Problembased Interdisciplinary Education for Sustainable Development

1
Problem-based Interdisciplinary Education for
Sustainable Development
Sustainable Development for Engineers and
Scientists MSEC30052
2
Contents

• Introduction
• Facilitation
• 2006 Exercises
• 2006 Evaluation

3
1. Introduction
4
Sustainable Development For Engineers and
Scientists

• Learning that is
• Inter-disciplinary
• Enquiry-based
• Student-centred

5
New Undergraduate Elective

• Optional 10 credit course unit (delivered over 12
  weeks)
• Offered to third years in four disciplines in
  2006/7
• Mech Eng, Civil Eng, Earth Science, Elec Eng
• 48 places awarded by competitive application
  process (6 teams)
• Offered to students from seven disciplines in
  2007/8
• Mech Eng, Civil Eng, Earth Science, Elec Eng,
  Maths, Physics, Chemistry
• Up to 96 places awarded by competitive
  application process (12 teams)
• Problem Based Learning Format
• Education through completing a series of
  challenges (tasks based on topical case studies)
• Small mixed teams working independently
• Facilitator dedicated to each group
• Post Doctoral Research Associates trained as
  Facilitators

6
What is Problem Based Learning?

• No lectures! No handouts on facts or theory! No
  direct teaching!
• Students given series of challenges to pursue
  wicked problems to develop their own learning
• Student teams choose how/what to do to in
  response to trigger proactivity and
  independence needed
• Develops professional skills and professional
  approach in students
• Formative feedback provided throughout learning
  process

7
The Difference with PBL

• Traditional teaching
• Im the expert - listen to what I tell you and
  follow my instructions
• Absorb my knowledge learn these facts and
  principles
• This is the right or wrong answer / approach.

• Problem Based Learning
• What do YOU think you need to know in order to
  tackle this?
• I dont know the solution you have to find
  that out for yourselves
• There is no single right or wrong answer you
  must justify your reasoning/approach

8
Why is a PBL, interactive, interdisciplinary
approach suited to learning about Sustainable
Development?

• Multi-disciplinary subject
• Interdisciplinary co-operation needed to tackle
  sustainability problems
• Fast pace of change makes skills vitally
  important (rather than just knowledge)
• Professional effectiveness key to driving change

9
Format of PBL Sessions (2007)(Following first
exercise, which is spread over 3 weeks)
Week A
Week B
Hand in deliverable from last task (and submit
electronically)
Receive and discuss Academic feedback on last
task
Class Sessions (Weds 9-11 am)
Team Process Review - Discussion on last task
Verbal presentation by two students common
question
Facilitated Group Discussion on set topic
All students feed back results of individual
research
Trigger/Briefing on New Task
Discuss, debate and reach consensus on proposals
Analysis/Discussion of Task/Problem
Plan writing of the report or other
deliverable(s)
Choose individual questions AND a common
question to research
Individual Research Follow-up meetings/emails
Follow-up meetings/emails Produce
Report/Deliverable
Outside timetabled sessions
10
2. Facilitation
11
Facilitation - Summary

• Post-Doctoral Research Associates selected to be
  Facilitators from applicants from across the
  Faculty
• Knowledge of sustainable development not a
  requirement to become a Facilitator
• Several short training sessions on facilitating
  groups provided in preparation
• A one to two hour meeting is held straight after
  each teaching session for support and guidance
• In 2006/7, six Facilitators were dedicated to a
  particular team of students, two others acted as
  understudies and general helpers more will be
  needed for 2007/8

12
Key Facilitator Roles

• Facilitate group process / teamworking
• Facilitate problem-based learning
• Act as a resource broker
• Advise students on relevance and adequacy of
  learning
• Facilitate development of generic competencies
• Administration be familiar with exercises,
  provide material to students at appropriate time
• Professionalism attend consistently and ensure
  group sessions start and run as timetabled

13
Facilitator Induction Plan

• Introduction to the course-unit
• Introduction to Problem Based Learning
• Introduction to Facilitating
• Introduction to issues of groupworking
• Practice Facilitation
• Details of schedule and pedagogic reasons for
  teaching format
• Selection of final team

14
2006 Facilitator Selection

• Facilitators required to be
• Good listeners
• Good communicators (particularly verbally)
• Encouraging to students (positive!)
• Sensitive to students concerns
• Confident
• Able to resist temptation to direct the group
• Open to new ideas

15
2006 Facilitation in Practice

• Briefing / information pack provided for each
  exercise, plus a detailed schedule for each 2
  hour session
• Two hour meeting/discussion held after every
  session to review the process
• Facilitators played key role in assessment as
  well as in facilitating their groups
• Students bonded strongly with each other and with
  their Facilitators during the course unit
• As students progressed during the course-unit,
  less need for Facilitators to intervene
• Very positive feedback from students about the
  benefits of a dedicated facilitator viewed as
  key to the learning experience

