Studentcentred interdisciplinary education for engineers and scientists

1
Student-centred interdisciplinary education for
engineers and scientists
Tuesday 10th July, University of Bradford
Design Process for a New Undergraduate Elective

• Mrs Helen Dobson, Teaching Support and
  Development EPS Faculty
• Mrs Rosemary Tomkinson, Head of Teaching Support
  and Development EPS Faculty
• Prof Charles Engel, RAEng Visiting Professor
• Miss Adele Aubrey, Teaching Support and
  Development EPS Faculty
• Dr Shahriar Amini, School of Chemical Engineering
  Analytical Science
• Mr Bland Tomkinson, University Advisor on
  Pedagogic Development
• THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER, MANCHESTER, UK

2
Plan

• Introduction Very brief description of project
  and curriculum design process
• Nominal Group Process Key Aspects of SD
• Nominal Group Process Student competencies
• Final discussion

3
Introduction

• Description of unit and curriculum design process

4
Sustainable Development For Engineers and
Scientists

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

5
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

6
New Undergraduate Elective

• New optional 10 credit course unit (delivered
  over 12 weeks)
• Interdisciplinary Offered to third years in four
  disciplines
• Problem Based Learning Format (no lectures!)
• Education through completing a series of
  challenges (tasks based on topical case studies),
  developed with academics from different
  disciplines
• Small mixed teams working independently
• Facilitator dedicated to each group (Post
  Doctoral Research Associates trained and employed
  as Facilitators)
• Formative assessment throughout the unit
• Innovative forms of summative assessment used
  (four different methods, including both group and
  individual assessments)
• Feedback from students and staff gained through
  Nominal Group Process

7
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

8
Course Development Four Advisory Groups

• (i) Projects working definition of Education
  for sustainable development
• (ii) Relevant key aspects of sustainable
  development
• (iii) Activities which graduates might be asked
  to undertake in early career in relation to
  sustainable development.
• (i) Skills and competencies that need to be
  developed for the activities identified by Group
  1
• (ii) Procedure for selecting case studies and
  study material to correspond with these skills
  and the tasks.
• Innovative methods of student assessment
  (formative and summative) and reward for
  successful completion
• Monitoring of the implementation of the pilot
  module and assessment, recognition and reward of
  staff involved.

9
Course Development Two Questions to Examine Today

• (i) Projects working definition of Education
  for sustainable development
• (ii) Relevant key aspects of sustainable
  development
• (iii) Activities which graduates might be asked
  to undertake in early career in relation to
  sustainable development.
• (i) Skills and competencies that need to be
  developed for the activities identified by Group
  1
• (ii) Procedure for selecting case studies and
  study material to correspond with these skills
  and the tasks.
• Innovative methods of student assessment
  (formative and summative) and reward for
  successful completion
• Monitoring of the implementation of the pilot
  module and assessment, recognition and reward of
  staff involved.

10
Curriculum Design Questions. Nominal Group
Process Workshop Exercise

• 1) What aspects of sustainable development are
  needed as key learning outcomes?

2) What competencies and skills need to be
developed in the students?
11
Nominal Group Process Workshop Exercise Process

• The Purpose
• To enable each participant to state her/his
  personal opinion.
• To obtain a group judgement of priority rating of
  the opinions expressed by the individuals.
• Method
• Five mins discussion in small groups, each person
  develops own ideas - list three suggestions each
  (for each question)
• Going round room, everyone makes one suggestion
  (of up to four words only), recorded on flipchart
• Continue round the group until no more
  suggestions
• Vote taken (by show of hands) of how many
  participants agree with each suggestion
  (clarification of points if required)
• Vote used to identify points on which consensus
  within group

12
Manchester SD Aspects (1)

• ENVIRONMENTAL
• Climate change
• Energy
• Waste
• Water
• Biodiversity
• Land, Air Water Quality
• Non-renewable resources
• SOCIAL
• Quality of life
• Public Perception and Behaviour
• Social inequity
• ECONOMIC
• Financial Incentives
• CONTROL MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE
• Regulation Policy decision making
• Technical Interventions

