world contexts into learning, namely problem-based learning, case-based learning, project-based learning, inquiry-based learning, cooperative (work- or community-based) education, and apprenticeships. §34 of the ‘Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework’ further states that “The selection of appropriate forms of work-integrated learning depends on the nature and purpose of the qualification type programme objectives and outcomes, the NQF level at which the WIL component is pegged, institutional capacity to provide WIL opportunities, and the structures and systems that are in place within professional settings and sites of practice to support student learning” (South African Government, 2014: 17). 

Bates (2014) acknowledges, “Advocates of experiential learning are often highly critical of online learning”, but argues, “online learning can be used very effectively to support or develop experiential learning”. In blended or flipped learning, for example, students can gather information by accessing online resources; students can further collaborate online, critique and evaluate each other’s work. Bates adds “experiential learning can be applied fully online, through a combination of synchronous tools such as a web conference, asynchronous tools such as discussion forums and/or social media for group work, and e-portfolios and multimedia for reporting”. Bates (2014) concedes, “Indeed, there are circumstances where it is impractical, too dangerous, or too expensive to use real world experiential learning.” However, real conditions could be simulated online to reduce the time to master a skill, says Bates. 

Dadze-Arthur and Raine (2016: 146) explain that “e-learning, also referred to as distance learning or online education, can be understood as learning that involves students doing all their classroom activities outside the traditional classroom, at a distance from their school or college, and supported by technology-based tools”. However, Beard, Wilson and McCarter (2007: 4) remark that a limited number of underpinning theories exist with regard to e-learning, which is often “technology-led rather than theory-led”. They coined the expression E²-learning with regard to the fusion between experiential learning and e-learning. Experiential-electronic learning (EE-Learning), the notion of ‘experiential learning in a distance-learning environment’, is generally to be understood as a combination of experiential learning and e-learning with the goal to create a strong, interactive learning community (Dadze-Arthur & Raine, 2016: 146). According to Baasanjav (2013: 576) the term “refers to the possibility of bringing together everyday experience and communication technologies”. Dadze-Arthur and Raine (2016: 146) simply uses experiential-electronic learning (EE-Learning), qualified as the notion of ‘experiential learning in a distance-learning environment’, which is generally to be understood as a combination of experiential learning and e-learning with the goal to create a strong, interactive learning community. 

Knud Illeris (2016: 201), inducted in 2006 to the ‘International Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame’ (2018) in the fields of continuing education and adult learning, remarks that ‘workplace learning’ and work-based learning’ taking place directly in the workplace “became popular slogans in the context of vocationally orientated education”. He indicates the paradoxical nature of this popularity in the light of historical trend that the bulk of curriculums were transferred from workplaces to formalised education. Illeris (2016: 202) points out “this has been absolutely clear: more and more schooling and less and less educational training at the workplaces”. Enterprises furthermore want education to be financed by the state. Karina de Bruin, a counselling psychologist and managing director of the JvR Academy, quoted by Hesse (2018) “Many jobs change dramatically over relatively short periods. Workers need to constantly update their existing skills and knowledge and acquire new skills and knowledge to ensure career success”. Whereas Illeris (2016) emphasise the need for lifelong learning during work life, with the view of continuously ‘upgrading’ the base qualifications of employees; de Bruin (in Hesse 2018) advocates self-directed learning and agility in order to survive and to keep aligned with the rapidly changing environment. 

Many aspects evolved since the beginning of the twentieth century, when cooperative education systems and sandwich education programmes were introduced in Northern America and Europe respectively, and subsequently spread internationally. Among the many changes, there had been an explosion of e-learning, say Arthur and Raine (2016), who indicates two main reasons. First is technological advances associated with the Internet that resulted in substantial affordable educational resources, networked learning, new ways in which knowledge is imparted, etc. The second reason is the importance of knowledge for economic growth. “At a time of budget constraints …” say Arthur and Raine (2016: 144) “… efficiency drives and a continuous emphasis on optimising value-for-money, the contemporary and emerging technologies offer unique opportunities for the education sector.” The emphasis on e-learning and diminishing opportunities for workplace learning as part of the curriculum, prompt the pursuance of simulations and educational alternatives to real-life experience, in order for graduates to gain competence. 

Baasanjav, U. (2013). Incorporating the experiential learning cycle into online classes. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(4), 575—589.

Bates, T. (2014). Can you do experiential learning online? Assessing design models for experiential learning. Electronically accessible from https://www.tonybates.ca/2014/12/01/can-you-do-experiential-learning-online-assessing-design-models-for-experiential-learning/

Beard, C.; Wilson, J.P. & McCarter, R. (2007). Towards a Theory of e-Learning: Experiential e-Learning. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 6(2), 3-15. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/95b4/bf51ed82edf9bb529574d65df250fb595df7.pdf

Dadze-Arthur, A. & Raine, J.W. (2016) Experiential Learning and Teaching at a Distance: How Distinctive an Experience? In Developing Public Managers for a Changing World. Published online: 19 Dec 2016; 141-159. Permanent link to this document: https://doi.org/10.1108/S2045-794420160000005008

Hesse, M. (2018). e-Learning your key to unlocking earnings. Published online in Personal Finance, 12 June 2018, https://www.iol.co.za/personal-finance/e-learning-your-key-to-unlocking-earnings-15441631?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

Illeris, K. (2016). Working and learning, chapter 18, 201-216. In Learning, Development and Education, from learning theory to education and practice—the selected works of Knud Illeris. New York: Routledge.

