ACADEMIA Letters

A review and survey of Problem-Based Learning

application in Engineering Education
Jose Figueiredo, IST

The reference article whose title we replicate above, is a very interesting and complete
practical literature review on Project Based Learning around the world. It describes particu-
larly where (which schools) Project Based Learning is practiced, and describes some assump-
tions, challenges, benefits, and opinions on PBL. The article could improve if some concepts
were tackled and explained in a more carefully way. Furthermore, some sections are empty
in the sense they don’t add any interesting information. In the analysis that follows, that is
our detour on the PBL subject, we will address what we consider to be the most important
misalignments of the referred article.
Project Based Learning (PBL) is an interesting learning approach and tends to be ad-
dressed in articles either by what it is, definitions and examples, or by examples of specific
structured cases. In both situations, we are losing an important dimension to explore, that is
what PBL can be. Starting from what it is and providing examples of use, situating experi-
ences, we should also and definitely focus on the power of the approach. What we can or could
do with this approach. PBL is a method, a methodology, a technique, a tool? (Mingers, 2001)
“methods or techniques…they are generally well-defined sequences of operations that if car-
ried out proficiently yield predictable results”. Let us continue to address it as an approach,
there is no need and no space to enter a conceptual debate. PBL is a situated approach we can
experience and improve all the times we explore it, and it is basically a strong and effective
learning strategy. PBL is like a customized for all learning production platform, completely
immersed in a learning paradigm. And this Academic Letters experience is by all means an
ecological endeavour, exploring a kind of conceptual recycling, with the benefits of the sus-
tainability of the discussion of ideas and concepts.

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Jose Figueiredo, [email protected]

Citation: Figueiredo, J. (2021). A review and survey of Problem-Based Learning application in Engineering
Education. Academia Letters, Article 412. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL412.

1
 Let us focus on two clear aspects that the article refers and we sustain that need to be
clarified and further explored: problem solving and scope. Problem solving, the typical ker-
nel of engineering education, is becoming old fashion and needs improvement. With crescent
complexity of the environment, context of our problems, engineering students need to prepare
themselves to be part of an important facet of real life, that is problem formulation. Formulate
the problems, problem-setting as Schōn (1984) put it, is an extremely important engineering
design concern “But with this emphasis on problem solving, we ignore problem setting, the
process by which we define the decision to be made, the ends to be achieved, the means which
may be chosen. In real-world practice, problems do not present themselves to the practitioner
as givens”. As well as we don’t “identify” requirements, because we, as engineers, are part of
the requirements construction, hearing and understanding the client and the user, negotiating
with them on the terms of what should be done, we act exactly the same way when construct-
ing and defining the problem. So, up with problem formulation, stop problem solving? Not
at all, problem solving is crucial, it always was and always should be, but our focus on it can
only begin after problem formulation. It is the same with the claims for efficiency, everybody
claims for more efficient things, everybody says things are not efficient, but we should only
focus on efficiency after we are sure you are dealing with an effective process. Before that
your focus should exclusively be on turning the process more effective, not efficient. Go-
ing even further, the engineer must be part of the identification of the problem. Most times,
most demanding problems are not explicit, not immediately identifiable. Is there a problem?
Where is it? what is it? Who and what it involves? and then, after identification, the prob-
lem should be formulated. And only then solved. Our approach, Problem Based Learning,
allows to tackle this problematic in very satisfactory terms as designing scope is a matured
practice in project management, it is even one of the knowledge areas in PMI/PMBOK project
management. As we all know the scope of a project tends to evolve during development and
during delivery, even in structured approaches to project management like PMI/PMBOK. In
more agile approaches this fact is even tougher. This goes with the idea and with the reality
of the project approach. And with PBL we are dealing with a project, a project that aims to
be educative, a base for learning, a project on knowledge creation (Nonaka, 1991).
In fact, the conceptual lightness that we observe in the article is already present in some
of the sources used. Barrows and Kelson (1995) in Abu Hassan and Khairiyah Mohd (2004),
define PBL “as a total approach to education, both a curriculum and a process”. In our case,
we would say, both in scope and as a learning strategy that should start with problem for-
mulating, defining scope. Barrows and Kelson curriculum is “careful selected”, in our case
it is constructed, it depends on the context, the group of students and their preferences, and
could be often messy, not particularly structured. Barrows and Kelson find “in real life and

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Jose Figueiredo, [email protected]

Citation: Figueiredo, J. (2021). A review and survey of Problem-Based Learning application in Engineering
Education. Academia Letters, Article 412. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL412.

