Engineering educators are currently concerned with producing graduates who have mastery of knowledge and generic or “soft” skills. A blend of both attributes would equip graduating engineers with critical thinking and problem solving skills, continuous self-learning abilities, and teamwork and communication skills. However, being burdened with heavy course requirements that must be fulfilled within a specified time frame, teachers tend to adopt didactic teaching approaches while students tend to rote learn what ever that has been spoonfed, which tend to produce graduates with qualities far from the desired outcome. The million-dollar question is: how can we produce the desired quality of engineering graduates within the restricted amount of time? In the Faculty of Chemical and Natural Resources Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Process Dynamics and Control is labelled by the undergraduate students as a “killer” subject. The failure rate is high and the passing marks are low, no matter who teaches the subject. The subject is considered by many to be difficult because it requires students to combine their knowledge in chemical engineering and mathematics. Students often fail to understand and visualize a process in operation, and relate mathematical theories to the physical reality. As a result, most students can barely decipher the problem-solving type questions in the exams. In an effort to guide the students to learn and understand the subject better, as well as acquire the necessary soft skills, cooperative learning and problem-based learning (PBL) have been introduced. Although cooperative learning had been implemented in previous semesters, this is the first time certain topics in the subject were covered through PBL. This is also the first time students from this faculty are exposed to PBL. This paper describes the implementation, feelings and thoughts of both lecturers and students, and the outcome of PBL in the Process Dynamics and Control class.
[1]
Richard M. Felder,et al.
THE FUTURE OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION II. TEACHING METHODS THAT WORK
,
2000
.
[2]
Richard M. Felder,et al.
THE FUTURE OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION III. DEVELOPING CRITICAL SKILLS
,
2000
.
[3]
Richard M. Felder,et al.
THE FUTURE OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION VI. MAKING REFORM HAPPEN
,
2000
.
[4]
Rebecca Brent,et al.
Cooperative Learning in Technical Courses: Procedures, Pitfalls, and Payoffs.
,
1994
.
[5]
Armando B. Corripio,et al.
Principles and Practice of Automatic Process Control
,
1985
.
[6]
Victoria J. Gallagher,et al.
Dynamics of Peer Education in Cooperative Learning Workgroups
,
2000
.
[7]
Donald R. Woods,et al.
HELPING YOUR STUDENTS GAIN THE MOST FROM PBL
,
1996
.
[8]
Richard M. Felder,et al.
THE FUTURE OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION I. A VISION FOR A NEW CENTURY
,
2000
.