Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011 - rees2009

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) Página 210 de 957
Research questions
The purpose of this study was to identify the extent to which engineering educators’
encountered tensions with the implementations of PBL in their teaching practice, both at
the classroom and at the system level. In the specific context of the first two years of
undergraduate engineering education, the research questions are:
1. Based on their teaching practice, what are the predominant tensions encountered
by engineering educators?
2. How do engineering educators manage these tensions?
Theoretical framework
In the context of this study, the definition of PBL is informed by the definitions offered by
Barrows (2002) and Savery (2006), but remains intentionally broad and inclusive of other
problem-focused pedagogies. While we adhere to the concepts that the problem is central
to the learning and should be ill-structured (open-ended), we are neutral in our stance on
whether PBL implementations should be at the course or curriculum level. Barrows’
(1986) taxonomy of PBL methods acknowledged the different ways that PBL could be
implemented based on the variation in context and objectives of the particular learning
environment. Therefore, in the rest of this document, PBL is described as a supported
learner-centered environment that makes use of open-ended problems as the basis for
learning both technical and professional knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Additionally, we
use activity theory (Engeström, 2001) as a lens through which to understand that
implementations of innovations such as PBL are, in fact, a human activity system (e.g.,
classroom level) embedded within a larger system (e.g., institution level) that represents a
culture, a way of being, and a set of objectives and goals. Within these interacting systems
exist tensions that could be envisioned not as problems, but as opportunities for change
and transformation.
Methodology
In this study, we defined our population as engineering educators in the Unites States. We
took a twophased approach to data collection: (1) a survey and (2) semi-structured
interviews. An online survey was launched to capture data about the experiences of
engineering educators with PBL implementations and the tensions encountered (Phase 1).
Hung et al. (2003) identified five tensions associated with PBL implementations and
Crawley et al. (2007) identified five tensions associated with engineering education
reform. Survey respondents were provided with each set of tensions taken from the
research literature and asked to force-rank them in order of frequency with which they
were encountered. It should be noted that the forced-choice aspect of these questions
provided data about the relative frequency of the named tensions in relation to each other,
and does not imply that top ranked tensions occur all the time in one’s teaching practice.
Survey data was analysed to produce descriptive statistics of the sample of respondents.
Proceedings of Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011
Madrid, 4 th - 7 th October 2011