Students’ Perception of Project Assisted Learning Edward E. Osakue, Ph.D.1, Graham Thomas, Ph.D.2 Abstract – The need to provide students with learning experiences that can help them develop the knowledge and skills relevant to the workplace has been consistently raised by businesses. Project-Assisted Learning (PAL) and Project-Based Learning (PBL) are effective learning methods that closely match workplace situations. Several studies have documented the benefits of PAL and PBL from the perspectives of the educators. This article presents cases of learning experiences in which project assignment, a case of PAL, was used to enhance the learning experiences of the students. The influence of the project on their experiences was captured using a survey instrument that involved opinion rating. The averages of the rating obtained in the survey appear to support the view that project assisted learning (PAL) is beneficial to students from the students’ perspective. Thus the students in this study validated what educators have claimed previously. Consequently, PAL should be a component in the learning experiences of students, especially in technology based programs. Keywords – Students, Project-Assisted Learning (PAL), Project-Based Learning (PBL), Educators, Perception, Opinion. INTRODUCTION It seems that the expectation of employers today is for freshly hired graduates to become “productive” from the first day of work. Commenting on the preparedness of college graduates entering the workforce, businesses said they would give fresh graduate students a “failing” grade [1, 2]. These employers want students trained in knowledge and skills that are immediately applicable to workplace situations. They want faculty to provide learning experiences that are similar to workplace settings. Educators, like employers are concerned about quality training of students because there has been continual emphasis and application of a variety of teaching and learning approaches to enhance student learning [3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. Instruction and training methods are many and varied. These include traditional lecture, interactive lecture, cooperative learning, case analyses, e-learning, action memos, art-based learning techniques, and teamwork [4, 5, 6, 8, 7, 9, 10, 11]. Project assignment is an effective instructional tool when properly managed. However, the idea of assigning projects to students is not a new one. There is a longstanding tradition in schools for "doing projects," assigning "hands-on" activities, developing interdisciplinary themes, conducting field trips, and implementing laboratory investigations [12]. According to W. T. John, Project-Based Learning (PBL) uses project(s) as the main instructional tool [12]. We would like to distinguish “Project-Assisted-Learning, (PAL)” from “ProjectBased Learning, (PBL)”. In our view, Project-Assisted Learning (PAL) uses project(s) as additional instructional tool, not the main tool [13]. Hence Courses where other methods of instructions are used but incorporate project assignment(s) are in the category of PAL. The skills students learn during a project include researching relevant concepts, team work
skills, good communication skills, timely delivery of completed task(s), dependability, and responsibility [8]. Projects thus help students develop career success skills such as investigative and research skills, friendship, teamwork skills, technical competence, and report writing skills. Projects provide students with opportunities for exploring concepts and principles in greater depths, beyond what can be covered in the limited class time through further research, study and discussions. Research on "situated cognition", claims that learning is maximized if the context for learning closely matches the reallife context of application. Similarly; learning is minimized if the context in which learning occurs is dissimilar to the context in which the learning will be used [14]. In addition, research on contextual factors recommends that instruction be carried out in a problem-solving context so that students can apply what they learn in solving actual problems and making real-life decisions. Learning that occurs in the context of problem solving is more likely to be retained and applied. Such learning is also seen as being more flexible than the inert knowledge that is acquired as a result of more traditional didactic teaching methods [15, 16]. Project assignments provide opportunities for students to learn to solve problems and make decisions that closely match workplace scenarios. The literature suggests that there are benefits and improvements attributed to PBL and PAL from the perspectives of educators [11]. This indicates that the focus of most researchers have been on how PBL and PAL improve the learning process for students and help improve their academic performances. We think it is equally important to know the students’ perspective on PAL or PBL. This article presents some instances where students were given the opportunity to express their opinions on the benefits of PAL as an additional
