The data concerning twelve students are presented in this section. Of the 50 students who agreed to participate in this study, eight students were randomly selected for formal interviews and formal observations. Four additional students are included because of their archetypal behaviour. These students were chosen to illustrate different attitudes, behaviours and learning approaches that were identified in this study.
In this chapter, particular emphasis is given to the data collected from these twelve students named here as Edward, Ali, Jacob, Khadir, Theo, Lucas, Phillip, Timothy, Claire, Matt, Jeff and Bruce. This section contains detailed account of these twelve students. The attitudes and behaviours that influenced their approaches to learning are explored here. The account also contains details of the activities that they engaged in, the tasks that they preferred and the different team roles that they assumed.
The characteristics of three students are presented in the following summary Table 5.1 below, to illustrate the method of analysis. A summary table of the characteristics of all twelve students is presented in Appendix 10. It is recalled here that a PBL team consisted of approximately five students, who met with their supervisor for approximately one hour each week during the semester.
As described in Chapter 4, most students were part of the first year electrical engineering degree course that was offered in problem-based mode for the first time at Victoria University. Some students were studying second year of an undergraduate robotic engineering degree. However, it was the first time all of these students had studied in PBL mode in a tertiary setting.
98
Table 5.1 Summary table of PBL student characteristics
Students Background Main reason for joining the course
Focus Understanding of PBL
Activities Engaged Examples of resources used
Tasks preferred Roles Learning approaches Jacob Mature age student, introvert, has other family priorities Family pressure, social reasons Obtaining a highly paid job
Data was not collected
Completing individual tasks, writing his part in the technical report
Internet, computer laboratory
Computer programming
Did not take any consistent role. Mainly a freeloader Surface approach throughout the first year
Claire Mature age student, extrovert, enjoys socialising. Enthusiasm to learn new knowledge, doing things hands on Learning and excel in the field of engineering, enhancing career prospects
Learning as a group with a diverse set of students with varied experience and skills Chairing meeting, delegating tasks, planning, organising team work and leading the team
Used prior knowledge in most of the tasks that she engaged, Internet, books from the state library Writing, collating team members’ solutions to individual tasks, experimenting. Organiser, mentor and team manager, completer, admirer Started off using deep approaches but focused on achieving a product in both semesters Jeff School-leaver, keen on gaining new knowledge Job motivation, Employability
High paid job, high academic achievement, become an expert.
Team work and collaboration. Self directed, independent learning
environment where technical skills are learnt in conjunction with generic skills. Brainstorming, discussing and sharing ideas, organising tasks, sharing knowledge and leading the team
Internet, books, manuals from the University library, lecture notes, teacher and laboratory Researching information, discussing with team members and actively contributing to the team’s work.
Leader, contributor, innovator mentor and shaper. Consistently used deep approaches throughout both semesters
99
5.2.1 Student 1, Edward
Edward was an Anglo-Australian student who entered university soon after secondary school. He entered tertiary education due to pressure from family members and thought going to university after secondary education was a social norm in his community. He enjoyed coming to university as he felt that university was an independent and fun environment and planned to make many friends. Edward also aspired to meet his ideal life partner at university. Apart from waking up at 7 a.m. and travelling to university in packed trains from the other side of the city, he seemed excited about his experience. In Semester 1, Edward was just another team member in his team. He loved having fun in team meetings and was the clown of the team. He normally waited until his team leader or another team member asked him to contribute to the team. When he was assigned a task, he stated that he “gave it the best shot” he could.
Edward expressed concern about the attendance and accountability of two other team members. He suggested that if he was to take on such a passive role himself, then the team’s progress would definitely suffer. He promised his team leader that he would help him in every possible way to see all the problems completed. Edward also indicated that he intended to replace one of the team members (Alex) in Semester 2:
Alex turns up and comes to classes but, after the class he goes straight home. He pretty much walks straight to his car and drives home, say like you have to chase him to get him to do something and it’s not worth it. Instead, may be we can send him an email of the last date when something is due.
Once we had to do his tech report, we had to append his part and all that sort of thing. We are going to find someone who can put as much work as we put in.
