This article was downloaded by: [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] On: 26 March 2013, At: 10:44 Publisher:

Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Research in Science & Technological Education

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/crst20

Problembased Learning: an appropriate methodology for technology education

Anthony Williams & P. John Williams
a b a b

University of Newcastle, N.S.W., Australia

Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia Version of record first published: 07 Jul 2006. To cite this article: Anthony Williams & P. John Williams (1997): Problembased Learning: an appropriate methodology for technology education, Research in Science & Technological Education, 15:1, 91-103 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0263514970150107

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-andconditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Research in Science & Technological Education, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1997

91

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

Problem-based Learning: an appropriate methodology for technology education

A N T H O N Y W I L L I A M S , University of Newcastle, N.S.W., Australia P. J O H N W I L L I A M S , Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia

ABSTRACT This article describes an innovative teaching project that has been implemented for training technology teachers. It is the purpose of the paper initially to present a rationale for using a problem-based learning (PBL) collaborative methodology in technology teacher training. This includes a historical background, a description of the present situation and the identification of possible future trends. The methodology is described that was developed for the project, with the technological context to which the methodology is applied, namely solar energy as the source of power for a commercially viable product. A model has been developed for the project, including the strategies used in implementation, the stimuli used to sustain student interest, and methods of assessment. The evaluation of the programme examines the extent to which the objectives have been achieved and the potential role of the approach in technology education.

This paper will examine a collaborative problem-based learning (PBL) approach to teaching in technology teacher education. An increasing variety of professional, educational and training disciplines are now problem-based (e.g. medicine, nursing, engineering, community health), and they may have a corresponding variety of educational objectives. However, they all have in common the use of problems in the instructional sequence. The problems may be as diverse as a mechanical predicament, unexplained phenomena, or patient symptoms. To appreciate the need for the implementation of such collaborative methodologies as PBL into technology teacher education in Australia, it is important to consider the historical development of technology education, the forces that have shaped it, the current forces for change, the demands upon the school systems, and consequently, the tertiary institutions training teachers for these schools. Technical education was introduced into the Australian school system at the turn of the century. It was designed to meet the needs of a fast growing manufacturing and industrial sector. The nation had come out of a depression and was going through a period of boom or growth. The needs of industry were mainly a semi-skilled trade-based workforce. The secondary school technology curriculum was therefore based upon the
0263-5143/97/010091-13 1997 Carfax Publishing Ltd

92 A. Williams & P. J. Williams trades needed by die industries of the day. These included vocational or trade-oriented skills such as drawing, and benchwork skills in both wood and metal. Until very recendy, there has been little significant change in the content and the form of technical education in Australian secondary schools. Even at the end of the last decade, it was still basically skills centred, with a focus on replicating demonstrated skills and production of projects that were primarily based on wood and metal (see, for example, New South Wales (NSW) Technics Syllabus). During the 1980s education became the focus of social attention. There was a general feeling of concern about secondary school graduates, and in order to identify the problems that existed and the areas that needed development, a number of studies were conducted. As a result of these studies (such as the Carrick Report, 1989), die New South Wales Government released a White Paper tided Excellence and Equity. This document was accepted by the Parliament of New South Wales and the changes that it proposed are being implemented. Technology education received special mention in the reports, and also in the Excellence and Equity paper. It stated that technology education was not meeting die changing needs of society. This is reflected in a discussion paper on technology education from die NSW Department of Education (1988, p. 1): Technological innovation, application and change have not been uniform. Recendy, the rate of change has increased. New technologies have proliferated as technology has interacted with advances in scientific knowledge. The speed of the advance of knowledge and the means to apply it have tended to outstrip die ability of individuals and many social institutions to assimilate both the nature of technology and the likely consequences of its utilisation. Technical change has apparendy become almost inexorable. The Carrick Report (1989) acknowledged the need for changes to be made in the manner in which technology education was taught. This report stated that 'consideration may need to be given to incorporating technological components into a wider variety of appropriate subjects given the permeating nature of technology in contemporary lifestyles' (p. 61). In this way students would be better placed to appreciate the practical applications of technology. Technology education is currendy undergoing the changes necessary to meet the demands associated widi technology identified in the above reports and government documents. Briefly, the current trends in technology education include: 1. the incorporation of a diverse range of technologies and a variety of application of these technologies; 2. die methodology identified as appropriate for teaching these technologies is that of problem-solving or design; 3. the opportunity for the development of creativity and adaptability skills; and 4. the ability of people to work together collaboratively in problem-solving processes. Technology education in secondary schools is undergoing a period of significant change in many countries. It is, therefore, imperative that technology teacher education should adopt not only die technologies that have been identified as being important, but also incorporate appropriate methodologies for the instruction of diese technologies. Because of the relevance of PBL to technology education, die project outlined in this paper has been developed. The rationale for structuring a curriculum on PBL is to promote student-centred interdisciplinary education as a basis for lifelong learning in professional practice (Engel,