1
Assistant Professor and Graduate Faculty, Department of Industrial Technologies, Texas Southern University, 3100 Cleburne Street, Houston, TX, 77004, USA. Email:
[email protected] 2 Assistant Professor and Graduate Faculty, Department of Engineering Technologies, Texas Southern University, 3100 Cleburne Street, Houston, TX, 77004, USA. Email:
[email protected] Note. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on April 12th, 2011; accepted on May 4rd, 2011. This paper is part of the Latin American and Caribbean Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 12-17, 2011. © LACCEI, ISSN 1935-0295. 12
LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, Vol. 5(1), 2011
instructional tool in their learning experiences. In order to evaluate the opinions of student on the benefits of PAL, a questionnaire was designed and administered at the end of the projects. The averages of the rating obtained in the survey appear to support the view that project assisted learning (PAL) is beneficial to students from the students’ perspective. Thus the students in this study validated what educators have claimed previously. CASE I: CONS 333 – QUANTITY SURVEY A project assignment was given to students in the course CONS-333: Quantity Survey. It is a required course in Construction Technology program and was taught in the spring semester of 2009. CONS-333 is designed to help students develop skills in estimating the quantities of building materials required in a building construction project. It is a computationally intensive course, but the formulas involved are simple, requiring the mastery of elementary algebra. Organization of Project The authors made a decision to use the team approach in the project because teamwork is a common problem-solving approach in the workplace today. Hence the project organization was tailored to mirror workplace organizational structure and communication formats as shown in Fig. 1. The instructor took on the role of a project manager, while team leaders worked directly with team members to accomplish assigned tasks. Other responsibilities of the personnel in the organizational setup are outlined below. INSTRUCTOR Reviews project topics Conducts class meetings Reviews reports and turn-ins Gives suggestions on handling identified difficulties and problems Grades works or reports TEAM LEADER Conducts team meetings Assigns individual tasks Coordinates members tasks Collates members work Turns in team work Reports problems and difficulties to Instructor TEAM MEMBER Performs assigned tasks Provides updates on tasks Attends team meetings Provides reports to team leader Reports problems and difficulties to team leader Execution of Project The instructor gave a set of drawings for a building to each student. The students were required to estimate a) site quantities, b) floor quantities, c) wall quantities, d) ceiling
quantities, and e) roof quantities. Milestones and dead lines were defined and explained by the Instructor to all the students. Team leaders were appointed by the instructor based on his knowledge and experience with those students in previous courses and during the term in this course. Team leaders were asked to assign tasks and coordinate the work of each team member. Students were asked to form teams of 3 or 4 members. The option to work alone was allowed, principally because there was only one female student in the class. The total enrollment in the class was 16 and 4 teams emerged with the female and one male working alone. These steps encourage and reinforce the formation of habits such as commitment, responsibility, respect, and goal setting as would be expected in the workplace. The instructor met with the students twice every week for four weeks. The first meeting was held on Mondays and the second on Wednesdays. Discussions on each task were held and questions answered. Additional explanations of concepts and principles on the topics were made by the instructor as difficulties were identified. Completed tasks were collected for grading at the end of the meetings.
