Problem-based and Project-based Learning in Engineering and Medicine: Determinants of Students’ Engagement and Persistance

Abstract

This paper presents results of a study conducted with undergraduate students involved in either problem-or project-based curricula (Medicine and Engineering, respectively) at the Université de Sherbrooke, Canada. The objective of the present research was to measure the impact of these innovative curricula on students' engagement and persistence in higher education. Our research question was: What determinants better predict students' engagement and persistence in innovative curricula such as PBL? Nine variables were examined as potential predictors of both factors (engagement and persistence). Results showed a variation in variables predicting engagement and persistence, with the most significant predictor being stress related.

The Effects of a Collaborative Problem-based Learning Experience on Students’ Motivation in Engineering Capstone Courses

“…Although prior studies of PBL have explored specific motivation constructs such as self-efficacy (Bédard, Lison, Dalle, Côté, & Boutin, 2012;Dunlap, 2006) and specific components of course design such as group processes and student resources (Henry, Tawfik, Jonassen, Winholtz, & Khanna, 2012), few if any studies have provided a holistic exploration of established motivation constructs and concrete elements of PBL pedagogies such as the one described in this study. It is noteworthy that while the descriptions of PBL such as those provided by Hmelo-Silver (2004), de Graaf and, and Savery (2006) suggest that PBL can foster students' positive perceptions of the MUSIC components, poorly implemented PBL can risk fostering negative perceptions.…”

“…These results extend findings from other studies that examine motivation-related constructs in PBL environments. Though work on motivation theory and PBL is still young, some work has been conducted to explore constructs such as self-efficacy (Dunlap, 2006) and engagement (Bédard et al, 2012). For example, whereas Bédard et al (2012) found no direct predictive link between self-efficacy and engagement in the PBL environment, their work did indicate that supports (e.g., opportunities for personal growth) and reflexive thinking, which align with the MUSIC model constructs, do predict curricular engagement.…”

“…Though work on motivation theory and PBL is still young, some work has been conducted to explore constructs such as self-efficacy (Dunlap, 2006) and engagement (Bédard et al, 2012). For example, whereas Bédard et al (2012) found no direct predictive link between self-efficacy and engagement in the PBL environment, their work did indicate that supports (e.g., opportunities for personal growth) and reflexive thinking, which align with the MUSIC model constructs, do predict curricular engagement. Their study also documented that stress-related factors were dominant predictors of engagement and persistence, and that autonomy (aligned with empowerment in the present study) was a strong support system; the link here between empowerment and particular course elements such as project selection and control extend the quantitative results evidenced in that work.…”

An initiative for integrating problem-based learning into a lean manufacturing course of an industrial engineering graduate program

“…Collaborative learning and facilitator support can contribute to students' success beliefs by allowing them to engage in mastery experiences. The reflective components of PBL can also contribute to higher levels of individual interest in helping students explicitly articulate their growing comprehension of the real work (Hasna, 2008;Bédard et al, 2012).…”

“…Despite an increasing of publications, few studies have provided systematic evidence of PBL (Galand et al, 2012;Jones et al, 2013). Moreover, the adoption of PBL in engineering education is usually adapted to existing program structures and outcomes, which may change the PBL approach from its roots in medical schools, and suggests a potential lack of PBL research in engineering education (Distlehorst et al, 2005;Bédard et al, 2012). …”