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

Problem-based Learning 1991). The professions that most often have implemented PBL have in common identifying and trying to resolve 'problems' through various phases of carefully orchestrated activities. Attempt is made to simulate the professional context in which the knowledge is to be used. Problems act as the stimulus and focus for student activity (Boud & Feletti, 1991) in providing the opportunities for students to develop professional behaviours. It is grounded on the belief diat learning is most effective when students are actively involved, and that they learn in the context in which the knowledge is to be used. Apart from the basic methodology, there are other aspects of PBL that are relevant to technology educators. Because it has been implemented in a number of contexts for some time, a body of research has developed relating to aspects such as the psychological basis for PBL as both a teaching and learning phenomenon, appropriate assessment methods, evaluation of the impact of PBL, and different teaching methods. Technology educators, however, do not yet have a significant body of research upon which to draw, though it is developing and research can in some cases be generalised from specific areas such as engineering, or applied from other disciplines (Glaser, 1992; Lave, et aL, 1988; Driver, 1989; Wood, 1994).

93

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

Characteristic Features of PBL

There are a number of common features of PBL, regardless of the specific methodology or the context in which it is applied. A summary of these features follows. 1. When promoting observational skills, it helps to use as many senses as possible; for example in presenting a situation, more than simply a written description will assist in honing students' observational skills. 2. Using simulations or experience to simulate reality (which may be professional practice). The success of simulation methods depends on having clear learning objectives and appropriate resources available to students. A written description is the poorest form of simulation. Curricula usually have learning experiences which offer progressively more realistic and complex situations matching student skill development. 3. Student collaboration must be encouraged in order to foster a supportive learning environment. Groups may be involved in brainstorming on die nature of a problem, identifying topics on which more information is required and which will later become the focus of independent studies, explaining new ideas or reasoning how mechanisms work or systems interact. The difference between this and general collaborative learning is diat it is problem-based. 4. Student directed learning can be fostered by allowing student control over aspects of the learning process, including setting goals and objectives, planning the learning timetable, choosing who to work with, deciding what and how they will learn, and how the outcomes will be assessed. 5. Independent study can be encouraged through what the students learn outside of class, for example, professional literacy, finding and retrieving information, goal setting, time management, critical dunking and self-evaluation. 6. Students reflect on the learning process by thinking about their learning experiences as a wholewhat deficiencies there are and how diese may be remedied, whether a learning plan was achieved or how die goals could be more efficiendy met.

94 A. Williams & P. J. Williams

(a) PROBLEM BASED LEARNING 5-8 students : 1 tutor Paper Case/Problem - doctor-patient story - diagnostic reasoning - single system problem - treatable/preventable GROUP DISCUSSION Problem identification (b) INQUIRY BASED LEARNING 15-40 students : 1-2 teachers Clinical experience, personal encounter or other simulation

INDIVIDUAL OR GROUP WORK Observation, action, reflection Relevant questions

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

Hypothesis generation Self-directed Teacher-directed studies activities Additional data New resources W \ Learning issues/tasks New skills, knowledge perception & values INDEPENDENT STUDIES GROUP DISCUSSION AND INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATIONS New group knowledge and awareness Synthesis of students' research Review of individual and group learning Other learning experiences W /

Additional information

GROUP DISCUSSION Synthesis and application of their new knowledge Review of their learning processes on this case

FIG. 1. The process of problem-based learning and inquiry-based learning.