South African Government (2014), Department of Higher Education and Training, Government Notice No 819. Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework. Government Gazette No. 38116, 17 October 2014 — §34 and §35, p. 17. Electronically accessible from http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/38116_gon819.pdf

 

Experiential learning in a distance e-learning context

Knud Illeris (2016: 201), inducted in 2006 to the ‘International Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame’ (2018) in the fields of continuing education and adult learning, remarks that ‘workplace learning’ and work-based learning’ taking place directly in the workplace “became popular slogans in the context of vocationally orientated education”. He indicates the paradoxical nature of this popularity in the light of historical trend that the bulk of curriculums were transferred from workplaces to formalised education. Illeris (2016: 202) points out “this has been absolutely clear: more and more schooling and less and less educational training at the workplaces”. Enterprises furthermore want education to be financed by the state. Illeris instead emphasise the need for lifelong learning during work life, with the view of continuously ‘upgrading’ the base qualifications of employees.

Many aspects evolved since the beginning of the twentieth century, when cooperative education systems and sandwich education programmes were introduced in Northern America and Europe respectively, and subsequently spread internationally. Among the many changes, there had been an explosion of e-learning, say Arthur and Raine (2016), who indicates two main reasons. First is technological advances associated with the Internet that resulted in substantial affordable educational resources, networked learning, new ways in which knowledge is imparted, etc. The second reason is the importance of knowledge for economic growth. “At a time of budget constraints …” say Arthur and Raine (2016: 144) “… efficiency drives and a continuous emphasis on optimising value-for-money, the contemporary and emerging technologies offer unique opportunities for the education sector.” The emphasis on e-learning and diminishing opportunities for workplace learning as part of the curriculum, prompt the pursuance of simulations and educational alternatives to real-life experience, in order for graduates to gain competence.

Dadze-Arthur and Raine (2016: 146) explain that “e-learning, also referred to as distance learning or online education, can be understood as learning that involves students doing all their classroom activities outside the traditional classroom, at a distance from their school or college, and supported by technology-based tools”. Unisa (2018) states that the university “is the largest open distance learning institution in Africa and the longest standing dedicated distance education university in the world”. It therefor makes sense that Unisa would favour simulations and other electronic facilitated experiential learning to actual placements of students.

Beard, Wilson and McCarter (2007: 4) remark that a limited number of underpinning theories exist with regard to e-learning, which is often “technology-led rather than theory-led”. They coined the expression E²-learning with regard to the fusion between experiential learning and e-learning. According to Baasanjav (2013: 576) the term “refers to the possibility of bringing together everyday experience and communication technologies”. Dadze-Arthur and Raine (2016: 146) simply uses experiential-electronic learning (EE-Learning), qualified as the notion of ‘experiential learning in a distance-learning environment’, which is generally to be understood as a combination of experiential learning and e-learning with the goal to create a strong, interactive learning community.

Bates (2014) responded to a colleague stating that experiential learning cannot be done online that “experiential learning is [indeed] like most design models: it is independent of the mode of delivery. What matters is how well it is done.” Bates points out that there is a range of teaching design models that embed real world contexts into learning, namely problem-based learning, case-based learning, project-based learning, inquiry-based learning, cooperative (work- or community-based) learning, and apprenticeships.

David Kolb’s cyclical theory (1984) is deemed synonymous with experiential learning. He synthesised three earlier models of learning through direct experience, namely the models of Dewey (1938), Lewin (1946) and Piaget (1972). Kolb argues that concrete real-life experiences (CE) provide a reference point for learning. Specific meanings and emotional stimuli in turn serve as material to consider and examine from a variety of perspectives, which entail reflective observation (RO). This in turn result in the looking for patterns, building concepts, testing of theories, and drawing logical conclusions about future implications, a process of abstract conceptualization (AC). People complete the cycle by drawing upon previous insights to solve problems and make decisions, the stage of active experimentation (AE). Kolb (1984) asserts that for learning to be effective in acquiring knowledge or skill, people need to engage fully in four successive stages. Dunlap, Dobrovolny and Young (2008) emphasise that Kolb’s cycle presents itself as scaffold in the design of E²-learning. As result of the transactional distance involved in e-learning, students easily experience real-world projects as frustrating, ineffective, and demoralizing. Kolb's model is therefore promoted as design-mould to provide structure and sequence for students.

