Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Continuing Engineering Education – Tokyo May 15–20, 2004
INITIAL EFFORTS IN IMPLEMENTING PROBLEM-BASED
LEARNING (PBL) IN TEACHING ENGINEERING
F.R. Mahamd Adikan, S.M. Said, S. Mekhilef and N. Abd Rahim
Department of Electrical Engineering & Telecommunication
Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya
50603 Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA
saad@um.edu.my
This paper presents initial efforts in the implementation of innovative methods in
teaching engineering, in particular using the Problem Based Learning (PBL) approach.
This paper elaborates the current practice of the PBL teaching method within the
Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Malaya. Pertaining issues include
the integration of the PBL method into the overall teaching methodology implemented
by the Department, and the characteristics of the PBL problems posed in the courses
offered. It is hoped that an integrated approach to teaching engineering will yield
graduates who are able to think critically and are receptive to lifelong learning in their
engineering career.
Keywords: Problem Based Learning, teaching engineering, transferable skills
1. Introduction
The Problem Based Learning (PBL) method is an innovative teaching approach which places
an emphasis on problems as a starting point for the acquisition of knowledge [1]-[3]. Its aims are
twofold: it encourages students to think for themselves, and it helps the students acquire the
necessary technical knowledge and transferable skills required in a certain course of study [4]-[5].
The PBL methodology contains many parallels to the problem solving scenarios faced by
practicing engineers at the workplace. An engineer has to constantly and efficiently solve practical
engineering problems. Therefore, critical thinking and problem solving skills are essential skills
that an engineer should possess, in order to provide an optimum solution to the problem at hand.
The PBL method is well suited to honing these skills. Realising this, the Department of Electrical
Engineering and Telecommunication has started to incorporate elements of PBL into its teaching
methodology. Other universities worldwide that have already implemented the PBL approach to
teach electrical engineering include the University of Manchester, University of British Columbia,
and University of Delaware.
2. The Department of Electrical Engineering & Telecommunication,
University of Malaya
The Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Malaya was established in 1959 [7].
The Department accommodates the needs of more than 600 students annually with a team of 28
academic staff and 30 support staff. Amongst the objectives of the Department are:
• To produce world-class graduates/engineers capable of identifying and formulating a
solution to an engineering problem innovatively
• To produce graduates with broad engineering skills and awareness
• To develop strong relationships with industry
• To develop new knowledge and cutting edge technologies in improving the quality of life
273
Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Continuing Engineering Education – Tokyo May 15–20, 2004
Central to the underlying themes of the objectives are the ability of the Department’s
graduates to think critically, and propose pro-active solutions in their careers [8]-[9]. They must
also be able to communicate their solutions and ideas in an articulate manner, and see through the
implementation of their projects efficiently and within the time constraints set. Engineering
graduates are expected to not only provide technical skills and solutions, but also have the
capacity to take up management positions. It is appropriate that the Department take the
necessary steps in order to hone the relevant transferable skills expected of such a graduate. In
the following section, the relevance of PBL in teaching engineering as perceived by the
Department of Electrical Engineering, will be discussed.
3. Problem-Based Learning – Current Developments within the
Department
Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is an innovative teaching approach that puts a high regard
on effective, lifelong learning as oppose to effective teaching [6]. The approach is gaining
recognition worldwide, particularly in the Medical field, for which the method was first developed. At
the heart of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is the tutorial group. The PBL tutorial group consists of
several phases: introduction and climate setting, starting a problem, problem follow-up and postproblem reflection.
Implementation of PBL within the Department is in its infant stage where lecturers are
currently being trained to become PBL facilitators. The Faculty has employed a top-down approach
whereby a central committee headed by a senior member of the teaching staff is responsible in
identifying and recruiting lecturers from every department as part of the PBL team. The team would
then follow a series of training programmes and a more or less subject-centred PBL approach is
gradually being introduced. The project is proposed to expedite this process by taking the ‘learning
by doing’ approach. Elements of PBL is said to exist in the form of final year project and
laboratories.
However, thus far, the final year thesis projects could not be viewed as a form of PBL per se.
This is due to the nature of thesis titles which relate closely to the field of expertise of the lecturers
involved, hence making standardisation of materials covered by the students impossible. Secondly,
students are evaluated mainly through the final thesis report, unlike the continual assessment and
equal weighing of both during and upon completion of a certain task as required by PBL. One way
of improving this is by assigning a group of students from various engineering programmes to a
single, comprehensive project that carries a theme. For example, the faculty could choose
renewable energy or the transportation system of the future as a theme. The latter would definitely
involve, among other things, the design and implementation of a solar car. This would involve
various engineering disciplines (the ones in bracket) – structural design (engineering design and
manufacturing), power electronics (electrical), suspension and propulsion (mechanical),
ergonomics and safety (civil and biomedical), energy cells (chemical) and environmental issues
(environment).
Efforts are currently under way to design laboratory experiments that carry a PBL theme. It is
viewed that in order for this to take place, experiments can no longer be subject-centric. It could
not be completed within the two-hour time slot given either. However, students could achieve
certain milestones towards completing the whole experiment within the time given and as opposed
to writing separate reports for each experiment, only one is required.
