Problem-Oriented and Project-Based Learning (POPBL) as an Innovative Learning Strategy for Sustainable Development in Engineering Education.
25 Jun 2008-European Journal of Engineering Education (Taylor & Francis)-Vol. 33, Iss: 3, pp 283-295
TL;DR: In order for engineers to be able to handle sustainability-related problems, their education needs to allow for interplay, mix and diversity; aspects that a problem-oriented and project-based learning approach will involve.
Abstract: In a world where systems are increasingly larger, where their boundaries are often difficult to identify, and where societal rather than technical issues play increasingly bigger roles, problems cannot be solved by applying a technical solution alone It thus becomes important for engineers to be skilled not only in terms of their particular technical field but also their ability to identify non-technical aspects of problems, the interaction between these aspects and possible solutions Introducing and integrating these aspects into engineering education is certainly not an easy task and requires innovative approaches In this article, focus is placed on the so-called Aalborg Model, a problem-oriented and project-based learning paradigm utilised at Aalborg University (Denmark), and the mutual benefits that this particular learning strategy provides for students, faculty and communities The article discusses the concept of sustainable development; accounts for the general capabilities of engineer
Citations
More filters
01 Jan 2008
TL;DR: By J. Biggs and C. Tang, Maidenhead, England; Open University Press, 2007.
Abstract: by J. Biggs and C. Tang, Maidenhead, England,
Open University Press, 2007, 360 pp., £29.99, ISBN-13: 978-0-335-22126-4
938 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a comprehensive, systematic review of the literature on integrating sustainability into curricula at both an undergraduate and postgraduate level of study in one particular subject area, engineering.
115 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors report an educational initiative and research project based on collaboration between Beijing Normal University, China and Aalborg University, Denmark: developing a sustainability curriculum using the methodology of Problem and Project Based Learning (PBL) in a Chinese context.
104 citations
TL;DR: In the last 40 years, problem-and project-based learning (PBL) has been widely adopted in engineering education because of its expected effectiveness in developing students' professional know-how as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: During the last 40 years, problem- and project-based learning (PBL) has been widely adopted in engineering education because of its expected effectiveness in developing students’ professional knowl...
95 citations
Cites background from "Problem-Oriented and Project-Based ..."
...…level to the course level, from being problem-orientated to project-orientated, and from being one subject to multidisciplinary, but the fundamental principle remains that students are motivated by themselves and become owners of the learning process (Edström and Kolmos 2014; Lehmann et al. 2008)....
[...]
...PBL implementation strategies in different culture settings and educational systems range from the curriculum level to the course level, from being problem-orientated to project-orientated, and from being one subject to multidisciplinary, but the fundamental principle remains that students are motivated by themselves and become owners of the learning process (Edström and Kolmos 2014; Lehmann et al. 2008)....
[...]
TL;DR: Challenge-based learning (CBL) as discussed by the authors is a multidisciplinary approach that encourages students to work actively with peers, teachers and stakeholders in society to identify complex challenges, formulate r...
Abstract: Challenge-based learning (CBL) is a multidisciplinary approach that encourages students to work actively with peers, teachers and stakeholders in society to identify complex challenges, formulate r...
74 citations
Cites background from "Problem-Oriented and Project-Based ..."
...In the later stages of research into the format of sustainability education, an emergent advocacy towards project- and problem-based approaches (e.g. Brundiers and Wiek 2013; Lehmann et al. 2008; Wiek et al. 2014), experiential approaches (Caniglia et al....
[...]
...…into the format of sustainability education, an emergent advocacy towards project- and problem-based approaches (e.g. Brundiers and Wiek 2013; Lehmann et al. 2008; Wiek et al. 2014), experiential approaches (Caniglia et al. 2016; Savage et al. 2015) and competencebased education (e.g.…...
[...]
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1999
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a framework for the generation of ILOs for a course by identifying the kind of knowledge to be learned (declarative or functioning) and the level of understanding or performance to be achieved.