In 2011, the South African Council on Higher Education (CHE) published ‘Work-Integrated Learning: Good Practice Guide’ (CHE, 2011), which differentiates several work-integrated learning (WIL) curricular modalities, as alternatives to actual workplace (WPL) or work-based learning (WBL) namely:

• Work-directed theoretical learning (WDTL), which entails theoretical forms of knowledge are introduced and sequenced in ways that meet both academic criteria and are applicable and relevant to the career-specific components
• Problem-based learning (PBL), a pedagogic approach that involves students learning through the structured exploration of a practice-based or research problem
• Project-based learning (PJBL), which brings together intellectual inquiry, real world problems and student engagement in relevant and meaningful work

34 (p. 17) of the South African ‘Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework’ (HEQSF, 2014) states that “In the HEQSF, WIL may take various forms including simulated learning [SWE], work-directed theoretical learning [WBTL], problem-based learning [PBL], project-based learning [PJBL] and workplace-based learning [WPL]”. §34 further states that “The selection of appropriate forms of work-integrated learning depends on the nature and purpose of the qualification type programme objectives and outcomes, the NQF level at which the WIL component is pegged, institutional capacity to provide WIL opportunities, and the structures and systems that are in place within professional settings and sites of practice to support student learning.” (acronyms added).

 

References:

Baasanjav, U. (2013). Incorporating the experiential learning cycle into online classes. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(4), 575—589.

Bates, T. (2014). Can you do experiential learning online? Assessing design models for experiential learning Accessible from https://www.tonybates.ca/2014/12/01/can-you-do-experiential-learning-online-assessing-design-models-for-experiential-learning/

Beard, C.; Wilson, J.P. & McCarter, R. (2007). Towards a Theory of e-Learning: Experiential e-Learning. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 6(2), 3-15. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/95b4/bf51ed82edf9bb529574d65df250fb595df7.pdf

Council on Higher Education (2011). Work-Integrated Learning: Good Practice Guide. HE Monitor No. 12, August 2011. Pretoria: IeCommunications. Electronically accessible from http://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/Higher_Education_Monitor_12.pdf

Dadze-Arthur, A. & Raine, J.W. (2016). Experiential Learning and Teaching at a Distance: How Distinctive an Experience? In Developing Public Managers for a Changing World. Published online: 19 Dec 2016; 141-159. Permanent link to this document: https://doi.org/10.1108/S2045-794420160000005008

Dunlap, J; Dobrovolny, J; and Young, D (2008) Preparing e-Learning Designers Using Kolb's Model of Experiential Learning, Innovate: Journal of Online Education: Vol. 4: Iss. 4, Article 3. Available at: http://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol4/iss4/3

Illeris, K. (2016). Working and learning, chapter 18, 201-216. In Learning, Development and Education, from learning theory to education and practice—the selected works of Knud Illeris. New York: Routledge.

International Adult and Continuing Education Hall of Fame. (2018). About the Hall of Fame (https://www.halloffame.outreach.ou.edu/about.html), 2006 Hall of Fame Inductees (https://www.halloffame.outreach.ou.edu/by_year/HOF_2006.html), and Knud Illeris (https://www.halloffame.outreach.ou.edu/2006/illeris.html).

South African Government (2014). Department of Higher Education and Training, Government Notice No 819. Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework. Government Gazette No. 38116, 17 October 2014. Electronically accessible from http://www.gov.za/sites/www.gov.za/files/38116_gon819.pdf and/or http://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/CHE%20-%20Higher%20Education%20Qualification%20Framework%20-%20EDITED%20171013.pdf

Four curricular modalities of WIL

The four different curricular modalities of work-integrated learning identified in the CHE’s (2011) Work-Integrated Learning: Good Practice Guide are revisited in the CHE’s (2014) Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Good Practice Guide, namely

• Work-directed theoretical learning.
• Problem-based learning.
• Project-based learning.
• Workplace learning.

It is said that “the general issues and principles discussed there would apply also in a distance education context but with the added complexity of how institutions design, manage, support and assess these kinds of approaches in such a way as to ensure equivalence of experience across a distributed and diverse body of students” (p. 34).

Council on Higher Education (CHE). 2014. Distance Higher Education Programmes in a Digital Era: Good Practice Guide. Produced on behalf of the CHE by the South African Institute for Distance Education (Saide). Pretoria: CHE.

Use case studies to instil interdisciplinary approaches to complex future problems

The engineer of the future, many other professionals and employees in general will be facing more and more complex challenges that would require much wider skills sets and interdisciplinary knowledge applications that integrate “science, technology and social systems” (National Academy of Engineering 2004, cited by Davis and Yadav 2014, 163). It is envisaged that “work environments will be inherently ill structured and complex owing to conflicting goals, unanticipated problems, multiple solution methods, non-technical success standards, and unavoidable constraints”.

Situated learning in “authentic and meaningful contexts”, enabling students to experience to complexities they may be faced with, is easier said than done. During the 20^th century cooperative and work-integrated education went a long way towards placing students in authentic workplace learning environments. However, “anchored instruction” is advocated as the solution for formal education settings.

The goal of anchored instruction is to overcome the inert knowledge problem by creating environments that enable students and teachers to experience the problems and opportunities experts in the field face and tools they use to tackle the problems. Furthermore, anchored instruction models are how experts change their own thinking based on new concepts and theories, rather than looking at new information as facts or mechanical procedures that need to be memorised (Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt [CGTV] cited by Davis and Yadav 2014, 164).