Some lecturers are taking a pro-active approach in blending between the traditional teaching
approach and PBL. An example of a quasi-PBL assignment question for a course in Computer
Organization and Architecture is described below:
You are the lead systems analyst on a new software project for your company. You have been
given the responsibility to choose the hardware platform for the project. Your supervisor, a
business major, has come to you with some suggestions. She states, "I think this new 750 MhZ
CPU in those XYZ brand computers is probably best. We don't really want to use those older
274
Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Continuing Engineering Education – Tokyo May 15–20, 2004
500 MhZ ABC brand machines when we can get one so much faster now." What is your
response?
The question above allow the students to discuss the consideration that should be taken
before making the final decision on which brand of computer the company will purchase. In here,
there will be discussion on how to measure the performance of a computer system, whether they it
is based on the processor speed, data bus width, MIPS, memory size and access time, software
availability, cost or brand. The advice of the supervisor and her background in the subject matter
will also be considered. The question above is considered to be quasi-PBL due to the fact that it is
subject-centric. The question does not involve cross-subject investigation.
In order to assign students to a full-PBL assignment, a pertinent prerequisite that needs to be
satisfied is that all the students should have a minimum level of understanding and skills regarding
the subject. This implies that a full fledged PBL approach could, theoretically, be implemented in
teaching third year and final year undergraduates. An example of a full PBL assignment is given
below.
Faraday’s law characterises the voltage drop across an inductor as VL = L (di/dt) where VL
= voltage drop (Volt), L = inductance (henrys; 1 H = 1 V. s/A), i = current (Amperes), and t =
time (seconds). Determine the voltage drop as a function of time from the following data for
an inductance of 4H.
Table 1 The characteristic of current against time
t (seconds)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
I (Ampere)
0.00
0.15
0.30
0.55
0.50
0.80
0.70
1.90
The question above requires students to choose a numerical method in order to solve it. It
assumes that the students have a good grasp of how inductors behave under forced conditions –
the forcing condition being the application of voltage. In making the decision on which
method/approach to use, consideration regarding the inductor’s transient behaviour should also be
made. This again implies that students already know the fact that the charging an inductor involves
two phases – the transient and steady states. Students would also have to discuss or justify the
method chosen based on the efficiency and accuracy of the method in attaining the final solution.
4. Implementing a Comprehensive PBL Approach
In order to study the effectiveness of PBL in an organised manner, we would suggest
implementing two crucial approaches, namely:
i. Leveraging the existing Engineering Tutorial Scheme and Special Semester
institutions to introduce and study PBL
ii. Revamping of the Academic Advisor approach
Suggestion (i) involves the implementation of a Hybrid Problem-Based Learning (H-PBL)
approach within the Department of Electrical Engineering. The Department would handpick 20 or
more weak students from a particular batch as the test group. The approach would be
implemented under the existing Engineering Tutorial Scheme and the Special Semester. The
Special Semester is a three-month period which is normally taken to be the long annual break for
our undergraduates. However, selected courses are held during this period in order to allow the
weak students to re-sit for the exams that they have failed during the preceding academic year. By
selecting students who have prior exposure to the subject concerned, the issue of assuring a
minimal level of engineering background before using the PBL approach is addressed.
The project involves two distinct phases. The first phase involves the formation and training
of the H-PBL team. The H-PBL team must include members with various academic backgrounds –
275
Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Continuing Engineering Education – Tokyo May 15–20, 2004
engineering, education, psychology/counselling. The H-PBL team will be responsible in drawing up
a PBL syllabus and more importantly – to identify, assess and if possible, formulate solutions for
the difficulties in implementing PBL. The second phase would involve the implementation of PBL
and the subsequent effect that it would have on the students’ performance. The project concludes
with a detailed report regarding implementation of PBL, the importance of quality assessment for
teaching and learning, and suggestions for future undertakings.
This project focuses on weak students with one major assumption – they are underachievers
because the conventional way of teaching does not agree well with them. It is hoped that by
changing the teaching approach, the same material could be delivered across more effectively.
By tackling issues concerning education approach, it is hoped that the spill-over effect would
be in the form of more attention given in the field that so far has been quite neglected. By proving
that quality of teaching – through different approaches – has a marked effect on students’ learning,
affirmative action would follow. More funds could be allocated in training, in nurturing lecturerstudent relationships through common activities, etc.
Suggestion (ii) is geared towards creating the necessary ‘culture’ for PBL to work. The
Academic Advisor programme was devised so that the Academic Advisor for a particular student
would be able to monitor the personal and academic progress of his or her group of students.
However, this programme has been generally unsuccessful. For example, the stipulation of three
meetings within a semester is simply not enough to build a rapport between the lecturer and
students, and both parties eventually feel that they are forced to conduct these meetings.
One approach that has been implemented successfully is the tutorial system. Typically each
lecturer personally selects up to eight new undergraduate students per academic year. This
introduces an element of accountability on the part of the lecturer, because to a certain degree, he
has personally selected this particular student for admission and is therefore responsible for the
performance of the student. This is in contrast to the Academic Advisor system, where the lecturer
does not have a say in selecting the students, and therefore a good match in personalities
between the lecturer and student is not always possible.