Abstract: generalize create, solve unseen problems, extrapolate to unknown domains 22831.indb 124 6/15/11 2:11 PM Designing intended learning outcomes 125 • the verb at the appropriate level of understanding or of performance intended; • the topic content the verb is meant to address, the object of the verb in other words; • the context of the content discipline in which the verb is to be deployed. The ILOs for the course The Nature of Teaching and Learning illustrate these points: 1 Explain why a particular course topic is important to teaching. 2 Apply a course topic to your own teaching. 3 Refl ect on your teaching in terms of a working theory you have gained from the course. 4 Evaluate a situation that has gone wrong and apply a solution. The fi rst refers to declarative knowledge: the students have to reach a level of understanding that requires them to explain something, not just describe or list it: the latter only display multistructural levels of understanding, but explaining requires students to be able to relate the topic to the context of teaching and is at a relational level of understanding. The second is a functioning knowledge example also at the relational level as it requires a level of understanding that enables the student to apply the topic to teaching. The other two are also about functioning knowledge and should be at the relational to extended abstract level of understanding, depending on the originality of the student’s response. The content in (3) is the student’s own working theory and the context the student’s own teaching, and in (4), the content is the theory used in evaluating and the context the problematic situation in teaching. As a note on the number of ILOs per course, we stated earlier that there should be no more fi ve or six ILOs for any course, even though there may be up to ten topics that need addressing. The answer is to write integrating ILOs that address several topics, or, as in ILOs (1) and (2) above, the ILO allows the student to select just one topic for demonstrating ability to achieve the ILO. Another thing to watch out for are redundant ILOs, such as ‘Describe and explain . . .’. ‘Describe’ is redundant because if the student can explain the topic, he or she can certainly describe it. The other matter one should keep in mind at this stage is that desirable but unintended outcomes, or outcomes unforeseen by the teacher, may emerge. This is the nature of extended abstract responses by the student, and they will be accounted for in the normal assessment, but others may simply be things that the student sees as important and relevant learning. This matter becomes a practical issue during assessment, and we address it in Chapter 10. You should now be in a position to design and write your own ILOs for a course you are teaching (Task 7.1). 22831.indb 125 6/15/11 2:11 PM 126 Designing constructively aligned outcomes-based teaching and learning Task 7.1 Writing course ILOs Take a course that you are teaching. Consider the course aim and write the course ILOs by identifying: a the kind of knowledge to be learned (declarative or functioning). b the content or topic to be learned. c the level of understanding or performance to be achieved. d any particular context in which the outcome verb is to be enacted. The following grid may be a useful framework to help you think. Kind of knowledge Level of Content topic Context Declar/function understanding (outcome verb) ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Now go across the rows and write out the course ILOs by stating the intended level of understanding or performance (outcome verb), topic and the context in which the verb is to be enacted. There is no need to include the kind of knowledge in the ILO as that is defi ned by the verb(s) you use. To recap an example of a course ILO from our course The Nature of Teaching and Learning : Students should be able to: Refl ect (level of understanding and performance) on your teaching (context) in terms of a working theory you have gained from the course (content). Now write your course ILOs. Students should be able to: ILO1: _______________________________________________________ ILO2: _______________________________________________________ ILO3: _______________________________________________________ 22831.indb 126 6/15/11 2:11 PM Designing intended learning outcomes 127 Aligning ILOs at three levels: curriculum mapping Now that we have written the course ILOs, we have the task of checking to see that the three levels of intended outcomes, graduate, programme and course, are aligned. We can achieve this by curriculum mapping (Huet et al. 2009), which is a systematic means of ensuring alignment between programme ILOs and graduate outcomes, and course ILOs and programme ILOs. Graduate outcomes and programme ILOs Table 7.4 shows a simply way of checking the alignment between graduate outcomes and programme ILOs. The table is a device to ensure that the match between programme ILOs and graduate outcomes has at least been considered. Programme ILOs should not be forced to match graduate outcomes that don’t belong in the programme. Because of the different natures of different disciplines or professions, different programmes may have different emphases in addressing the graduate outcomes. It is not necessary that every programme should address all graduate outcomes to the same extent because some may not be relevant to the programme. Programme ILOs are simply the reasons that the programme is being taught, which is a matter of professional and academic judgment. However, university policy will prevail on this. Task 7.2 parallels Table 7.4: it asks you to align programme ILOs with the graduate outcomes of your university, if it has any. If the programme ILOs ILO4: _______________________________________________________ ILO5:_______________________________________________________ ILO6:_______________________________________________________ Review the ILOs to see whether: a the kind of knowledge, content and level of understanding or performance are relevant to achieve the course aim. b they cover all the main reasons for teaching the course. c they are clearly written, especially in identifying the level of understanding or performance to be achieved by the students, and the context (if appropriate). d the number is manageable for designing aligned teaching/learning activities and assessment tasks. How does this new set of course ILOs compare to your existing course ‘objectives’? Does the existing set need to be rewritten? 