Fig. 1: Organizational structure for project CASE II: MFG 333: STRENGTH OF MATERIALS The course “MFG 333” is required in the degree programs for Design Technology and Construction Technology majors. It is designed to introduce students to engineering materials, their mechanical properties, and applications in design of machines and structures. It is computationally intensive but do not require more than College Algebra skills. The course was taught in the spring semester of 2010 and the instructor met with the students three times a week for one hour each. This time constraint made the course more challenging than normal. A project assignment was given after mid term in the semester. Organization of Project Due to the fundamental importance of this course in technology and engineering design, individual technical skill development by students is the main focus. To realize this goal, the project organization was tailored to allow direct supervision of students work as shown in Fig. 2. This made this project more of an individual responsibility; though students were encouraged to relate freely during the project
LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, Vol. 5(1), 2011
13
duration. The responsibilities of the Instructor and students in the organizational setup were:
following instruction was included at the top of the sheet. “Below are some questions about the final project assignment in this course. Please respond to the statements in the table using rating provided below”. 1 – Strongly disagree 3 – Not sure 5 – Strongly agree
2 – Disagree 4 – Agree
STUDENTS’ FEEDBACK AND DISCUSSIONS Fig. 2: Organizational structure for project INSTRUCTOR Teaches and reviews relevant project concepts and principles Demonstrates use of software for specific skills Conducts class meetings Assigns project tasks Collates students work Reviews reports and turn-ins Gives suggestions on handling identified difficulties and problems Grades works or reports STUDENT Attends class meetings Performs assigned project tasks Provides updates on project tasks Provides reports to Instructor Reports problems and difficulties to Instructor Fig. 2 mirrors a typical project organization in a workplace environment. For the purpose of comparison, the instructor position is similar to that of a team leader or design supervisor in a design project. The student is similar to the position of a team member in a design project. Team members are assigned tasks by the team leader who also monitors and coordinates the work of team members. The team leader holds regular meetings with team members during project development to review and assess work progress on a regular basis as was done weekly in this course. Discussions on tasks done and questions answered. When necessary, additional explanations of concepts and principles on topics were made by the instructor as difficulties were identified. Changes or revisions are instructed by the team leader as necessary and the instructor routinely asked students to make changes or revision during the project. Completed tasks were collected for grading at the end of the meetings. SURVEY SHEET AND ADMINISTRATION The due date of the final report was set for the last day of class for the semester. On the day of the final examination, when all the project reports have been turned in, the students were given a survey sheet. In the survey sheet (Tables 1 or 2), questions 3 to 7 and 12 deals with technical competence while questions 8 and 9 deals with teamwork skills; and questions 1 to 3 and question 10 deals with personal work skills. The 14
Case I Table A1 in the Appendix A gives the responses of the students to the survey in Case I: Quantity Survey. Table 1 is the summary of the average responses from the students, rounded to nearest whole number. There were 14 responses from the 16 students who took the course, representing 88% response rate. Responses were in the range of 2 to 5. The average rating of students to each question is presented in the third column. Average rating varied from 3.4 to 4.6. Fig. 3 shows the plot of Table 1 data with the rating (not rounded) on the vertical axis and the question number on the horizontal axis. Generally, averages of 4 and above suggest that the students are in agreement with survey questions, while averages below 3 mean the students disagree with the survey questions. It is observed in Fig. 3 that the average rating of responses is in large part close to or above 4. The exceptions are responses to questions 9, 10, and 11. Fig. 4 shows for Case I, the plots of the proportion of students who view projects as helpful in their skills acquisition. The upper curve represents those who indicated from not sure to strongly agree, while the lower curve represents only those who indicated from agree to strongly agree. The lowest proportion for the upper curve is about 75% in response to question 10 about project reporting. This proportion drops to about 42% for those who agree or strongly agree. For the majority of the questions, however, the proportion is above or close to 60% for those who agree or strongly agree, and we think this is a comfortable majority agreement and makes PAL a desirable and good approach as a learning tool. From Table 1, Fig. 3, and Fig. 4, the students’ responses to questions 3 to 7 and 12 suggest that they view the project assignment as helpful in improving their skills in this aspect. Likewise, their responses to questions 8 and 9 dealing with teamwork skills suggest that the students view the project assignment as helpful in improving their teamwork skills. Personal work skills are involved in questions 1 to 3 and question 10 and responses are favorable, though the response to question 10 seems to indicate no substantial improvement. Question 10 deals with project reporting, an aspect that team leaders had more influence. So this response may be due to the fact that the team leaders did most of the collation and turning in the reports. Overall, it is safe to say that the students are of the view that project assisted learning is beneficial to their learning experiences.
LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, Vol. 5(1), 2011
Table 1: Average rating responses-Case I
Question Serial # 1 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 13
Statement This final project was challenging. The final project made me work harder than I planned. The final project gave me opportunity to research deeper into the course topics. The final project helped me to develop better analytical skills in building quantities estimation. The final project helped me to understand the concepts of the course materials better. The final project allowed me to apply the principles taught in the course in a practical way. The final project helped me to know more about building quantities estimation. The final project helped to improve my social skills. The final project helped me to develop better relationships with my team members. My technical writing skill was improved by the final project. My personal organizational skill was improved by the final project. The final project helped me to improve my print reading skills. The final project was really beneficial to me.
Average Rating 5 4
Fig. 3: Rating average plot-Case 1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 3
4
4 4
Fig. 4: Percentage responders-Case 1 Case II Table A2 in the Appendix A gives the responses of the students to the survey in Case II: Strength of Materials. Table 2 is the summary of the average responses from the students, rounded to nearest whole number. There were 11 responses from the 13 students who were present at the time of survey, representing 85% response rate. All the responses were in the range of 2 to 5. The average rating of students to each question is presented in the third column. For all the questions, the average rating varied from 4.1 to 4.6. Fig. 5 shows the plot of Table 2 data with the rating on the vertical axis and the question number on the horizontal axis. As mentioned in Case I, averages of 4 and above suggest that the students are in agreement with survey questions, while averages below 3 mean the students disagree with the survey questions. It is observed in Fig. 5 that the average rating response is generally above 4, indicating that the students view the project assignments as beneficial. Fig. 6 shows for Case II, the plots of the proportion of students who view projects as helpful in their skills acquisition. As in Case I, the upper curve represents those who indicated from not sure to strongly agree, while the lower curve represents those who indicated from agree to strongly agree. The lowest proportion for the upper curve is about 90% in response to question 8 about social skills. Because this was not a team project, this result is not surprising. This proportion remains the same for those who agree or strongly agree. The lowest proportion for lower curve is about 72% on question 6. At first this seams to be surprising, but it should be borne in that the students are being exposed for the first time to a foundation course in design and many of the concepts and principles were quite new to them. However, Fig. 6 confirms the opinion that the students are in agreement as to the beneficial effect of projects in learning experiences.
LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, Vol. 5(1), 2011
15
Table 2: Average rating responses-Case II
Question Serial # 1 2 3
4
5
6
7 8 9 10 11
12 13
Statement This final project was challenging. The final project made me work harder than I planned. The final project gave me opportunity to research deeper into the course topics. The final project helped me to develop better analytical skills in building and machine design. The final project helped me to understand the concepts of the course materials better. The final project allowed me to apply the principles taught in the course in a practical way. The final project helped me to know more about building and machine design principles. The final project helped to improve my social skills. The final project helped me to develop better relationships with my course members. My technical writing skill was improved by the final project. My personal organizational skill was improved by the final project. The final project helped me to improve my print reading skills. The final project was really beneficial to me.