While solving Problem 2, Edward’s ideas were seldom considered by the team. While Edward did not express any concern about his ideas being neglected, he appeared to gain the impression that he could not think efficiently. He mentioned a couple of times during team meetings that his ideas were not effective. However, that did not stop him from contributing to the team. He helped his team leader to execute the leader’s ideas in solving the problems. During an interview Edward mentioned that:
I never really had much to put in. I am a dumb ass [laughs]. It was fairly straight forward with the problems most of it. Like, we were told what we had to do so, you went and did it
100 and then you came back and occasionally we had to find out something. We were told what to research on and sometimes like, if I had an idea and I pitched it was stupid, mostly I would say: ‘They don’t really agree with that’.
In the third problem, Edward did whatever his team leader asked him to do. He soldered components on to the bread-board, tested circuits that were built by his team leader and also contributed to writing the technical report. He appeared to learn techniques from his team leader and constantly worked to improve his skills. At the end of Semester 1, he mentioned in an informal interview that he was unable to concentrate much on the other lecture-based subjects as the PBL subject consumed most of his working time.
It wasn’t as hard as I initially assumed it to be. It required a little bit of work but, it went good. But it is still hard to keep PBL and your normal classes and not really concentrate on them like, sometimes you concentrate on PBL and you have to do some maths, there is always work sheets that you haven’t done and you just concentrate on, some other time to do that because you have to do PBL, so trying to keep both running at the same time.
At the beginning of Semester 2, Edward mentioned that he had failed both the lecture- based subjects but had managed to obtain a credit in the subject taught in problem-based mode. He appeared to be disappointed by his experience in Semester 1 and expressed an aversion to PBL. Edward openly expressed his feelings to his team members as well as to the members of other teams, saying:
I never want to hear the words PBL. PBL is bullshit I hate it. Yeah, this semester is a joke. Last semester was actually reasonably good. We actually learnt stuff. But this semester is like inadequate... If you look at it this way, if you had failed the lecture-based subjects, which is programming and digital and circuit theory in Semester 1, you went up to this in Semester 2 and you had a group full of people that failed in Semester 1; you wouldn't be able to do this problem at all. Hey, can we get a refund for our course?
Edward’s “cool dude” behaviour attracted a few students to his team. During Week 3 of Semester 2, some new students joined Edward’s team. Edward spent time with these new members and started to expand his social circle. He made new friends with members of other teams and socialised with them at the university bar.
In Semester 2, Edward slowly started to experiment with the role of a freeloader. After Week 2, he started missing a few meetings. He rarely brainstormed during team meetings and almost completely stopped contributing to team discussions. Most of the time during supervised meetings, he remained silent. During unsupervised meetings, he
101 demonstrated interest in socialising. He organised for unsupervised team meetings at the university’s bar, which ended up in social activities. He frequently missed team meetings and complained that he could not get a grasp of the problem or of the ideas of his team members.
[In Semester 1], they broke it up and they had every meaning less. OK this week you need to do this. It was more understandable. But this time it’s like, OK where are you guys going now? It’s like, it is hard to, you know the depth of this problem up here is one way down here and it’s hard to understand what to do if you don't know what you are doing...
In Semester 2, Edward agreed that he only worked on tasks that were within his ability and he showed no interest in gaining new knowledge. Edward complained about a range of things such as access to the learning spaces, the problem, the teaching methods and also about his achievement in the previous semester.
I think I have gone backwards. But, I don't think I have because this semester I have shut up and sat in the corner when I get f****g ah, because it's just, instead of cheering me up, worn me out. I don't care. Last semester was good, this semester they have just chucked this massive thing on us and go do it. It's like what are we doing? We didn't even get like a problem outline, they gave us one sheet once and then …
During a focus group interview, he expressed concerns about the teaching methods of a staff member, which he perceived as causing his failure in that subject. During the mid- semester break, he started a conversation on the University’s learning management system (WebCT) and questioned the teaching expertise of this staff member. This conversation stimulated a long debate among students that included comments of a racist and sexist nature. Edward’s action also sparked a controversy amongst PBL supervisors, who engaged in further discussions with other staff members to what kind of material should be allowed to be posted on such teaching and learning websites.
[What is your contribution to your team’s learning?]
This semester or what? Man it's going to be difficult. This semester not very much. Because I don't really understand the problem that very well. [I only do] whatever is given to me or whatever I can do. Because I don't have a good understanding of the programming I think. Because I failed last semester because [Teacher] is f****n useless. And I can't understand him or what he is trying to teach. I have more gone to the problem and looked at the parts that I can do like statistics, going up to the intersection and providing other information that I can give rather than stuff that I have got no idea on. That's about all.