Problem-based Learning Models

Problem-based learning, as Feletti (1993, p. 146) stated, is 'an orientation towards learning that is flexible and open and draws upon the varied skills and resources of faculty and students'. This flexibility of PBL is one aspect of the learning model that has application to technology education. One problem diat does exist because of this flexibility is the ability to represent the concept of PBL as a model. Any model that is developed will relate specifically to the situation in which PBL has been applied. PBL, and variations of the strategy, have over the last decade been extensively used in medicine faculties around the world, and for this reason many PBL models relate to these areas. The models shown in Fig. 1 are drawn from medical education. On examining these models it is not difficult to identify a range of similarities between

Problem-based Learning ^
Problems Observe context

95

Investigate

Mock-ups

Refining and detailing

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

FIG. 2. Accepted models of technology. the PBL models and the models of the design process that technology educators have used extensively for a number of years now. The models shown in Fig. 2 are commonly used to represent the design process in technology education.

Similarities between PBL and the Design Process of Technology Education

As stated, there are a number of similarities between the two teaching strategies. Briefly, these include: 1. A large number of phases or stages through which to pass during the project. 2. Both start with an identified problem or situation which directs the students' area or context of study. 3. Student-initiated research is relied upon for the student to progress through the project as well as for their own learning. 4. Both require high levels of student initiative; students need to develop motivation and organisation skills. 5. Both lend themselves to long-term projects; PBL may be used over a short time frame but this does not detract from its ability to be used effectively over a longer time frame, as is usually associated with technology projects. 6. Both are open-ended with regard to outcomes, allowing the student the opportunity to choose, after appropriate research, an outcome that interests them. 7. Observational skills are identified as having a high priority, especially in the initial stages during the identification of the problem. 8. Student reflection is an important aspect of both models; the student is encouraged to evaluate fully the outcome they have achieved and the process used. These similarities indicate that both the technological design model and the PBL model are representative of appropriate methodologies for technology education. The interest of this paper is in the application of the PBL model to technology education. The PBL model has a number of distinctive aspects, and it is these that can readily and appropriately apply to technology education.

96 A. Williams & P. J. Williams 1. A reliance upon group work. Group work has become an important methodology for technology education. The ability of individuals to work as a member of a group has been identified as an important attribute. It requires a range of skills which include (a) an ability to incorporate their personal skills into a group project, (b) to work with others to identify and organise a range of tasks to be addressed by the group, (c) to persevere with teamwork in problem resolution, (d) to participate in shared learning exercises, and (e) to engage in shared decision-making (Australian Education Council, 1994). The ability of an individual to work as a group member is seen as important to the technological world. Technologically developed countries such as Japan and Sweden have used groups or teams as a strategy in solving technological problems whereas Australia is just beginning to appreciate the benefits of using this problem-solving strategy. The skills identified in the Statement on Technology for Australian Schools (see above, Australian Education Council, 1994), acknowledge the need for individuals to be able to work effectively as team members. Kennedy & O'Kelly (1991) established that students, through involvement in group work, were exposed to experiences that emulated the 'world of work'. The skills developed through group work include communication skills, adaptability, listening skills and organisational skills (Eckert, 1991). PBL is based on the practice of using group work as a basic principle. Because of this use of group work there is a range of benefits to be gained through the incorporation of this strategy into the technology classroom. 2. An emphasis on analysis. Another characteristic of PBL that lends itself to technology education is the recognition of the skill of analysis. It has long been recognised that research has been an important aspect of the design process; what the PBL strategy does is to add emphasis to the area of analysis. The PBL methodology encourages students to undertake in-depth analysis of the information they have gathered as well as the information they have received in relation to the problem or situation. This emphasis on analysis is needed in technology problem-solving as it is too easy for students to gather a great deal of information during the research phase of problem-solving, then simply use that information to support their original ideas. Through a thorough analysis of both the problem and the information gained through research, a student will be able to develop a better range of options as well as a more considered final outcome. 3. Encouragement of student collaboration. The use of groups is a basic principle of PBL methodology. The reason for the reliance on groups is to develop collaborative working skills in the students. In the early stages of the process of problem-solving in groups, brainstorming is vital. This is far more effective in a group environment than when done individually. The major reason for this increase in effectiveness is that there is a reduced level of fear of failure in the group (Killen, 1992). The ability to work collaboratively with other students in the organising and planning of die procedure for solving a problem is vital for students who are to be involved in technology in the future. The PBL process encourages this, as Feletti (1993, p. 184) describes: As a group the students will identify topics or issues which later become the focus of their independent studies. The group may subdivide the list, work individually or in small teams, and later share their new information. As a part