Admittedly, it would not be realistic to fully implement this type of tutorial system in the
Faculty of Engineering, due to the lack of manpower. However, perhaps some elements may be
adopted, for example, that the lecturer be allowed to choose his or her tutees, and also a more
regular meeting session be established for all the students under that particular lecturer. At the
very least an hour once a fortnight could be allocated to discuss any particular engineering or
mathematical problems that the students may be facing, or a more general discussion on the latest
topics in engineering. Furthermore, as the students are meeting in a group, it would appear less
intimidating to them, than meeting the lecturer one by one. In addition, instead of just assigning
the lecturers as academic advisors, it may be a good idea to enlist tutors and postgraduate
students in the programme. This not only lightens the load of the lecturers, but may be preferable
for the students, as they are closer in age to the students and may be more approachable.
5. Conclusions
In this paper, the implementation of the PBL approach in the Department is presented. PBL
is seen to be an ideal tool for teaching engineering, as the PBL methodology is seen to possess
many parallels with the actual engineering project cycles encountered in an engineer’s career.
Therefore, it is useful in developing the relevant transferable skills expected of an engineer, for
example critical thinking skills, communication skills and analytical skills. Collaboration with
educational psychologists is of essence, in order to devise innovative teaching methods, in
addition to those discussed above. Input from psychologists and counsellors are also of value,
because in many cases, the problems faced by engineering students are related to their personal
problems, and an avenue to solve these issues should also be made possible. It is hoped that
such an integrated approach to teaching engineering will yield us graduates who are able to think
critically and are receptive to lifelong learning in their future careers as engineers.
276
Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Continuing Engineering Education – Tokyo May 15–20, 2004
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
Jian Ma, Group decision support system for assessment of problem-based learning. IEEE
Trans. Educ., 39, 3, 388 -393 (1996).
Maskell, D.L., and Grabau, P.J., A multidisciplinary cooperative problem-based learning
approach to embedded systems design. IEEE Trans. Educ., 41, 2, 101 -103 (1998).
Waters, R., and Mccracken, M., Assessment and evaluation in problem-based learning.
Proc. Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE 1997) 'Teaching and Learning in an Era of
Change', 2, 689 -693 (1997).
Kellar, J.J., HoveY, W., Langerman, M., Howard, S., Simonson, L., Kjerengtroen, L., Stetler,
L., Heilhecker, H., Ameson-Meyer, L., and Kellogg, S.D., A problem based learning
approach for freshman engineering. Proc. Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE 2000), 2,
F2G/7 -F2G10 (2000).
Fink, F.K., Integration of engineering practice into curriculum-25 years of experience with
problem based learning. Proc. Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE 1999), 1, 11A2/7 11A212 (1999).
Dorothy H. E., and Cindy E.H., Problem Based Leaning; A Research on Learning
Interactions. US: Lawrence Erlblum Associates Publishers (2000).
Department of Electrical Engineering and Telecommunication, University of Malaya,
Brochure, 2001.
Soundarajan, N., Engineering Criteria 2000: The impact on engineering education. Proc.
Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE 1999), 1, 11A1/25-11A1/30 (1999).
Chawdurry, B., Laboratory-based training for electrical engineering freshman. Int. Journal
Elect. Eng. Educ., 34, 112-119 (1999).
Curriculum Vitae
Faisal Rafiq Mahamd Adikan
Faisal Rafiq Mahamd Adikan: Lecturer, Department of Electrical Engineering and
Telecommunications, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya (Since 2001). Ph.D candidate at
University of Southampton (since 2003). Received B.Eng from UMIST, United Kingdom (1997).
Received Masters in Engineering Science from University of Malaya (2001).
Suhana Mohd Said
Suhana Mohd Said: Lecturer, Department of Electrical Engineering and Telecommunications,
Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya (Since 2002). Received M.Eng in Engineering
Science from the University of Durham, United Kingdom(1997). Received D.Phil in Engineering
Science from the University of Oxford, United Kingdom (2003).
Saad Mekhilef
Saad Mekhilef: Lecturer, Department of Electrical Engineering and Telecommunications, Faculty of
Engineering, University of Malaya (Since 1999). Received B. Eng in Electrical Engineering from
the University of Setif,1994). Received M.Eng. Sc. and Ph. D from the University of Malaya,
Malaysia (1998 and 2003 Respectively).
277
Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Continuing Engineering Education – Tokyo May 15–20, 2004
Nasrudin Abd Rahim
Nasrudin Abd Rahim: Professor, Department of Electrical Engineering and Telecommunications,
Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya. Was born in Johore, Malaysia, on November 17,
1960. He received the B.Sc. (Hons) and, M.Sc. degree from University of Strathclyde in 1984 and
1987 and the Ph.D. degree from Heriot-Watt University in 1995. He is presently a Lecturer with the
Department of Electrical Engineering, Universiti Malaya Malaysia. Dr. Nasrudin is actively involved
in industrial consultancy, for major corporations in the power electronics projects. His research
interests: include power electronics, real-time control system, and electrical drives.
278