Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011 - rees2009

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) Página 527 de 957
assert that environments that do not support students’ competence, relatedness, and
autonomy needs result in poorer outcomes in motivation, performance, and well-being.
Both self-regulation and self-determination theories acknowledge the impact of the
environment on the individual as the individual strives toward autonomy. How a student
responds may depend on both the instructor’s teaching strategies and the student’s
learning strategies (Vermunt &Vermetten, 2004). Where they complement each other, a
state of congruence exists; when they are not compatible, Vermunt and Verloop (1999)
describe the outcome as “friction”, which itself has two forms—constructive and
destructive. Constructive friction occurs when the incompatibility between teaching and
learning strategies results in the student learning new approaches to thinking and
learning. Destructive friction can occur when teachers take over for students who are
employing learning strategies the teacher feels will not lead to a positive outcome or when
the students do not have the level of self-regulatory skills that the teacher assumes they
have.
Different course designs activate different goal structures, student expectations and
student behaviours. We suggest that in order to be lifelong learners, students must first be
self-regulated learners developing into self-determined learners. In order for this to occur,
students must be supported in and have opportunities for taking control of the learning
process. Support and opportunity can come in many forms. This study looks at just two
variants of student-centered learning pedagogies.
Methodology
A mixed-method triangulation research design was employed where both qualitative and
quantitative data were collected during a defined research period and analysed
simultaneously. A case study design constituted the qualitative methodology; a nonexperimental
comparative design defined the quantitative methodology. Sampling of
courses was purposeful in that particular courses were chosen on the basis of pedagogy:
one required chemical engineering course was taught using a problem-based format
(PBL); one elective failure analysis course using a project-based format (PjBL). Both
formats are student-centered pedagogies based in constructivist theory (Savery & Duffy,
2001). Critical features of PBL are that students actively engage with authentic tasks that
become the vehicles for further learning; students determine what they will need to know
and how and where to find it; students constantly monitor their understanding; the use of
collaborative teams is integral; and the instructor provides appropriate scaffolding and
acts as a mentor who pushes the students to deeper learning through questioning and
challenging assumptions (Barron et al., 1998; Savery & Duffy, 1995). Problem-based
learning relies on the use of authentic but simulating problems that students, with the
appropriate assistance from the teacher, can solve together. There are specific content
objectives with each problem. Projects, on the other hand, are ill-defined, complex, and
open-ended. Barron, et al. (1998) suggests that problem-based is the scaffold to projectbased
learning.
Although both courses emphasized team-based problem solving and offered significant
opportunities for student-student and instructor-student interactions, the types of
Proceedings of Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011
Madrid, 4 th - 7 th October 2011