Problem-Based Learning in Promoting Critical Thinking among Engineers - Essay Example

PBL in promoting critical thinking among Engineers Critical Thinking Skills Critical thinking is depicted as the ability to think rationally and clearly. It embraces the sole ability to engage independent and reflective thinking. These two levels of critical thinking are essential in learning and other professional practices as they enable the individuals to understand different logical connections between different ideas. Critical thinking help in the decision-making process as the individual is able to identify, evaluate and construct their concrete arguments. Additionally, a critical thinker is able to detect common mistakes and inconsistencies in reasoning. Consequently, such an idea helps them to solve problems systematically as the person has the ability to identify importance and relevance of ideas and reflect on their justifications based on their values, beliefs and deductive reasoning (Slameto, 2013). Therefore, it is a reasoning tool that every profession has to integrate in their learning and practices; hence engineers often have to use it. Why Critical Thinking among Engineers? It does not matter if a person is a chief or design engineer or somewhere between the two, all engineers need critical thinking skills. Engineering as a profession relies on concise, clear and rational decisions that can be only achieved through a well-structured thought. On the other hand, the design-related decisions have design principals and codes that guide them, as well as, decisions that involve costs, emotions and the approaches to handle problems. Therefore, these most of the problems related to design line are left wide open for personal opinions and interpretations. Hence it can be seen that without critical thinking Engineers may find their selves stuck in the arriving at some courses of action (Slameto, 2013). Critical thinking among engineers leads to a more sensible and replicable processes for research, planning and presenting ideas, recommendations and courses of action. Processes in learning and practices among engineers are the guiding facets that require marrying critical thinking to make concrete decisions. Second, applying critical thinking saves time taken in transforming data into quality information. Assembling data to a more quality information requires critical thinking to determine what data collection tools and techniques to use, decisions of approving orders, determining the different procedures to eliminate in projects so as to stay within a budget among other decision (Hyunjoo et al. 2015). Thinking is a skill that assures the engineers that their recommendations and rationale are based on critical thoughts and not ad hoc. This is an essential critical resource that provides engineers with an opportunity to evaluate arguments, assumptions and biases. Therefore, the critical thinking process ensures an individual accounts for these elements and understand the impacts of them in their practices. Lastly, critical thinking is the solution to the engineers who find their daily practices have to be met through presentations. Therefore, it helps them present their ideas in more professional formats that make the work easy. However, the question to answer under this context is; which learning approaches can engineers use to promote critical thinking? However, as engineers are seen to be problem-solvers then problem-based learning (PBL) can be suitable in this context. Problem-based Learning PBL embraces a student-centred pedagogy where learners get to know about a subject via the experience of developing a problem. Consequently, they deduce domain knowledge and critical thinking as the main tools for learning and solving the underlying problem. It is a learning technique that has been used in different fields including medicine and education-related disciplines. Its underlying goal entails helping the students develop effective problem-solving skills, and flexible knowledge, as well as, effective intrinsic motivation and collaboration skills. Therefore, this learning technique represents a paradigm shift from different traditional teaching styles and learning philosophies (Grolinger, 2011). Benefits of PBL in critical thinking among Engineers PBL is beneficial helping engineers think critically. Learners in this field are subjected to a greater opportunity of practicing higher order cognitive and thinking skills. Such skills include analytical, evaluation and synthetically engage themselves in reflective thinking. Engineers then will tend to ask questions such as “why” and “how” rather than “when, where and what”. Such ideas indicate that PBL exposes engineers to practice higher order thinking that is characterized by analytical analysis rather than descriptive learning (Grolinger, 2011). A study by Karim and Bassem (2008), aimed at assessing the benefits that were associated with PBL among engineering students at Kettering University as opposed to traditional concepts in the learning modules. Five modules were developed for Problem-based Engineering Thermo-dynamics. Five students were assigned practical tasks under these modules that included Spark ignition engines, steam power plant, power gas turbines, vapour refrigeration and transient problems. Each of these modules had problems to solve. Afterwards, they used summative and formative techniques to evaluate the impact of PBL on assisting the students in solving these problems; problem-solving skills and critical