Davis, C. and Yadav, A. 2014. Case studies in engineering, pp. 161 – 180. In A. Johri and B.M. Olds (eds). 2014. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. New York: Cambridge University Press.

National Academy of Engineering. 2004. The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.

Similarities and differences between case studies and problem-based learning

Davis and Yadav (2014, 163) indicate that Burgess (2004) suggests “that cases could be developed that provide students with authentic experiences of solving real-world problems and promote flexible, adaptive learning needed for the work-place”.

However, apart from pointing out directly below important similarities and differences “between case study learning and problem-based learning”, Davis and Yadav (2014, 163) present a comparison in a table (copied from p. 164):

• Cases “are an account of current/past activity and contain information that reflects the perspectives of a previous problem solver or case author”.
• Problem-based learning “presents real-world problems to students who require new skills or knowledge to solve the problem”. Citing Burgess (2004) Davis and Yadav (2014, 163) indicate that “students need to discover what is required to solve the problem and build a case”.

 

Burgess, K.L. 2004. Is your case a problem? Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 1/2, 42-44.

Davis, C. and Yadav, A. 2014. Case studies in engineering, pp. 161 – 180. In A. Johri and B.M. Olds (eds). 2014. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Case studies or histories present students with actual projects and problems encountered

Cases, case studies or case histories “are narratives that present real-life scenarios/problems and allow students to experience how professionals address problems encountered in the field” say Davis and Yadav (2014, 161). Stated differently, a case study is a written account of something actually done; a micro-context focussing on a specific subset of a larger domain. Davis and Yadav (2014, 162) mention three major types of cases, namely (a) descriptive or analytical, (b) problem-solving or synthetical, and (c) problem identification. Citing Merseth (1994), cases comprise three main elements convey Davis and Yadav (2014, 161), namely:

1. “they are based on real-life events or realistic situations that allow students to experience problems they are not likely to encounter first-hand;
2. they present both contextual and technical information that is based on careful research and study;
3. [and] they may present no clear-cut solutions to allow students to develop multiple perspectives”.

It therefore follows that cases mimic real-world scenarios, which require students to solve authentic ill-structured problems with complexities, and to experiment within safe confines.

Case studies have a long and effective teaching history, since 1870, in business, law and medicine. The Harvard Business School adopted in 1908 case studies as instructional method. In 1940s an entire science course was offered by means of case studies. Since the 1950s cases have been used in chemical and civil engineering.

Davis, C. and Yadav, A. 2014. Case studies in engineering, pp. 161 – 180. In A. Johri and B.M. Olds (eds). 2014. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Merseth, K.K. 1994. Cases, case methods, and the professional development of educators. Eric Digest. Retrieved 14 July 2014 from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED401272

Learning through service (LTS)

The term 'learning through service' (LTS) has been added to the lexicon of ways to describe pedagogical methods which infuse academic learning with service rendering say Swan, Paterson and Bielefeldt (2014, 357).

In their view, the overarching 'umbrella' term' community engagement' (CE) includes a variety of educational models, for example service-learning, community service-learning, problem-based learning and project-based learning.

Swan, C.; Paterson, K. and Bielefeldt, A.R. 2014. Community engagement in engineering education as a way to increase inclusiveness, 357-372. In A. Johri and B.M. Olds. 2014. Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. New York: Cambridge Press.

Opinions about and experiences with Problem-based Learning

The question 'What is your opinion and experiences in Problem-Based Learning?' has been asked on ResearchGate to scholarly peers. The elaborate response by Ms Rajaa Fahad Allhiani at King Abdulaziz University has been elevated to popular answer. She, among others, answered:

• Problem-based learning (PBL) is an approach that challenges students to learn through engagement in a real problem.
• Problem-based learning is student-centered. PBL makes a fundamental shift--from a focus on teaching to a focus on learning.
• Learning takes place within authentic contexts.
• In a PBL course, students and the instructor become colearners, coplanners, coproducers, and coevaluators.
• The PBL approach is grounded in solid academic research on learning and on the best practices that promote it.
• PBL is unique in that it fosters collaboration among students, stresses the development of problem solving skills within the context of professional practice, promotes effective reasoning and self-directed learning, and is aimed at increasing motivation for life-long learning.
• PBL originated from a curriculum reform.
• Traditional education practices, starting from kindergarten through college, tend to produce students who are often disenchanted and bored with their education.
• Perhaps one of the greatest advantages of PBL is that students genuinely enjoy the process of learning.
• A PBL course is designed into a series of real-world, hands-on, PBL investigations.

She states that the problem-solving process can be summarized according to three broad and reiterative phases.

1. "What do we already know?" In this phase, you will entertain the problem in light of the knowledge that you already have from your own experience.
2. "What do we need to know (to solve this problem)?" Here you will list questions or learning issues that must be answered to address missing knowledge, or to shed light on the problem.
3. In this phase your group will discuss, evaluate, and organize hypotheses and tentative hypotheses. "What should we do?"

Visit the ResearchGate page for more information and other responses/answers.

Five PBL criteria: centrality, driving question, constructive investigations, autonomy, and realism

“Project-based learning (PBL) is a model that organizes learning around projects”, state Abhonakar, Harode and Sawant (2011, 32). They add that a project must satisfy five criteria to qualify as an instance of PBL, namely “centrality, driving question, constructive investigations, autonomy, and realism”.