Average Rating 4 4
5
Fig. 6: Percentage responders-Case 2 SAMPLE RESULTS FROM STUDENTS
4
4
4
4 4 5 5
4
5 4
Sample results from students for Case I and Case II projects are presented in Appendix B. Fig. B1 shows the building materials summary and cost summary and floor materials worksheet for Case I project from a student in the Quantity Survey class. Material quantities information in this sheet were obtained from worksheet sets for the different aspects of the building phases such as excavation, foundation, floor, wall, ceiling, etc. The estimated material cost for the building by this student was $21,952.57. There was some variation in the estimated material cost from different teams because of differences in cost data obtained from different Home Depot stores. Fig. B2 shows the first page of the floor quantities worksheet used by the student during the project. The worksheet was prepared by the instructor and distributed to all the students in the class for their use. Fig. B3 shows a bending moment diagram for one of the problems in Case II project turned in by a student in the Strength of Materials class. The bending moment diagram was generated with software that came with the textbook for the case. Fig. B4 is a sample calculation using the result from the bending moment diagram of Fig. B3. The maximum bending stress in the beam was estimated manually using the maximum bending moment calculated with the software. In the Quantity Survey course, more than 56% of the students had B-grade or better. In the Strength of Materials course, 50% of the students had B-grade or better and half of the 50% had A-grade. Since these courses are math-based, these performances are good because most students in the school struggle with mathematic. In both courses, those who did not do well were largely due to the fact that they did not complete some laboratory and or project assignments. Absences may also have had a role in poor performances. CONCLUSION
Fig. 5: Rating average-Case 2
16
In project-assisted learning (PAL), project(s) are used as additional instructional tools, not the main tool. In this study, PAL was used in a Quantity Survey (Case I) course and in a Strength of Materials (Case II) course. Sample results from students for Case I and Case II projects are presented in Appendix B from Fig. B1 to Fig. B4. These figures show actual portions of work turned in by students and graded. Most of the students who completed the project assignments did
LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, Vol. 5(1), 2011
reasonably well in the Quantity Survey and Strength of Materials courses. Opinions of students on the influence of projects in their learning experiences were gathered at the end of the semester for each course in a survey and are presented. Case I is a team based project while Case II is more of an individual type project. The responses for Case II survey show greater agreement with the survey questions. This appears to suggest that students show greater commitment in individual type project than team based project. The rating averages of the responses to the administered questionnaire appear to support the view that PAL is beneficial to students’ learning experiences from both cases. This is significant because it shows that students are validating what educators have claimed previously. Consequently, project assignment(s) ought to be part of a course delivery, especially in engineering and technology based programs. Instructors in engineering, engineering technology, and related programs will be well served if they deliberately incorporate project assignment(s) into their course delivery. REFERENCES Mina, M., Omidivar, I., Knott, K. (2003). Learning to think critically to solve engineering problems: Revisiting Dewey’s ideas for evaluation of engineering education. Proceedings of ASSE, 2003 http://www.boundlessline.org/2008/01/employers-want.html. (2008). Employers want real world experience.
for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Van Renberg, B. W. J. (2003). Structural Engineering Education: Effective Teaching and Learning. Proceedings of the 2003 ASEE/WFEO International Colloquium. http://aiche.confex.com/aiche/2005/techprogram/P3326.htm.(2 005). Using Teamwork and Case Studies in-Class to Teach Chemical Engineering Safety. John W. T., (March, 2000). A Review Of Research On Project-Based Learning, http://www.autodesk.com/foundation Osakue, E. E. and Thomas G, “Using Project Assignment to Improve Students’ Knowledge and Skills, Conference for Industry and Education Collaboration, American Society for Engineering Education, February 3-5, 2010, Palm Spring, California. Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1989), Situated cognition of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42. Boaler, J. (1998). Open and closed mathematics: Student experiences and understandings. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 41-62. Bransford, J. D. Sherwood, R. S., Hasselbring, T. S., Kinzer, C. K. & Williams, S. M (1990). Anchored instruction: Why we need it and how technology can help. In D. Nix & R.
Duff, J. C. (1964). Creative teaching in colleges and universities: The importance of effective instructional techniques, Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 35. pp. 154 – 157. Kuznetsov, H. (2002). Technology-Based Innovative Teaching Methods. Proceedings of the 2002 ASEE/SEFI/TUB Colloquium. Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching: A Converational Framework for the Effective Use of Learning Technologies, 2nd ed., New York: Routledge Falmer. Meyers, C. (1996). Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Guide for Faculty in all Disciplines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Richard. L. G. (2004). Using Case Studies to Teach Engineering Design and Ethics. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition. Thomas, G. & Thomas, E.R. (2009). Incorporating industrystyle design into course projects in undergraduate engineering technology courses. The Technology Interface Journal. Vol. 10, No. 1. Sandhu, J. A., Bamberg, E., Hong, J., & Boyce, M. C. (2002). Active Engineering Pedagogy for an Introductory Solid Mechanics Course. Proceedings of the American Society LATIN AMERICAN AND CARIBBEAN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION, Vol. 5(1), 2011
17
