Developing Problembased Interdisciplinary Education for Sustainable Development

1
Developing Problem-based Interdisciplinary
Education for Sustainable Development
Monday 25th June, University of Surrey
Design of a New Undergraduate Elective
Sustainable Development for Engineers and
Scientists

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

2
Contents

• Introduction Description of unit and curriculum
  design process
• Assessment Formative and Summative methods
• Focus on Facilitation
• Project Evaluation Monitoring and Evaluation
  based on staff and student feedback

3
1. 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
New Undergraduate Elective

• Optional 10 credit course unit (delivered over 12
  weeks)
• Offered to third years in four disciplines
• Mech Eng, Civil Eng, Earth Science, Elec Eng
• 48 places awarded by competitive application
  process
• 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 and
  employed as Facilitators

6
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

7
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.

8
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
9
Case Study Exercise DevelopmentDesigning Wicked
Problems

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

10
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)

11
2. Assessment

• Formative and Summative Student Assessment Methods

12
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.
  

13
Summative Assessment
14
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

15
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

16
3. Focus on Facilitation

• Facilitators a key resource in enabling student
  learning

17
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

18
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

19
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

20
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

21
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

22
4. Project Evaluation

• Monitoring and Evaluation based on staff and
  student feedback

23
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

24
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)

25
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

26
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

27
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.

28
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 Alice Harling
• The University of Manchester
• School of Chemistry
• Email alice.harling_at_anchester.ac.uk

29
Facilitator Team
30
Question.

• What are the key attributes of an effective
  facilitator?

31
Additional Notes
32
University Questionnaire Results
A Agree, B Mostly Agree, C Neither Agree nor
Disagree, D Disagree, E N/A
33
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

34
Summary of Case Study Exercises
35
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