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

Problem-based Learning of the group process, students may try to explain new ideas or reason together how mechanisms work or systems interact. Through such activities students come to value teamwork, learn to make and keep commitments and realise that collaboration invariably leads to cooperation. These skills and attitudes will be increasingly essential to the practising technology educator and the participants in technological activities.

97

4. Reflection on the process as well as the product. This fourth aspect of the PBL methodology

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

that provides a valuable experience for technology educators is the emphasis on reflection. The ability to evaluate the effectiveness of the outcome, and the process followed in achieving that outcome, has long been recognised as an important part of the technological design process. The PBL mediodology places an emphasis on reflection as a part of the process, as well as the outcome achieved by that process. Another important aspect of this reflective process is that it also includes reflection on the learning experience that has taken place while participating in the project. Feletti (1993) describes this reflective process dius: This is a professional skill which requires each student to think about his or her learning experience as a whole. At a metacognitive level they can review what path the learning took, whether this was according to plan and, if there were efficiencies in skills, resources or time, dien what needed to be identified and overcome. In other words, students and teacher can reflect on what might be done next time and what has changed in them (individually or as a group), (p. 148). The ability to participate in reflection holistically is very important for a technologist, but the ability to reflect on the learning (personal change) that has taken place as a result of die process is a very important skill for an educator.

The PBL Technology Project

The PBL methodology has the potential to be a most valuable means of teaching technology at all levels. At the University of Newcastle the authors of this article have developed a subject based on the PBL methodology. The subject was offered to the fourth year Bachelor of Education Design and Technology students for the first time in 1994. The subject introduced students to the context of solar energy applications. Students were informed about the PBL methodology at the beginning of the semester to ensure that diey understand the process and what experiences diey were likely to confront during the project. Students selected their own group members, on lecturers' advice according to the criteria to follow. The students were exposed to a wide range of information and media about solar energy and its current applications. The general problem in the context of solar energy applications was presented to students, who then specified the context and die problem as a part of the process of understanding both the problem and the technology, based on group analytic research. Some of the other features of the project were: 1. Students worked in groups of four. This group size allowed for high levels of individual involvement but also provided experiences in the function and organisation of group work.

