1 / 14

Effectiveness of Problem-Based Learning in Online Interdisciplinary Teams

This study investigates the impact of problem-based learning (PBL) in online interdisciplinary teams at the University of Manchester, particularly in the management of humanitarian aid projects. Designed by Ian Hutt Bland Tomkinson, the program used a social constructivist approach to engage students in solving complex, real-world problems such as the aftermath of the 2004 Indonesian tsunami. Although all groups successfully submitted their work, challenges in collaboration and communication emerged, highlighting the need for better online tools and training.

jory
Télécharger la présentation

Effectiveness of Problem-Based Learning in Online Interdisciplinary Teams

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Can problem-based learning in interdisciplinary teams work effectively online? Ian Hutt Bland Tomkinson University of Manchester

  2. Project Managing Humanitarian Aid • Designed/taught by: Bland Tomkinson • Unit leader: Paul Chan • Management of Projects Programme (MACE) • “Interdisciplinary Sustainable Development” (MSEC) • Collaboration with Keele & Staffordshire • Funded by NTFS

  3. Project Managing Humanitarian Aid • Social Constructivist Approach • No formal lectures • Small, interdisciplinary groups (~8 students) • Solving “wicked problems” (scenarios) • Facilitated discussions • Group, individual and peer-assessed reports • Issues of scalability and logistics • Feasible for Distance Learning?

  4. Online Groupwork PBL? • Aftermath of the Indonesian Tsunami, 2004 • Strategy for transitional accommodation • Only online collaboration allowed

  5. Structure & Tools • Online briefing material • News websites • Documentary (BoB) Presentation • Group discussion forum • File exchange • Group Wiki Collaboration • Group Wiki report • Reflective journal Assessment

  6. Data Collection • Submitted Reports • All groups and individuals successfully submitted • Nominal Group Process • Groups generate +ve/-ve comments and vote • Blackboard/wiki scored strongly as a –ve • Online Survey – 15 Qs, 5pt Likert scale • 62.5% response rate (15/24)

  7. Technical / Training • Q1. Technical problems prevented me from using Bb9 and the online tools effectively. (5/15 agree) • Q2. I received sufficient instruction to be able to use Bb9 and the online tools effectively. (1/15 disagree)

  8. Presentation • Q3. The websites and other online resources presented through Bb9 provided useful background to the scenario. (1/15 disagree)

  9. Collaboration - groupwork • Q4. My group was able to collaborate effectively online.(3/15 disagree) • Q8. I found that my group was able to engage effectively with the facilitator online.

  10. Collaboration - tools • Q6. The discussion groups and similar tools enabled my group to communicate even when we were not all online. (11/15 agree) • Q5. The online tools provided enabled my group to hold effective online meetings. (5/15 agree)

  11. Other Tools • Q7. My group used additional online tools (e.g. Facebook) to collaborate online. (14/15 agree) • Facebook: 11 • Skype: 12 • Email: 12 • Mobile Phones: 5 • Google Docs: 1

  12. Preferences • Q9. I prefer meeting online to meeting face-to-face. (3/15 agree) • Q10. I contributed more to the online discussions than I would in a face-to-face meeting. (2/15 agree)

  13. Creativity • “I think It was a good experience, but a hard one ” • “I found it hard to fulfil our commitment when collaborating online.” • “Communicating through computer or other tools is time consuming” • Q11. I feel that working online made our collaborations less creative. (10/15 agree)

  14. Conclusions • Limited success • All groups collaborated and submitted. • Effective group communication part of the challenge. • Students probably would not agree...! • Lessons learned • Synchronous communication tool (Pronto) • Greater familiarity required

More Related