13
Manchester SD Aspects (2)

• Understanding Interconnectedness
• i) Individual Local Global
• ii) Social Economic Environmental
• iii) Timescales Past Present Future and
  Short-term Long-term
• iv) Company Supply Chain World
• Understanding Mechanisms for Change
• v) Regulation, Policy Standards
• vi) Economic Instruments Cost-Benefit Analysis
• vii) Culture Attitude
• viii) Innovation Technology
• Understanding Societal Responsibility
• ix) Quality of Life Human Needs
• x) Individual and Cultural Values and
  Philosophies
• xi) Ethics, Morality and Respect
• xii) Citizenship Diversity, Harmony, Empathy,
  Community Congruence
• Understanding Triggers for Change
• xiii) Social Inequity, Poverty, Conflict Human
  Suffering
• xiv) Environmental Detriment Harm to Ecosystems

14
Manchester - Competencies
15
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
• Dr Shahriar Amini
• The University of Manchester
• School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical
  Science
• Email shahriar.amini_at_anchester.ac.uk

16
Staff Facilitator Team 2006/7
17
Additional Notes
18
Five Exercises Chosen 2006/7

• 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)

19
PBL Process
Week Two (2 hrs)
Week Three (1st hr)
Week One (2nd hr)
Individual Research Follow-up meetings/emails
Follow-up meetings/emails Produce and Submit
Report
Student activities outside timetabled sessions
20
Summary of Case Study Exercises
21
Assessment

• Formative and Summative Student Assessment Methods

22
Formative Assessment

• Detailed feedback on each group report from the
  four formative exercises
• Practice exam papers completed at the end of each
  exercise (modified essay questions)
• Group discussion reviewing process of exploring
  each exercise and producing required deliverable.
  

23
Summative Assessment
24
Observation of Teamwork

• For the final exercise, each group was observed
  by a Facilitator who had worked with a different
  team previously. Their role was to observe a
  number of parameters of the performance of that
  group as a whole.
• The parameters were

25
Peer Assessment

• To obtain a score for the perceived contribution,
  each student was to be asked to make observations
  upon all the other members of his or her group.
  At the end of the final exercise, each student in
  the group completed a simple, anonymous,
  check-sheet for each of the other members,
  concerning their
• Attendance
• Contribution to the group discussions
• Gathering appropriate ideas and information
• Shaping ideas and analysing information
• Summarising ideas and information
• Contribution to the structure and design of the
  report
• Contributed to the writing of the report
• Task focus
• Including others
• Conflict resolution

26
Focus on Facilitation

• Facilitators a key resource in enabling student
  learning

27
Facilitation - Summary

• Eight Post-Doctoral Research Associates were
  selected to be Facilitators from applicants from
  across the Faculty
• Knowledge of sustainable development was not a
  requirement to become a Facilitator
• Several short training sessions on facilitating
  groups were provided in preparation
• Six staff acted as Facilitators dedicated to a
  particular team of students, two others acted as
  understudies and general helpers

28
Key Facilitator Roles

• Facilitate group process
• 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,
  administer formative exam papers
• Professionalism attend consistently and ensure
  start of group sessions as timetabled

29
Facilitator Selection

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

30
Facilitator Induction

• General discussion of what is Problem Based
  Learning as a means to develop skills and
  knowledge
• Briefing on the structure of how students should
  tackle each exercise and roleplay exercises
  leading to selection
• Further discussion and roleplay
• Detailed briefing on first student exercise

31
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

32
Project Evaluation

• Monitoring and Evaluation based on staff and
  student feedback

33
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

34
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)

35
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 problems)
• Negative Feedback
• Timetable (9am start!)
• Workload (quantity and variability)
• Volume of work not summatively assessed
• Timing of assessments

36
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

37
Conclusions

• Positive feedback this years pilot, from staff
  and students
• Course unit to be repeated January 2008, with 96
  places for students drawn from seven disciplines
• Fourteen PDRA facilitators to be employed for the
  next cohort
• Full review of unit to be carried out and
  development of new case study exercises
• Despite challenges faced, the results of the
  pilot study have justified confidence in pursuing
  a student-centred, problem-based,
  interdisciplinary approach to education for
  sustainable development.

38
University Questionnaire Results
A Agree, B Mostly Agree, C Neither Agree nor
Disagree, D Disagree, E N/A
39
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