22831.indb 127 6/15/11 2:11 PM 128 Designing constructively aligned outcomes-based teaching and learning haven’t yet been articulated, discuss them with the programme coordinator and derive a set, then match them with the graduate outcomes. This should give you a clearer idea of how graduate outcomes can suitably be addressed in your teaching. How does your attempt gel with your university’s policy on this? Gelade and Fursenko (2007) also describe a tool for systematically mapping courses and programmes for graduate outcomes. Task 7.2 Aligning programme ILOs with graduate outcomes 1 Take a programme in which you are teaching and either list the programme ILOs if they are already articulated or, if they are not, sit down with the programme coordinator or programme committee chairperson and fi rst write the aims of the programme and a list of programme ILOs that meet those aims. 2 What are the graduate outcomes of your university? List them in the left-hand column in the grid below. 3 In the right-hand column list the programme ILOs that would address the graduate outcomes. Are all graduate outcomes addressed somewhere? Which are not? Does it matter?’ Graduate outcomes Programme ILO 1 2 etc. Table 7.4 An example of aligning programme ILOs with graduate outcomes Graduate outcomes Programme ILO Competent in professional Analyse and apply principles to real-life practice accounting situations Communicate effectively Communicate as a professional with clients and colleagues in real-life accounting situations Teamwork Operate effectively and ethically as a team member in real-life accounting situations Ethical professional As above 22831.indb 128 6/15/11 2:11 PM Designing intended learning outcomes 129 Programme ILOs and course ILOs The next level of alignment is between the programme and the course ILOs. As each programme is served by its constituent courses, it is important that, when aligning course ILOs to the programme ILOs, the course ILOs in total address all aspects of the programme ILOs. Often a programme ILO will be addressed by several courses, from different and increasingly more complex angles. You may attempt this in Task 7.3. Task 7.3 Aligning course ILOs with programme ILOs For individual teachers 1 List the programme ILOs of the programme. 2 List the course ILOs of the courses that you are teaching in a given programme. 3 Consider what programme ILO(s) each of the course ILOs addresses in the following table. Programme ILOs Course 1 ILOs Course 2 ILOs Course 3 ILOs
6,414 citations
01 Jan 2008
TL;DR: Biggs and Tang as discussed by the authors, 2007, 360 pp., £29.99, ISBN-13: 978-0-335-22126-4, ISBN-14: 978.
Abstract: by J. Biggs and C. Tang, Maidenhead, England, Open University Press, 2007, 360 pp., £29.99, ISBN-13: 978-0-335-22126-4
4,862 citations
Book•
05 Jan 2004
TL;DR: In this paper, the limits of the two opposing paradigms of sustainability in an accessible and illuminating way are explored, and the critical forms of natural capital in need of preservation given risk, uncertainty and ignorance about the future are identified.
Abstract: In the debate about sustainable development, the key question is whether natural capital can be substituted by man-made capital. Proponents of weak sustainability maintain that man-made and natural capital are substitutable in the long term whilst followers of strong sustainability believe they are not. This insightful book assesses whether science can unambiguously endorse either paradigm and explores the extent to which, and at what cost, certain forms of natural capital should be preserved. The book explores the limits of the two opposing paradigms of sustainability in an accessible and illuminating way. The author begins by examining the availability of natural resources for the production of consumption goods and the environmental consequences of economic growth. He also identifies the critical forms of natural capital in need of preservation given risk, uncertainty and ignorance about the future, and addresses the important topic of sustainability indicators. In doing so, he analyses indicators of weak sustainability such as Genuine Savings and the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare, and indicators of strong sustainability including ecological footprints, material flows, sustainability gaps and other measures which combine the setting of environmental standards with monetary valuation. For the most part, requiring only a basic knowledge and understanding of economics, this accessible book will ensure the important theoretical and empirical debates surrounding sustainable development are available for a wide audience including undergraduate and postgraduate students of environmental and ecological economics. It will also be of interest to researchers and policymakers involved in the sustainable management of environmental resources.
1,006 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors lay the groundwork for an empirical analysis of the question of how far sustainable development can be achieved through stakeholder relations management (SRM) through which corporations are confronted with economic, social, and environmental stakeholder claims.
Abstract: Sustainable development (SD) – that is, “Development that meets the needs of current generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs and aspirations” – can be pursued in many different ways. Stakeholder relations management (SRM) is one such way, through which corporations are confronted with economic, social, and environmental stakeholder claims. This paper lays the groundwork for an empirical analysis of the question of how far SD can be achieved through SRM. It describes the so-called SD–SRM perspective as a distinctive research approach and shows how it relates to the wider body of stakeholder theory. Next, the concept of SD is operationalized for the microeconomic level with reference to important documents. Based on the ensuing SD framework, it is shown how SD and SRM relate to each other, and how the two concepts relate to other popular concepts such as Corporate Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility. The paper concludes that the significance of societal guiding models such as SD and of management approaches like CSR is strongly dependent on their footing in society.
688 citations
"Problem-Oriented and Project-Based ..." refers background in this paper
...Furthermore, there is also the question to which extent one kind of potential (or capital) may compensate for another, i.e. the notions of weak vsersus strong versus balanced sustainability, see e.g. Neumayer (2003), Kjærgård and Bondesen (1997) and Steurer et al. (2005)....
[...]