102 In his portfolio, Edward claimed that he had attended every meeting and completed all the tasks that were required of him. He indicated to the researcher that his contribution was only limited and that failing the lecture-based subjects in the previous semester had limited his knowledge and skills required to solve the problem in Semester 2. He nominated himself for a pass in the PBL subject in Semester 2 and reported that he had learnt some of the skills such as programming and digital electronics and claimed to have realised how important such skills were in the field of electrical engineering. To summarise, in Semester 1 Edward played a supporting role in his team and offered help to his team leader whenever he was directed. He was neither intrinsically nor extrinsically motivated and did not bother to validate or apply new knowledge. In fact, he used a surface approach to learning and often complained that he did not understand the problem clearly. Moreover, he made minimal or no attempt to identify his own learning needs and was always directed by another team member or the supervisor to complete the tasks that were delegated to him.
Edward enjoyed socialising and made new friends outside his team, which contributed to his new role as a freeloader in Semester 2. He decided that he did not have the knowledge level to solve the Semester 2 problem. He gradually lost interest and became disengaged. He also duplicated his Semester 1 portfolio and submitted the same portfolio for assessment in Semester 2. This resulted in Edward failing PBL Subject 2.
5.2.2 Student 2, Ali
Ali was an African student who migrated to Australia while he was studying at high school. He worked part-time and decided to attend university with some of his friends because this was the norm for that group. He aspired to become a power engineer and obtain a highly paid job. In Semester 1, he decided to join a team which mostly consisted of students from his country of birth. Even though he felt comfortable in their company, he felt that working in a team with them was unmanageable. He was concerned that the majority of his team members including himself were having fun during most meetings and worried that this might lead to lower grades. Ali mentioned that he took his studies seriously, but at the same time he thought it was fair to have some fun.
103 At the moment, I am enjoying this sort of life style as it personally suits me. I am also enjoying my course so far … it offers students a better life style
He expressed some difficulty in understanding the Australian higher education system and explained this as a consequence of growing up overseas up to Year 10. He saw transition to university as a learning task and expressed some concern about PBL:
I don’t understand this [PBL] stuff and that. I know it is about learning in a group and all that, but I don’t really get what they [supervisors] want us to learn. I think it is the same as the other subjects [lecture-based] but with more practical work. But it’s fun.
Considering himself brighter than other students in his team, he assigned himself the job of leading the team. Ali consistently used a surface approach to learning and solved the tasks that were assigned to him in isolation. At times, his supervisor was concerned about his progress and spoon-fed him with solutions to problems. As an example, during Semester 1, his PBL supervisor spent the scheduled meeting time solving sample test problems from another subject that was taught in lecture-based mode.
Ali attended unsupervised team meetings that were organised by Elias (another team member) during Semester 1. When Ali’s team solved Problem 3 in Semester 1, most of the unsupervised team meetings ended up in clashes, both verbal and physical between Elias, Raja and Ali. Ali normally aligned himself with Khadir, another student from his country of origin, and strongly opposed ideas suggested by Elias and Raja. Ali indicated that his team members did not display any interest in understanding his contributions. He also raised concerns about a team member’s stereotyped and often racially prejudiced views and reported that he always compromised to avoid arguments. For this reason, Ali worked with Khadir, leaving the rest of the team to work individually.
To me if someone likes to take a role, I let them go. But, I don’t like Elias. He is just too much. He doesn’t understand where I come from and he wants to do everything by himself. In Semester 2, Ali’s contribution to the team was again superficial. He always picked tasks that he thought was easier than the others.
I contributed a lot to the survey, to serve the priority and all that. The second one I did, even thought I didn’t do the most, like the other groups … I did the digital fair enough, fair bit of it. Coz that’s what I like and the other one [survey] is easier to me.
During team meetings, Ali socialised with his team members, including talking about his job, but made very little or no attempt to have subject-related conversations. He
104 often used sexual references when conversing with his team members. He occasionally asked questions of his supervisor to clarify his doubts during supervised team meetings, but never shared ideas or explained the solution to his tasks to other team members. According to Ali, sharing of information was only meant to happen on WebCT. He advised that he shared information with his team members by posting messages on WebCT but indicated that he did not tend to read the messages posted by other team members.
Ali met with his team members face-to-face for less than an hour a week during the semester. Even though he was physically present for most team meetings, he tended to disengage soon after the supervised team meeting started. At the end of Semester 2, his view of PBL was that it was a subject where there was lot of written work designed to improve communication skills while some technology was taught as well. He also added that PBL helped him approach problem-solving by delegating tasks and locating