Abhonakar, Harode and Sawant (2011, 33) report on PBL launched through industrial projects in co-operation of a number of large industrial entities. The core aim “to provide students with projects which conformed to industrial standards, and methods of developing projects”. Furthermore, students benefit from guidance by industry professionals who also bring students abreast “at the forefront with the technology and tools used”. Therefore integration of academic knowledge with cutting-edge tools is achieved. Support by faculty members and their intermittent guidance further aid students. Project quality and “timely conformance with the deadlines” are accentuated.

Abhonakar, P., Harode, A. and Sawant, N. 2011. Effect of projects on learning: an Indian case study, 31-38. In J. Davies, E. de Graaff, and A. Kolmos, (Eds.). 2011. PBL across the disciplines: research into best practice. Proceedings from the 3rd International Research Symposium on PBL 28-29 November 2011, Coventry University, UK. Denmark: Aalborg University Press.

Problem-based and project work model

The Aalborg University was founded in 1974 on a new educational model, the problem-based and project organized model (also known as problem-based project work model) reports Coffin (2011, 19). PBL—note that the acronym PBL is often used to indicate both problem-based and project-based learning—has been practised with variations the past four decades in the Danish educational system by Roskilde University and Aalborg University. The “Aalborg model varies in terms of [programme] themes and choices of project work, definition of a problem, relationship between courses and the project, methods of supervision, resources, and group size” state Coffin (2011, 19). Herewith an illustration of my interpretation:

Coffin (2011, 19) gives an “overview of the idea of how this AAU-PBL model works is that students work together in groups on their project, one project per semester, to analyse and define problems within the interdisciplinary or subject/ theme frame. Students furthermore are expected to submit a group project report and then participate in a joint examination, but obtaining individual marks. As for the core of learning principles for the Aalborg PBL model, the focus is upon the problem, the content, and the team (Graaff & Kolmos, 2003). In terms of time frame and learning management, in each semester students are expected to spend 50% of their time on the project (team dynamic) and spend another 50% on the traditional lectures. Each group has a group room as space for their study and has a supervisor to guide them through their project. In each semester, each program formulates a theme which covers a variation of problems and learning objectives; therefore, students’ projects and courses (lecture based) must comply with or relate to the theme of that particular semester. Students are expected to apply knowledge from course lectures in working on their project work.”

Coffin (2011, 17) remarks that PBL “has gained a reputation of producing students with comprehensive abilities” that are ready to face “the changing world in the globalization era”. PBL is generally regarded as a pedagogical strategy that integrates theoretical subject knowledge with practical skills. Coffin (2011, 18) remarks that PBL represents student-centred pedagogy that “promotes active learning and lifelong learning” based on constructivism learning theory. PBL is further “characterized by flexibility and diversity”. Coffin (2011, 18) cautions that when implementing PBL, there should be awareness “of the differences between PBL used at course level and at system level … what is called PBL curriculum” and emphasise that “four components of PBL must be aligned: PBL curriculum design, PBL tutorials, PBL compatible assessments, and philosophical principles underpining PBL”.

Coffin, P. 2011. Reflections on problem-based learning practice at Aalborg University, 17-30. In J. Davies, E. de Graaff, and A. Kolmos, (Eds.). 2011. PBL across the disciplines: research into best practice. Proceedings from the 3rd International Research Symposium on PBL 28-29 November 2011, Coventry University, UK. Denmark: Aalborg University Press.

Case-oriented versus problem-based and project-organised learning models

The acronym PBL is generally used to indicate both problem-based and project-based learning. Guerra and Kolmos (2011, 3) point out that two very different PBL models, within the PBL philosophy, are in use at the Aalborg University, namely:

• case oriented PBL model in medical education
• problem based and project organised learning in engineering education

Guerra and Kolmos (2011, 4) state that an enquiry process characterises PBL. Formulated problems, based on real and complex situations, drive learning. The process enhances the interest of students and “promotes critical thinking, self-learning skills, lifelong learning, self-achievement, self-regulation, selfefficacy, communication skills and interpersonal skills for students”.

Guerra and Kolmos (2011, 7-9) developed an observation framework based on PBL theory, the spectra of seven PBL curriculum elements also defined as domains, categories of observation for each, and some examples of observation evidences. The table below portrays the framework and the findings (√= presence & √D= present but differences) with regard to commonalities and differences concerning the two models, namely CO = case orientated and PB = problem based and project organised:

With the figure below, Guerra and Kolmos (2011, 13) indicate the “progression from a traditional teaching environment to a pure problem-based learning environment”.

Guerra, A. and Kolmos, A. 2011. Comparing problem based learning models: suggestions for their implementation, 3-16. In J. Davies, E. de Graaff, and A. Kolmos, (Eds.). 2011. PBL across the disciplines: research into best practice. Proceedings from the 3rd International Research Symposium on PBL 28-29 November 2011, Coventry University, UK. Denmark: Aalborg University Press.