thinking capacity. Subject-based learning module was used as a control experiment with five students tackling same tasks (Karim and Bassem, 2008). The study found that analysis, evaluation, synthesis and application were rated above average by all the students in helping them tackle the problems in all the five modules. These are the main constructs of critical thinking. Under their reflections students claimed that PBL increases their understanding, it makes the class enjoyable, enhanced their reflective thinking, boosted their confidence in solving the problems and combined the class environment to their real life practices. Students attempting the PBL-structured module tasks outperformed the SBL students. All the students were supportive of PBL for its critical thinking allowance and its underlying facets that enabled these students tackle these problems (Karim and Bassem, 2008). Students subjected to PBL get the insights of solving different problems in their daily practices and workplaces. PBL boosts critical thinking level of these students in solving engineering problems that are mostly related to the real life. Additionally, these students exhibit analytical skills and higher thinking while handling these problems. Learners develop conceptual knowledge during their learning that allows them translate such knowledge to the workplace premises (Slameto, 2013). In a learning environment for fields such as calculus and algebra or even modelling, students are able to deduce and evaluate the behaviour of the variables involved in the problem. Both inductive and deductive reasoning become essential tools in solving such problems and evaluating their results. Students go further to ask, so what? And then? These questions indicate a higher level of thinking that allows students critically make reliable forecasts and interpretations. Comparison between PBL and traditional teaching method PBL can be compared to the traditional teaching methods in regards to their differences and their similarities. PBL has been adopted to eliminate the traditional techniques for their nullified aspects based on applicability. The traditional teaching method aims at imparting systematic, profound knowledge to learners and comprehensive tackling of diverse concepts in learning. On the other hand, problem-based learning targets and pays attention to the practicality of the knowledge. Learners are subjected to the different techniques in developing problems that act as the guides to solving related issues (Will, 2007). Additionally, under the traditional teaching methods, the lecturers and teachers take the lead of the learning sessions and focus on the classroom teaching. Teachers even impart knowledge to the learners, and these students can be seen to get information passively. Such an idea does not appear in the PBL where the students take the lead of the class sessions. PBL allows students to form the work-out groups for more participation of the students. Therefore, the students get all the information actively and allow enhanced interaction between the students and the teacher and among themselves (Will, 2007). Students subjected to the PBL show higher levels of analysing ability and enthusiasm. Additionally, they portray better presentation skills, writing skills are well cultivated. On the other hand, teachers under the traditional method are oriented to the quantity of learning that they impart to the learners. Hence the students’ writing and presenting skills are poorly cultivated. Nevertheless, PBL nurtures the students for their career practicality in their workplaces. Under the traditional teaching techniques, students do not get the insights of structuring problems for analysis and solving. PBL enhances critical thinking that improves the reasoning, analytical and evaluation techniques; aspects that miss under the traditional methods (Qiang, 2009). Lastly, the two methods allow planning of lessons by the teacher for delivery of information. They draw collaborative learning among the students though the PBL is more effective than the traditional method. Additionally, both the methods give the students opportunities to create learning groups that enhance discussions for assignments. Lastly, they all target in delivering the course content, however, PBL is more concerned with the practical part of the learning content and the means of delivering the content (Qiang, 2009). References Grolinger, K. (2011). Problem-Based Learning in Engineering Education: Meeting the needs of the industry. Teacching Innovation Projects Volume 1, Issue 2. Hyunjoo I., Brad H, Kim, K & Johnson P. (2015) Teaching Creative Thinking Skills: A Longitudinal study. Clothing and Textile Research Journal, Vol. 33(2) 129-142. Karim J. N & Bassem H. R. (2008). Impact Assessment of Problem-based in a learning Engineering Science Course. Journal of Stem Education Volume. 9, Issue 3 & 4. Qiang W.(2009). Analysis on Chinas Foreign Languages Teaching Reform Development Trend and Problems [OL]. Retrieved from http://www.docin.com/p-50590686 Will D. B. (2007). A Comparison of Problem-Based Learning and Traditional Curricula in Baccalaureate Respiratory Therapy Education. Respiratory Care Vol 52, No. 11 Retrieved from http://services.aarc.org/source/downloaddocument/downloaddocs/11.07.1497.pdf Slameto D. (2013). Developing Critical Thinking Skills through school Teacher Training “Training and Development Personnel” Model and their Determinants. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, Vol 4, No. 2 Read More