98 A. William & P. J. Williams 2. Student groups undertook preliminary research in the field of solar energy application, and materials provided by the lecturers (e.g. videos) initiated and supplemented student research. 3. Student groups identified a potential area of interest in solar energy application and undertook in-depth research into this application in order to develop a design opportunity. 4. Student groups organised their approach to solving the problem. 5. Student groups undertook the development of a working prototype which fulfilled the developed design brief. 6. Research, the input of individual group members, and prototype design and development were all documented by the group. 7. Each student evaluated their group's prototype as well as die process used to achieve the outcome. The students' learning experience while participating in the project was also evaluated. The diagram in Fig. 3 was used to illustrate to students involved in this project some of the processes and expectations of the course. The 'INPUTS' represent the ideas generated from die initial individual research. As these inputs are critically examined, the goal is to determine the most satisfactory solution to the problem, and this will be the input that continues through the funnel to become the solution. In the context of technology, the solution is generally a system or product. The narrowing funnel shape represents the increasingly specific and in-depth research that is required as the group moves from broad superficial research to problem solution. The numbers represent specific phases of activity. The initial phase (1) is the presentation of the problem to the individuals in the class, die resulting wide-ranging individual research that is expected to help clarify and define the problem, and die exposure to lecturer-prepared introductory material. The groups are formed at (2). It is hypodiesised diat initial individual research facilitates effective group formation by providing a basis for complementary individuals within groups. As die groups are formed, the research becomes immediately broadened, in die movement from individual research to group directed research. Then the group research becomes more specific and in greater depth as the problem is clarified and specified. At about (3), the group should identify a solution to the problem. Specific in-depth research, organised by the group, is begun to be applied in solution construction. The group solves the problem and presents the solution in (4). The evaluation stage of (5) attempts to answer the question of how well the problem has been solved, and to evaluate the learning process and efficacy of the group. This project was run over two semesters. The above features provide an overview of how a variation of PBL methodology was implemented into technology teacher education in this project, allowing an evaluation of the effectiveness of the methodology for wider application into technology education in general. The groups selected a variety of solar powered applications to develop, including a wheelchair lift to be installed in a bushland nature walk, an illuminated suit for cyclists, an automatic greenhouse ventilating system, a hydroponics system, and a surface skimmer to collect litter from a swimming pool.

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

Assessment
When students are first confronted widi problem-based learning they invariably have concerns about how diey will be assessed as individuals. This concern comes about

Problem-based Learning
Inputs

99

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

Solution

FIG. 3. PBL method in technology.

because students often approach a learning task with a preconceived attitude based on the assessment that will occur as a result of the completion of that learning task (Newble & Jaeger, 1983). An assessment task that only superficially addresses the components of the learning task will lead to students adopting a surface approach to learning, and in so doing only address those issues that will be assessed rather than confronting the unit as a worthwhile learning process (Newble & Clarke, 1986). It is therefore imperative that students see the supportive relationship between learning and assessment (Heron, 1981). At the start of the project it is important to convey to the students the assessment strategies that will be utilised to assess firstly, the performance of the group, and secondly, the performance of the individual members of the group. Students need to have confidence that they do not lose their identity as an individual in the group process. The project described in this paper addressed these assessment issues with the students at the very start of the project. This was important given the students' lack of experience with this methodology and the assessment strategies related to it. A range of assessment strategies at two levels was used to assess the solar energy project. The first level related to the assessment of the project outcome achieved by the group. As the groups would produce different outcomes to the design process, students were concerned how this was to be addressed fairly and equitably. The second level of assessment related to the performance of the individuals within the group. Students were concerned that if there was a poor performer in the group this would affect their marks as individuals as well as the group's overall performance.

100

A. Williams & P. J. Williams

The Assessment of the Group

A criterion strategy was used to assess the product generated by the group. Prior to the students being given the task, a set of assessment criteria was developed that would give the students a clear understanding of the requirements. Included in the assessment description was the weighting to be given to the different aspects of the task. At the introduction to the project this information was distributed to the students and discussed in detail to clarify any concerns or questions the students had concerning assessment. Following is an example of the criteria and weighting used in the projects.

Solar Energy Project Assessment Criteria and Component Weighting Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013 Groups will be assessed in the following areas: research in the field of solar energy application; a plan of approach for developing a prototype of the chosen solution; AutoCAD generated graphics to support the other drawings in folio; detailed documentation of the process undertaken for the development of the prototype; detailed minutes of the group meetings outlining the tasks developed, the distribution of tasks, and the process of completion of the tasks; a working prototype of the solution chosen by the group which must meet the needs identified in the problem and be of a standard that would allow it to go into production; the quality of finish of the prototype must be of a standard appropriate to the subject.

