El movimiento ambientalista y la lucha por la incidencia

PBL is described as the learning initiative from the outcome of the process in understanding a problem (Wood, D. R., 1994, cited in Northwood et al., 2003). PBL was first developed for medical education in 1969 in the medical school at McMaster University, and since then the approach has become common in medical institutions (Walker et al., 2009; McFalls, 2013). The approach is also largely conceived and developed in other discipline, initially for training lawyers and clinical practitioners, and then subsequently adopted for other professional courses (Savin-Baden, 2000). Nevertheless, it is just as appropriate for engineering subjects, consumer sciences, and traditional academic subjects (Ward et al., 2002; Northwood et al., 2003).

PBL is an alternative approach to learning that facilitates a multitude of strategies critical for success in the 21st century (Bell, 2010). The main goals of PBL are: to promote deep learning (Woods, 2003); to help students develop their generic skills such as flexible knowledge, effective problem-solving, self-directed learning, effective collaboration and intrinsic motivation (Tchudi et al., 1996; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Gibbings et al., 2007); higher-order thinking; multi-disciplinary learning; independent learning; teamwork and communication - all of which motivate students to prolong lifelong learning (Paul, 2010).

In PBL, students are responsible for their learning. Masek et al. (2010) and Mohd-Yusof et al. (2004) described PBL as another method which results in Student-Centred Learning (SCL).

62

SCL is an innovative learning method that is believed to increase student engagement in the learning process (Masek et al., 2010). Lecturers act as facilitators, moderators or advisors (Ward et al., 2002) to oversee each step of the process, give reflection and discuss each choice, before the student starts off in their particular direction (Savin-Baden, 2000). SCL has also been highlighted as an important element in educational policy. For example, the Bologna process in Europe emphasised the need for more SCL in intended learning outcomes (Communiqué, 2009).

PBL is in contrast to traditional approaches which are teacher centred and where knowledge is limited to the teacher and textbook (Northwood et al., 2003). In order to create a student- centred approach through PBL, it is necessary that faculties give up traditional ways of instruction and places the responsibility for learning directly on the student (Ozbicakci et al., 2012).

Claims made with regards to the value of PBL in HE suggest that it represents “an effective method for professional education programmes and across Higher Education of relevant professional problem-solving” (Murray‐Harvey et al., 2005, p. 257). However, Kolmos (2010) and Prince (2004) argued, based on the literature, faculties adopting PBL are unlikely to see improvement in student test scores, but are likely to see improved students’ attitudes, behaviours and habits in learning independently. Othman et al. (2009) provided three principles of how PBL can specifically affect engineering students in their learning process.

i. Students realise the importance of changing their perspective about learning.

ii. Students pay more attention to the process, rather than concentrating on the end product of learning.

iii. Students experience more opportunities of learning activities (p. 9).

Guidelines have been developed by researchers to change the traditional curriculum to a PBL curriculum (Paul, 2010), the roles of the management in implementing PBL in institutes (Kolmos et al., 2007; Kolmos, 2010); and the role of tutors (De Grave et al., 1999; Wee et al., 2001).

Jonassen et al. (2006) claimed that adopting PBL in the curricula helped to prepare engineering graduates to become better workplace problem-solvers. Many educators and researchers around the world have tried, tested and delivered the majority of their curricula via PBL and there is evidence from a growing literature on the use of PBL in various engineering degree programmes. Table 2-8 summarises the universities involved in delivering

63

their engineering programmes via PBL according to its country.

Table 2-8Engineering programmes delivering their engineering programme via PBL

(Source: author)

Country University Engineering Programme

Australia University of Southern Queensland

(Gibbings et al., 2007)

Agricultural, Civil and Environmental Engineering; Electrical Engineering; Electronic and Computer Engineering; and Mechanical and Mechatronic Engineering. Malaysia University of Malaya (Said et al., 2005) Electrical Engineering

Port Dickson Polytechnic (Krishnan et al., 2009)

Electrical Engineering

University of Technology Malaysia (Mohd- Yusof et al., 2004)

Chemical Engineering

Denmark Aalborg University (Kolmos et al., 2013) Civil Engineering; Mechanical, Production and Management Engineering

India Shri Ramswaroop Memorial Group of

Professionals (Yadav et al., 2011)

Electronics and

Communication Engineering United

States of America

Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh (Cline et al., 1997)

Chemical Engineering

George Institute of Technology, Georgia (LaPlaca et al., 2001)

Bio-Medical Engineering

The change to the PBL approach is not dependent on individuals. The organizational levels, especially the management of an institute, have to involved to ensure the successful of the approach (Scott, 2003). It is not surprising if academic staff feel confident and satisfied with their existing teaching practice. However, management should establish a process where academic staff reflect on the advantages and disadvantages of the current practice, and also provide awareness of alternative practices, such as PBL (Kolmos, 2010). Another suggestion, described by Kolmos (2010) for encouraging teachers to change their approach, is to set a vision of the HE institution. Academic staff should be involved during the process in order to create ownership and motivation. Jamison et al. (2014) also agreed with Kolmos’ statement, and described the process of changing the curricula as also a process of changing the university’s mission and vision (p. 265). Jonassen et al. (2006) suggested that engineering faculties that lacked support to develop PBL can utilise the online application to support PBL environments.

64

When academic staff change their role to facilitators, moderators or advisors, it is important to ensure students’ engagement with their learning. Students’ engagement is “the extent to which students are actively engaged in, or committed to and actively involved in their own learning” (Markwell, 2007, p. 6). Academic staff should make themselves available to consult with students outside the classroom (Weinert, 1999), make the students feel comfortable, and create the sense of belonging to a learning community (Coates, 2005). In addition they should motivate students to co-operate with each other by structuring the team when performing group work (Koppenhaver et al., 2003). Similarly, Markwell (2007) briefly described several elements that can contribute to student engagement. Among the elements are:

 Attendance at and active participation during class.

 Clarification of what students have learnt in class, along with discussing other aspects of their lives.

 Collaborative work and motivation of students to establish informal communication among peers.

 Interaction with surrounding people, such as academic staff, support staff and others.  A sense of belonging to the community, university or college (p. 6)