2
in their career” problems already formulated? Eventually formulated by a god teacher that
supervises us all the time in our practice? “PBL utilizes real world problems, not hypothetical
case studies” would this mean that students receive a fixed translation of what is the reality,
the real problem, and they train themselves blindly solving it? Is this not hypothetical? In
fact, forgetting these nasty details, allowing curriculum construction (scope) from scratch and
tolerating drift from the main plan, PBL looks like a promising experience. It looks like it
can endorse skills to tackle real engineering problems. And we consider this flexibility to be
one of the strengths of the PBL approach. It is that flexibility that helpfully trains decision
processes and critical thinking, as well as qualitative reasoning, to name three topics deeply
internalized in engineering practice.
The article mentions things like “the studying behaviour of students”, and tutors have “a
good teaching experience” which are images misaligned with the undergoing paradigm. One
of the changes imposed by PBL in the learning cycle is that students doesn’t study, or at least
they do it in a very different way. The trick is to plan, to do, to check, to act, to assume
decisions about course of action, to gather by themselves all the information considered rel-
evant and necessary, wherever it comes from (books, internet, other people), to reflect and
experiment in trials (trial and error). PBL is a rich experience that simulates and stimulates
professional involvements, the practice of engineering. Concerning the professor, it is not a
teacher anymore, it doesn’t explain content, doesn’t assume a top down discourse above stu-
dents. The professor is concerned with the purpose, we could say the purpose of the project
(we could refer it as content or domain), it stimulates a deep and dynamic debate about the
goal, facilitates the tentative ways explored, debates and integrates discussions, always par-
ticipating as a collaborator and not as an authority that accumulates all the knowledge and
decide above all.
The article also displays two speeds, two parts, from section 3 to the end of section 4.1
it is more telegraphic, more light, and less interesting. It also uses a positivist approach with
the use of the questionnaire, trying to prove assumptions, while PBL is essentially an inter-
pretive, constructive approach. This mixes of paradigms positivist/interpretive are common
but usually non-consistent and should be avoided.
So, apart from some paradigmatic “translations” that require to be more careful, we can
say the article is academically useful and can act as a launching mechanism to go further and
explore a very interesting educative approach like Problem Based Learning. An approach that
is being adopted quite quickly all over the world, an approach that demands senior and mature
lectures or professors in order to explore PBL possibilities and promote effective experiences.

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Jose Figueiredo, [email protected]

Citation: Figueiredo, J. (2021). A review and survey of Problem-Based Learning application in Engineering
Education. Academia Letters, Article 412. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL412.

3
References
Abu Hassan Mohd Ariffin, Khairiyah Mohd. Yusof, Mohd. Kamaruddin Abd. Hamid, Mimi
Haryani Hassim, Azila Abd. Aziz, and Syed Ahmad Helmi Syed Hassan, 2004, Confer-
ence on Engineering Education, Kuala Lumpur, 14-15 Dis. 2004

Barrows, H., and Kelson, A. C., 1995, Problem-Based Learning in Secondary Education and
the Problem-Based Learning Institute (Monograph 1), Problem-Based Learning Institute,
Springfield, IL.

Mingers, John, 2001, Combining IS Research Methods: Towards a Pluralist Methodology,

Information Systems Research, Vol. 12, No. 3, September 2001, pp. 240–259

Nonaka, I., 1991, The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review, 96-104

Schön, D. A., 1984, The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, Basic
Books; 1st edition, September 23, 1984

Academia Letters, March 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0

Corresponding Author: Jose Figueiredo, [email protected]

Citation: Figueiredo, J. (2021). A review and survey of Problem-Based Learning application in Engineering
Education. Academia Letters, Article 412. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL412.