Holistic view of essential elements of project-based learning

Gavin (2011, 550) cites Kolmos, de Graaf and Du (2009) and summarises their model which “provides a holistic view of the elements that must be considered” for developing project-based learning (PjBL). The seven elements that ought to be considered are “(i) the objectives and knowledge; (ii) types of problems; (iii) progression, size and duration; (iv) student learning; (v) academic staff facilitation; (vi) space and organisation; (vii) assessment and evaluation”.

Kolmos (2012, 50) remarks that various versions and models of problem based and project based learning are being implemented globally; and as result conceptual understandings are diverse and sometimes confusing. She summarises the conceptual work done by United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) Chair in PBL in Engineering Education towards defining problem and project based learning.

Kolmos (2012, 51) remarks that there “will always be variations in the models” and that “concrete models will and must be different” because of the “wide range of subjects, cultures and systems” involved. She points out that “there are common learning principles across the original problem-based and problem-oriented and project-organised practices such as problems as the vehicle for learning, interdisciplinary learning and teamwork” (emphasis added and note that Kolmos uses the acronym PBL “for problem based and project based learning and is intended to be synonymous with problem oriented and project”). Learning theories, such as Dewey (1938), Illeris (1976), Kolb (1984) and Schon (1987), inform practices, but “there is no direct link from the learning theories to the educational model level”. Kolmos (2012, 52) indicate that PBL learning principles comprise three approaches (imagine the Mercedes-Benz logo depicting a simple three-pointed star).

• The cognitive learning approach entails learning organised around problems that are resolved through projects—a central principle with regard to motivation (however, it is important to keep in mind that PBL could increase the stress-levels of students, which may diminish motivation). The problem serves as starting-point for the learning processes, often complex problem analysis and problem-solving strategies.
• The contents approach concerns interdisciplinary learning and supports the relationship between theory and practice. The project usually spans traditional subject-related boundaries and methods.
• The social approach is team-based, collaborative learning and collective ownership. The learning process is a social act wherein learning takes place through dialogue, communication and working together on a common project.

Kolmos (2012, 53-54) presents a PBL curriculum model that has been developed based on the PBL learning principles. The PBL curriculum model contains seven “elements were identified on the basis of a theory on relationship models and principles of alignment”. All seven components/elements “must be aligned to a certain degree”. Kolmos (2012, 54) indicates that “each of the elements can be interpreted in a different way”, however, “if there is a change in one element it will effect change in all the other elements as well”.

Gavin, K. 2011. Case study of a project-based learning course in civil engineering design. European Journal of Engineering Education, 36, 6, 547–558.

Kolmos, A, de Graff, E. and Du, X., 2009. Diversity of PBL – PBL learning principles and models. In: D. Xu, ed. Research on PBL practice in engineering education, chapter 2. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers, 9–21

Kolmos, A. 2012. Changing the Curriculum to Problem-Based and Project-Based Learning, 50-61. In K.M. Yusof, K. Mohd, N.A. Azli, A.M. Kosnin, S.K.S. Yusof, and Y.M. Yusof. 2012. Outcome-Based Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education: Innovative Practices, chapter 3. Hershey PA: IGI Global.

The ‘ARC’ of project-based Learning (PjBL)

Sustaining the curiosity of students “across the arc of a project” is feasible, assert Krauss and Boss (2013, ix), if “how inquiry works” is understood. The noun ‘arc’ originates from Latin arcus, meaning a bow or an arch. The noun is used with regard to a bow-shaped curve; an unbroken section or part of curved line, graph, geometric figure or circumference of a circle; part of a circular section of the apparent path or course of a celestial body; also used with regard to the luminous bridge or discharge that occurs when an electric current flows between two electrodes. In addition to the use of ‘arc’ in geometry, maths, astronomy and electricity; it is used for story-arcs and project-based learning (PjBL).

Veronica Sicoe, a science-fiction writer, differentiates three character ‘arc’ types and a variant of one, namely:

1. The Change Arc, the hero’s journey or evolution of the protagonist “from an unlikely fellow into a savior and hero”. The transformation is often radical.
2. The Growth Arc, involves the protagonist overcoming one or more flaws, past wounds, fears or weaknesses as result of outer conflict or motivation (Ackerman & Puglisi 2013a, 10-12; 2013b, 17-19). The end result is an improved version, an upgraded protagonist 2.0, a fuller, better person. Related, but often overlooked variant, is the Shift Arc, where the protagonist forms new perspectives, acquire new or additional skills, or assume a different role. The end result is not more or better, only different.
3. The Fall Arc, or tragedy, where a fatal flaw hinders the character’s growth or change resulting in decline of the protagonist into doom, insanity, immorality or even death.

Krauss and Boss (2013) urge that projects should be rigorous, demanding efforts that mirror accomplished adults from students. Based on Krauss and Boss (2013, 53-56) the following steps towards the design of the project-arc are recommended:

• Identify important and enduring concepts fundamental to field of practice
• Explore the significance and relevance of identified concepts/topics—why do they matter? What should students derive from them with regard to their employment readiness and careers?
• Find the real-life contexts to which the concepts and/or topics apply. Determine which theory and subject knowledge are necessary.
• In which ways would students engage critical thinking pertaining to the topics and contexts?
• Consider how the topics should be framed and draft the project sketch/es, including an overview, the scenario/s, required actions and outcomes.
• Formulate the project assignment. Ensure a clear title to anchor the project; an inspiring driving question and challenging outcomes to accomplish.
• Workshop the formulated project assignment with colleagues, practitioners and/or students to resolve misconceptions and finalise.