Mark Breakdown This project is worth 50% of the total subject marks; the following indicate the component weighting of this task: (a) function and finish of the working prototype (b) documentation of the process (c) graphics, both problem-solving and informative (Total) 60 25 15 100/c0

The Assessment of the Individual Members of the Group

The task of weighting the students' individual performance was performed using two strategies, documentation of the design process and peer assessment. (a) The first strategy used was to have the groups document thoroughly the process of the design of the project. It was required that the groups meet at least once a week and these meetings were documented in the form of meeting minutes. In the minutes it was required that the students document the distribution of tasks to members, then at the following meeting the individuals report on their progress on that task. These minutes then had to be signed by all group members as true and accurate, and included in the

Problem-based Learning

101

folio which documented the development of the process. The minutes were to contain specific information: Group Meeting Minutes Date Members present Report of progress of tasks from last meeting Evaluation of progress of project Distribution of new tasks Date of next meeting Signatures of members (b) The second strategy used to assess the individual group members' contribution was to have group members do a peer assessment of the other members of the group as well as an evaluation of their own contribution. The following is the format of this assessment procedure: Group Members' Participation Assessment Project Please name each member of the design group and give a contribution to the overall project weighting. This weighting is to be expressed as a percentage of the whole project, e.g. if the group consisted of three members who participated equally then each member's weighting would be 33 - 3%. Include yourself and how you felt you contributed as well. Member's name Participation weighting etc %

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

Through the use of the above assessment strategies it is possible to establish the level of participation of individuals.

Evaluation
The group outcomes from the project ranged from satisfactory to excellent. The majority of the physical project development work was completed in the last few weeks of the course. It was felt that if this development phase could have begun earlier all the results would have been excellent. There was some initial discomfort felt by both students and lecturers with the process; students felt the need for specific direction in the context of a situation in which they had to define and address a problem, and it was a temptation for lecturers to give the solution to a problem rather than guiding the students to find an appropriate solution for themselves. An evaluation was conducted at the conclusion of the course, consisting of 18 items to which students responded on a 5-point Iikert scale from 'not at all' to 'completely', and two open-ended items. The evaluation items were grouped around six themes: A B C D open-endedness of the project; satisfaction of learning needs; learner-centred approach; group work;

102 A. Williams & P. J. Williams E cognitive skill development; and F researching new knowledge. ANOVA tests for the zero mean difference between themes resulted in the following: B-D: F l , 4 = 12-62, p<0-025 (B<D) B-E: F l , 4 = 12-13, />~0-025 (B<E) C-F: Fl,4 = 8-51, p<0-05 (C<F) A possible interpretation of the results for B (satisfaction of learning needs) and D (group work) is that students saw the group work experience as enjoyable and valuable, but not in the context of satisfying their learning needs. The B (satisfaction of learning needs) and E (cognitive skill development) analysis could indicate that students appreciated the acquisition of cognitive skills gained from the project, but did not see this as satisfying their learning needs. These explanations are plausible given the history of these students' experiences of mainly didactic and teacher-centred instructional methods with an emphasis on individual manipulative skills rather than cognitive and cooperative skills. Therefore, while they see group work and cognitive skill development as enjoyable and profitable, they do not relate to them as a means of learning. Stated another way, their experience with a variety of teaching-learning styles has been limited, and therefore they were prevented from recognising that alternative styles could also satisfy their learning needs. The analysis of C (learner-centred approach) and F (researching new knowledge) could be interpreted as indicating that students appreciate the learner-centred approach, but do not realise that this implies the necessity of individually researching new knowledge. This interpretation is reinforced by the negative responses to the item 'How often would you use a similar methodology in your teaching?' (third lowest mean of all the items). The implication here is that students did not see problem-based learning as a valuable method, and could not see its relevance to their future teaching and learning. The open-ended items in the evaluation solicited general positive and negative comments. The most common positive comments related to the opportunity to develop a technology that was new to students, and the advantages of working in groups where members have complementary skills. The most common negative comments related to the difficulty of motivating all group members equally, and the need for more clearly denned expectations. Among the groups was an all-female group. The total mean for this group was significantly higher (p<0-05) than for the other groups. This overall positive reaction could also relate to the generally higher means from the female group with regard to how well the group functioned. In other words, because the members perceived themselves to function well as a group, the general attitude about the project was positive. It is also of interest to note that the type of coursework covered in this subject was new to the members of this group. The students in this female group elected to join this subject rather than pursuing die coursework they had covered in previous years of the degree. The conclusion of the project was that a problem-based learning methodology is appropriate for use in technology education, both to achieve the goals of technology education and to give students experience in a realistic group work environment. In education in the discipline of technology a variety of methodologies should be utilised in order to represent the total discipline appropriately, and a problem-based methodology should be one of those used.