16
2006 Facilitator Team
17
3. 2006 Exercises
18
Case Study Exercise Development

• Mechanisms for Driving/Implementing Change
• Predicting Consequences of Change
• Barriers to Change (Social, Env, Tech,
  Financial)
• Corporate change (within large organisations)
• Change across national and cultural boundaries
• Change via new legislation
• Change driven by technical innovation
• Change driven by investor pressure

• Verbal written Communication
• Collaborative team working
• Interdisciplinary Working
• Researching
• Handling large quantities of information (and
  misinformation)
• Filtering and analysing data
• Handling uncertainty and incomplete information
• Problem Solving
• Decision Making
• Justifying and Defending Recommendations

• Balancing environmental, social and economic
  consequences
• Considering impacts of change on
  different stakeholders
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Life Cycle Approach
• Benchmarking / Assessing sustainability
• Cost/Benefit Analysis

• Team of industry consultants
• Environment Agency Team
• Overseas Aid Organisation
• Safety, Health and Environment (SHE) Dept of a
  large organisation

• Not simply showcasing successful technical
  solutions to sustainability or environmental
  problems
• Not simply designing technical solutions to a
  problem without considering the wider economic
  (commercial) and social barriers to
  implementation

19
Five Exercises Chosen

• WHEELS
• Change within a company
• Developed by Mrs Helen Dobson (Chemical Engineer)
• SHELTER
• Change across national and cultural boundaries
• Developed by Prof Grahame MacDougall (Architect)
• RULES
• Change driven by legislation
• Developed with Dr Carolyn Abbot (School of Law)
• ENERGY
• Change driven by technical innovation
• Developed with Dr Tony Sung (Mechanical Engineer)
• SHOPS
• Change driven by investor pressure (CSR / risk /
  benchmarking)
• Developed with Mr John Butlin (economics and CSR
  specialist)

20
Summary of Case Study Exercises
21
4. Project Evaluation

• Monitoring and Evaluation based on staff and
  student feedback

22
Evaluation (1)

• University Standard Questionnaire
• Very positive results compared with typical
  course units
• 100 students agree or mostly agree that
• Skills developed will be valuable
• Exercises were helpful for learning topics
• 96 students agree or mostly agree that
• Material studied was intellectually stimulating
• Teaching and support staff were readily
  approachable
• Teaching staff were helpful and willing to answer
  questions

23
Evaluation (2)

• Student Questionnaires
• (i) Readiness for inter-professional learning,
  (ii) Learning styles, (iii) Self-perception
• Scores for inter-professional learningand for a
  deep approach to learning rose but not
  statistically significant.
• Self-perception scores improved
• Nominal Group process review
• Half way through unit (facilitators students)
  and at end of unit (facilitators students)

24
Nominal Group Process Results Key points from
students

• Positive Feedback
• Inter-disciplinary
• Teamwork (working in groups, independent
  learning)
• Mode of assessment
• Content (relevant, real-life, real-time
  problems)
• Negative Feedback
• Timetable (9am start!)
• Workload (quantity and variability)
• Volume of work not summatively assessed
• Timing of assessments

25
Nominal Group Process Results Key points from
staff

• Positive Feedback
• Imaginative, varied tasks Problem based
  learning Communication skills group
  learning Multidisciplinary participants
  Encouraging team work Teaching experience for
  research staff
• Negative Feedback
• - Lack of different disciplines- Unclear role
  for assistant facilitators- Lack of specialist
  knowledge- Moving goalposts

26
Changes for 2007/8

• 96 places for students drawn from seven
  disciplines.
• Fourteen PDRA facilitators to be employed for the
  next cohort .
• Development of 2-3 new case study exercises.
• Use of rooms in Renolds Building as well as CEEBL
  suite (C24 Sackville St Building).
• Summative Assessment to change from written exam
  to individual student personal reflective report.
• Blackboard and Googledocs to be used by students
  outside class sessions for accessing course
  literature and producing collaborative reports.

27
Thank you

• Mrs Helen Dobson
• The University of Manchester
• Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences
• Teaching Support and Development
• Email helen.dobson_at_manchester.ac.uk

28
Additional Notes
29
Course Unit Development Team

• Project Team
• Rosemary Tomkinson, Helen Dobson, Charles Engel,
  Adele Aubrey, Bland Tomkinson, Charlotte Woods,
  Martin Snelling, Tim Jones
• Project Steering Group (Led by Pat Bailey)
• Pat Bailey, Peter Hicks, Simon Steiner, Richard
  Dodds, Charles Engel, Bland Tomkinson, Paul
  Sharratt, Colin Hughes, Rosemary Tomkinson, Helen
  Dobson, Tim Jones

30
University Questionnaire Results
A Agree, B Mostly Agree, C Neither Agree nor
Disagree, D Disagree, E N/A