Ackerman, A. and Puglisi, B. 2013a. The negative trait thesaurus: a writer’s guide to character attributes. Jupiter, FL: JADD Publishing.

Ackerman, A. and Puglisi, B. 2013b. The positive trait thesaurus: a writer’s guide to character attributes. Jupiter, FL: JADD Publishing.

Krauss, J. and Boss, S.  2013. Thinking through project-based learning, guiding deeper inquiry. Thausand Oaks, Ca: Corwin (Sage).

Sicoe, V. 2013. The 3 Types of Character Arc – Change, Growth and Fall. A blog post created 29 April 2013, accessed 15 April 2014 at: http://www.veronicasicoe.com/blog/2013/04/the-3-types-of-character-arc-change-growth-and-fall/

Mind, Brain and Education Science applied to Project-based Learning (PjBL)

Krauss and Boss (2013, 14) consider project-based learning (PjBL) from the perspective of the inquiring human-mind and state that in PjBL “curiosity is the engine for learning” and add that “students who are accustomed to project-based learning aren’t afraid to ask questions—and keep asking until they arrive at answers that make sense to them”.

Krauss and Boss (2013, 15) cite Tokuhama-Espinosa (2010), who published a ground-breaking work on the new trans-disciplinary academic field ‘Mind, Brain, and Education Science’ that has grown out of the intersection of neuroscience, education, and psychology. Krauss and Boss (2013, 15) report that “Tracey Tokuhama-Espinosa synthesises more than 4,500 studies from this emerging field to offer five key concepts shown in the left column of Table 2.1” below. Krauss and Boss (2013) state that these five concepts are relevant to PjBL.

Krauss, J. and Boss, S.  2013. Thinking through project-based learning, guiding deeper inquiry. Thausand Oaks, Ca: Corwin (Sage).

Tokuhama-Espinosa, T. 2010. Mind, brain, and education science: a comprehensive guide to the new brain-based teaching. New York, NY: W.W. Norton

Project-based learning as instructional approach

“Project-based learning is a teaching and learning model (curriculum development and instructional approach) that emphasises student-centred instruction by assigning projects” posit Abdulaala et al (2011, 392). They continue to state that project-based learning (PjBL) allow for “students to work more autonomously to construct their own learning and culminates in realistic, student-generated products”. As instructional approach, PjBL entail organising learning around projects, which are “complex tasks, based on challenging questions or problems, that involve students in design, problem solving, decision making or investigative activities; give students the opportunity to work relatively autonomously over extended periods of time; and culminate in realistic products or presentations”.

PjBL is recognised “as an innovative approach that teaches a multitude of strategies critical for success in the twenty-first century” observe Abdulaala et al (2011, 392). PjBL furthermore “permits the integration of non-technical issues necessary for sustainable development in engineering education” they state.

Assessment triangulation is achieved through the use of multiple tools and methods, indicate Abdulaala et al (2011, 398). Direct measures include individual student or team “assignments, a course design notebook, oral presentations, artefact evaluation and a defect removal assignment. Indirect measures include class feedback forms, process checks, entry and exit surveys, outcome survey and a course evaluation questionnaire”. Abdulaala et al (2011, 398) define quality work “as essentially complete and correct work that is documented neatly in a well-organised fashion and submitted on time” and to help students submit quality work, they are “referred to a set of checklists that define what is expected from their assignments”. The assessment range includes “exceeds expectations (E), meets expectations (M), acceptable (AC), needs improvement (NI) or represents no credible effort (NCE)”.

Abdulaala, R.M., Al-Bahib, A.M., Solimanc, A.Y. and Iskanderanid , F.I. (2011). Design and implementation of a project-based active/cooperative engineering design course for freshmen. European Journal of Engineering Education, 36 (4), 391–402.

Learning climate model: variables impacting Assignment Freedom and Problem Drive

This post follows on two previous posts about the learning climate model comprising two axes, namely ‘Assignment Freedom’ (AF) versus ‘Active Problem Drive’ (PD) and four quadrants. Federau (2006, 43) emphasises that “THERE IS NO ‘BEST PLACE’ IN THE GRID” and cautions that “many variables will [or may] influence the learning climate”.

Federau (2006, 44) presents “Educational Grid Variables” in a table. The working group (WG) identified operational variables/parameters controllable by either the academia or ‘workplace advocates’ (individuals providing an environment that will maximise PJB/PjBL) or “that can be documented, making assessment of the learning climate possible”. The WG admit that “there are other important [variables or] parameters involved”, which are of “an intrinsic nature” and may “therefore have a great impact on the motivational drive in an educational situation”. The table below—based on Federau’s Table 1 (2006, 44)—lists the WG’s identified operational variables/ parameters. The indicated effects on the AF- and PD-values reflect the WG’s initial assumptions. Federau, however, points out that the strength of the effects of the variable/parameter should be graduated as indicated (or even more precisely using values on a scale from 1 to 10), not just ‘yes’ or ‘no’ as the WG did.