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

Problem-based Learning

103

As a result of this project and evaluation, future applications of problem-based learning methodologies in technology should consider die following points: 1. 2. 3. 4. Carefully select group members to ensure complementary skills. Develop a monitoring/reporting mechanism to keep groups focused and progressive. Establish deadlines for the completion of stages. Improve the assessment mechanism that discriminates more fully among individual group members at stages throughout the course. 5. Comparatively evaluate performance and responses of a class that has a background in student-centred strategies. Correspondence: Dr P. John Williams, Edith Cowan University, Mount Lawley Campus, 2 Bradford Street, Mount Lawley, Perth 6050, Western Australia.

Downloaded by [Universidad Del Pais Vasco] at 10:44 26 March 2013

REFERENCES AUSTRALIAN EDUCATION COUNCIL (1994) Statement of Technology for Australian Schools (Melbourne, Curriculum Corporation). BARROWS, H. (1986) A taxonomy of problem based methods, Medical Education, 20, pp. 481-486. BOUD, D. & FELETTI, G. (1991) The challenge of problem based learning (London, Kogan Page). CARRICK,J. (1989) The Carrick Report on Secondary Education (Sydney, NSW Government Printer). DRIVER, R. (1989) Students' conceptions and the learning of science, International Journal of Science Education, 11, pp. 481-490. ECKERT, P. (1991) Preparing for the 21st century by collaboratively learning for a more productive school, Primary Focus, March, pp. 9-12.
ENGEL, C.E. (1991) Not just a method but a way of learning, in: D. BOUD & G. FELETTI (Eds) The
Challenge of Problem Based Learning (London, Kogan Page).

FELETTI, G. (1993) Inquiry based and problem based learning: how similar are these approaches to nursing and medical education, Higher Education Research and Development, 12, pp. 143156. GLASER, R. (1992) Expert knowledge and processes of thinking, in: D. F. HALPERN (Ed.) Enhancing Thinking Skills in Science and Mathematics (Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum). HERON, J. (1981) Assessment revisited, in: D. BOUD (Ed.) Developing Student Autonomy in Learning (London, Kogan Page). KENNEDY, T. & O'KELLY, C. (1991) All in Cooperative Education (Carlton, Curriculum Organisation). KILLEN, R. (1992) Teaching Strategies for Design and Technology (Newcastle, University of Newcastle D&T Development Project). LAVE, J . , SMITH, S. & BUTLER, M. (1988) Problem solving as an everyday practice, in: J. LAVE,J.G. GREENO, A. SCHOENFELD, S. SMITH & M. BUTLER (Eds) Learning Mathematical Problem Solving, Institute for Research on Learning Report No. IRL 88-0006 (Palo Alto, CA). NEWBLE, D.I. & CLARKE, R.M. (1986) The approaches to learning of students in a traditional and in an innovative problem based medical school, Medical Education, 20, pp. 267-273. NEWBLE, D.I. & JAEGER, K. (1983) The effects of assessment and examination on the learning of medical students, Medical Education, 17, pp. 165-171.
NEW SOUTH WALES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (1988) Technology Education: a discussion paper

(Sydney, NSW Government Printer). WOOD, E.J. (1994) The problems of problem-based learning, Biochemical Education, 22, pp. 78-82.