Issues in making the transition from traditional teaching to project based learning

Project based learning (PBL) is a complex topic that has become a contentious issue in recent years. Amongst its supporters, PBL is seen as a great step forward in higher education. Through the eyes of its detractors, PBL is an unwarranted burden that presents no value. The latter point of view originates from those who have not experienced a PBL environment. There are challenges in implementing PBL as a means of delivering a programme in tertiary education. The teacher’s role is changed from that of knowledge giver to one of facilitator. Teachers need to be taught and assisted with new practices, and a PBL programme has to be designed for each institution proposing its uptake. It is claimed that the transition from traditional to PBL-based teaching is worth the effort as graduates are said to be “industry ready” to a greater extent than under the traditional system. Introduction PBL: Project-based or problem-based learning? A common answer to the question “Does PBL mean project-based or problem-based learning?” is “nobody really knows”. Perhaps a part of the real answer lies in the process of executing a project. Often the first step is to define the problem, after which the project is planned and executed in order to solve the problem. Hence it may fair to say that project-based learning includes problem based learning, as solving a problem does not necessarily include executing a project in the formal sense. In this paper PBL is taken to mean learning based on project work and on finding solutions to real problems. PBL is becoming widely accepted as a means of adding value to the learning experience in tertiary teaching institutions, and to producing “industry ready” graduates. There is a growing demand for graduates with, in addition to core engineering abilities, skills in team work, project management, negotiation, communication, computer literacy, problem solving, information literacy and a commitment to lifelong learning (Krishnan, Vale, & Gabb, 2007). The foregoing are often referred to as “soft” or “transferrable” skills. It is claimed that PBL is instrumental in equipping graduates with these skills (Kolmos, 2002, Sponken-Smith, 2009 and Krishnan et al., 2007). The School of Engineering at AUT University (Auckland, New Zealand) has made a commitment to introduce PBL to two of its degree programmes in 2011. The process of preparing for the transition to PBL is a complex one. There is no single prescription for PBL that can be applied to any teaching institution (Kolmos, 2002). Rather, a model must be developed for each application. Decisions about when (e.g. in first or subsequent years of the study programme) to implement PBL, and how much of the course content (a single paper, 50% or 100% of the curriculum) should be taught by PBL methods have to be made. Implications for teachers Teacher preparation and supervisory considerations are of vital importance in making the transition to PBL. Spronken-Smith and Harland (2009) report establishment of a “community of practice” (COP) for supporting teachers during the transition. It was considered necessary to develop a collective vision ISBN 1 876346 59 0 © 2009 AAEE 2009 417 about the desired learning outcomes of the PBL programme, ensure the necessary skills, incentives and resources are available for teachers, and develop an action plan for implementation. Implementers of PBL may need to overcome an “implementation hurdle”. When teachers relinquish control over curriculum content knowledge they are no longer required to be “knowledge-givers” and this can challenge their values, resulting in a reluctance to accept the new practice. Whist a fundamental change to teaching practice may provoke resistance among teachers, experience at Aalborg University (Denmark) suggests that the change to PBL has resulted in a 70% reduction in lecturer contact hours (Kolmos, 2002). Much of this reduction is attributed to students dividing their time equally between lectures and project work, and a change in assessment practice. After two years working with PBL at the University of Otago (New Zealand) it was stated that most teachers enjoyed teaching with PBL and found it rewarding. Some reported anxiety and stress due to a perceived lack of structure, while others found it wonderfully relaxing (Sponken-Smith & Harland, 2009). Kolmos (2002) reported that trust was an issue among staff in the early stages of the transition. Some staff stated that they would not trust the PBL model until they had been able to observe progress of a student cohort from the first year to completion of a master’s programme. Now that PBL has existed in one form or another for about three decades, there should be sufficient evidence that PBL is (if executed correctly) a teaching method that is worthy of trust. A number of PBL models exist. The Aalborg and Maastricht models have been established over several decades and are seen to be successful in providing well rounded graduates equipped with a good range of transferrable skills. Yet the two models have distinct differences. Students at Maastricht University (Netherlands) carry out small, well-defined projects and sit individual exams. At Aalborg, students undertake larger, loosely-defined projects and take a group, oral exam at the end of the process. At Aalborg, first-year students undertake a paper titled “Collaboration, learning and project management”. Other universities offer similar papers in the first year. It has been reported anecdotally that sceptics of PBL become “converts” once they have experienced it. PBL appears to have become a philosophy, and perhaps, in the eyes of some, a religion. As such it must be subject to intense scrutiny and question. Nevertheless there is evidence to suggest that introducing PBL changes the culture of an organization from one where teachers are somewhat remote and autocratic to one in which there is continuous interaction between staff and students. Implications for students The student experience of PBL is important. Third-year students at the University of Otago (New Zealand) undertaking a PBL-based course concurrently with three traditional, one-semester papers reported that they spent more time on the PBL paper than on the others. However student satisfaction scores for that paper increased from 2.9 (on a 1 to 5 scale, 5 being the best) under the traditional system, to 4.3 under the PBL format (Sponken-Smith, 2009). Students felt that knowledge gained through PBL would be more likely to be retained than would knowledge gained through cramming for an exam. Maori students, accustomed to being part of hui and other communal aspects of Maori life, saw group work as a way of life, and felt the lecture scenario was a foreign, uneasy way of learning. One of the soft skills said to be developed in the course of PBL is that of being able work across a range of disciplines. That being the case an interdisciplinary approach could be taken from the lowest level at which PBL is to be introduced. Thus the PBL implementation plan must define whether the PBL content is to be applied to a single course comprising single-subject material, or to a composite project module comprising subject material from a number of courses, taught either previously or concurrently. In the AUT context, where mechanical and electrotechnology disciplines are taught, it may mean that students from the two streams should form joint teams to undertake interdisciplinary projects. Engineers need to maintain lifelong learning and skill enhancement in order to preserve their value and maintain competitive advantage. Graduate engineers may never practice as engineers, but may become involved in business, management, law or even medicine.