Knowledge disagreement formulations in problem-based learning tutorials: balancing pedagogical demands with ‘saving face’

McQuade, Robert; Wiggins, Sally; Ventura-Medina, Esther; Anderson, Tony

doi:10.1080/19463014.2018.1495089

Cited by 15 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…the misalignment between what they already know, and the requirements of the problem to be solved) (De Grave, Boshuizen & Schmidt, 1996), and it is through their debates with one another that rich knowledge stances are acquired, and deeper learning occurs in arriving at successful solutions (Aarnio et al, 2013). Recent interactional research involving PBL in engineering has shown how students -even in the absence of the tutor -exhibit effective self-management strategies during knowledge disagreements (McQuade, Wiggins, Ventura-Medina & Anderson, 2018), which reaffirms the point that students must be given the educational freedom to negotiate these critical discussions themselves. Therefore, if the openended nature of PBL is to be sustained, new PBL tutors must be sufficiently supported in making the transition towards facilitator of student-centred learning (Azer, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Civil Engineering 4 Real (CE4R): co-curricular learning for undergraduates

Murray

Hendry

McQuade

2019

European Journal of Engineering Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vocational disciplines such as engineering provide an ideal opportunity for contextualising the curriculum. The provision of co-curricular activities can stimulate students to assimilate their prior knowledge and skills whilst enhancing employability attributes. Team-based cocurricular activities linked to problem-based learning (PBL) can offer students a quasiauthentic experience of engineering practice. In this paper, we provide a case study of a successful co-curricular initiative supported by local civil engineering employers. Civil Engineering 4 Real (CE4R) are evening workshops facilitated by practicing engineers, where student attendance is voluntary. Students use authentic documentation and collaborate in peer learning to solve industrial problems. CE4R has assisted student's anticipatory socialisation into their disciplinary profession. However, further research is required to establish the cognitive legacy that students gain from attending CE4R. There is also a need to explore the industrial experience within the UK higher education landscape (Tennant et al, 2015; Foster et al, 2017;Pilcher et al, 2017) and anecdotal evidence suggests that this can compromise the authenticity of the learning and assessment regime within an engineering curriculum.Academic role models tend to display research identities rather than the industrial disciplinary identities that would assist students to learn through mirroring "real-life situations and require the practising of the ways of thinking and problem solving employed by actual experts in relevant fields" (Kreber, 2013, p.19).In light of these issues, the current paper is organised as follows. In the next section, we examine the call for HE to recognise the value of co-curricular/extra-curricular learning and the concept of hybrid problem-based learning (PBL). This is followed by an introduction to the Civil Engineering 4 Real (CE4R) initiative; a co-curricular series of evening workshops designed to combine prior curricular knowledge with real-life engineering problems and scenarios. The next section provides a justification for our research methodology whereupon we draw insights from selected student feedback. The following section provides a discussion of four key findings from our analysis (relevant learning; links (and gaps) identified between CE4R sessions and curriculum; importance/appreciation of problems being 'real'; value of team work) before we offer our overall conclusions to the research. Co-curricular learning: a hybrid problem/project-based approachThere has been a growth in the number of references made to what students do outside the formal curriculum. Whilst some researchers (Wankel & Wankel, 2016) view co-curricular and extra-curricular as having interchangeable meaning, when we refer to 'co-curricular' we mean extensions of the disciplinary learning experience whereby students are able to assimilate knowledge and skills related to their professional practice within an academic programme.'Extra-curricular' refers to activities that may be coordi...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Civil Engineering 4 Real (CE4R): co-curricular learning for undergraduates

Murray

Hendry

McQuade

2019

European Journal of Engineering Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The trainee responds to his suggestions by referring to the external source again: she repeats that she has checked the specific guidelines (lines 43‐47) and it says ‘just ordinary benzos’. By bringing up the guideline, the trainee appears to be appealing to an external authority and thus minimising the disagreement 42 . In the end, supervisor and trainee do not align; the trainee ultimately states that it's unnecessary to consult these specialists because they will reach the same conclusion.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By bringing up the guideline, the trainee appears to be appealing to an external authority and thus minimising the disagreement. 42 In the end, supervisor and trainee do not align; the trainee ultimately states that it's unnecessary to consult these specialists because they will reach the same conclusion. In this example, we see that ignoring the trainee's expressed knowledge by immediately suggesting alternatives prevents a knowledge exchange in which trainee and supervisor come to a shared decision or a general consensus on which knowledge is decisive, the medical guidelines or practical experience.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bidirectional learning opportunities: How GP‐supervisors and trainees exchange knowledge

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are a host of well documented difficulties in ensuring that every member of a team reaches the same learning outcomes during group work. [ 26,27 ] In this course format, this is accentuated, and both student‐reported and anecdotal evidence suggests that in some groups a subset of students take on the experimental design and decision‐making tasks, while other members take care of the more familiar aspects of the deliverables, thus bypassing most open‐ended course design elements and benefits. This causes an imbalance in the level to which each student benefits from this experience, which requires active participation to get the most out of it.…”

Section: Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimenting with labs: Practical and pedagogical considerations for the integration of problem‐based lab instruction in chemical engineering

Ghaemi

Potvin

2021

Can J Chem Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laboratory instruction is a core component of the training of chemical engineers. The hands-on experiences in the laboratory are designed to facilitate the development of critical analytical skills, establish links between theory and reality, and develop transferrable skills. In the Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering (CHBE) at the University of British Columbia (UBC), the senior laboratory course was designed using a Problem-Based Laboratory (PBL) approach to shift part of the responsibility for the learning experience from the instructor to the students, with the aim to improve learning outcomes. In this course, student teams perform 10-week open-ended labs in which they design and execute unique experimental plans to address industrially relevant problem statements. This course leverages student autonomy and ownership of their work, the flexibility of deliverables, and low-stakes opportunities to make and fix mistakes to increase student engagement, which in turn facilitates the development of critical thinking and decision-making skills and increases student confidence in their engineering abilities. This paper synthesizes student feedback, performance data, instructor observations, and logistical experiences over several iterations of this course to identify the key elements required for the successful implementation of PBL instruction. The rationale for this shift in pedagogical approaches, the pedagogical grounding underpinning this design, the basic course structure and its reception by students, and the main challenges of this type of course implementation in chemical engineering are also presented.

show abstract

Knowledge disagreement formulations in problem-based learning tutorials: balancing pedagogical demands with ‘saving face’

Abstract: This project is funded by The Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council Award (EPSRC Reference 1827113). The authors would like to thank the manuscript reviewers for their attention to detail and for such supportive comments throughout the publication process.

Cited by 15 publications

References 55 publications

Civil Engineering 4 Real (CE4R): co-curricular learning for undergraduates

Civil Engineering 4 Real (CE4R): co-curricular learning for undergraduates

Bidirectional learning opportunities: How GP‐supervisors and trainees exchange knowledge

Experimenting with labs: Practical and pedagogical considerations for the integration of problem‐based lab instruction in chemical engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About