Operational variables/parameters	Effect on ‘Assignment Freedom’   (AF)				Effect on ‘Active Problem Drive’   (PD)
	Not at all	Possibly not	In some degree	Defini-tely	Not at all	Possibly not	In some degree	Defini-tely
Student influence on content			Yes		No
Degree of prior knowledge			Yes				Yes
Introduction to group work			Yes				Yes
Guidance policy	No						Yes
Assignment structure			Yes		No
Student delivery	No						Yes
Examination (summative)			Yes		No

Federau (2006, 44-47) provides “short descriptions of the WG’s perception of the effect of the variables”:

• Student influence on content is of great importance in describing the degree of project organisation.
• The degree of prior knowledge of students has a heavy [reducing if present] influence on the degree of how problem-based a piece of education is.
• Introduction to group work will influence the values measured by both axes— Federau (2006, 45) suggests to plan a ‘pathfinder’ portion to match the learning situation and the ability of the students.
• The students’ guidance policy must first and foremost guide the students by explaining only principles and by indicating where ‘missing’ knowledge can be found—never answer a question that has not been asked.
• Assignment structure: the more detailed the written assignment is and the more demands there are on form, the less project-organised it will be—project-organised group work is not problem-based by definition.
• If student delivery quality has an impact on the final mark of the student or the group it can have a negative effect on the problem drive value. If the group knows that the final marking will more or less depend on the character of their delivery, the students will concentrate on ‘getting the right answer(s)’ and their use of presentation tools rather than on understanding the scientific principles behind the solution(s) presented in their delivery.
• Using individual examination and marking will underline the perception of group dynamics being regarded as tools for education.

Federau, M., 2006. Problem-oriented, project-based education in civil engineering, Part 1. In: I. Manilou, ed., Report in inquiries into European higher education in civil engineering, 6th Euceet volume. Bucahrest, Romania: CONSPRESS, 30–47. Available from: http://www.euceet.eu/publications/index.php?id=7 [Accessed 10 April 2014].

What the learning climate grid can be used for?

This post follows on ‘using the learning climate model to prepare good problems’ which presents a summary of Federau’s (2006) ‘prologue’ and the learning climate model comprising two axes: The ordinate/vertical the concept ‘Assignment Freedom’, and the abscissa/horizontal ‘Active Problem Drive’. “The score, i.e. the (x,y) or (PD,AF) value, will then give an indication of how ‘project-oriented’ and how ‘problem-based’ the learning situation and learning climate are” (Federau 2006, 41).

Federau (2006, 42-43) next explains “what can the model be used for?” The working group (WG) hopes “that the Learning Climate Grid can serve as a ‘common language’ when referring to” to problem- and project-based learning (PBL and PjBL respectively).

The learning climate grid (model) may be used to depict the transition from lecturer-driven teaching to “project organised, problem-driven” learning by students (line 1 in the figure 3 from Federau 2006, 42). The ‘grid’ may also be used to indicate the development “towards using PBL in non-project organised course units (line 2, figure 3)” or modules. By using the ‘grid’ it is possible “to place certain ways of organising PBL in an operational context”, however not precisely.

 

Because it would not be possible to ‘place’ specified learning situation and/or materials “precisely in the grid, a subdivision as shown in figure 4 [from Federau (2006, 43)] could be useful”. The placing of a learning situation and/or materials “in one of the quadrants could help the development of a common PBL language”. “The (PD,AF) value (0,0)”, depicts lecturer-driven teaching with the lecturer as ‘purveyor of knowledge’ or ‘provider of facts’. However, the “first quadrant as a whole equals a situation where some attempts have been made to make learning more problem-driven”. Federau (2006, 43) emphasises that “THERE IS NO ‘BEST PLACE’ IN THE GRID” and explains the remaining quadrants as follow:

• The learning climate of the third quadrant is what is usually understood by PBL: A high degree of focus on the development of learning competence (problem drive) and at the same time also of personal competence by implementing project parameters.
• The fourth quadrant describes a situation probably not so well known: Highly problem-driven education with little or no use of project parameters. The education is group-organised with little or no lecturing. Very often discipline oriented education is found here.
• The second quadrant describes a situation where high emphasis is placed on using project parameters, but also where the full advantage of problem drive not is taken.

 

Federau (2006, 43) cautions that operational “variables changes from situation to situation” such as “the lecturers’ ability and approach, from subject to subject, with students’ ‘seniority’ in the system, as a function of the ‘subject’ (f. ex. mathematics versus design)”. More about this in a subsequent post.

Federau, M., 2006. Problem-oriented, project-based education in civil engineering, Part 1. In: I. Manilou, ed., Report in inquiries into European higher education in civil engineering, 6th Euceet volume. Bucahrest, Romania: CONSPRESS, 30–47. Available from: http://www.euceet.eu/publications/index.php?id=7 [Accessed 10 April 2014].