STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVE: DOES PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING INCREASE OWNERSHIP OF ONE’S EDUCATION?
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Students in the 4th year laboratory course in the Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering (CHBE) at UBC perform multi-week problem-based laboratories (PBL). Open-ended industrially-relevant problem statements are provided as context, but teams are not bound by them and can choose alternative problems according to their interests. Operating instructions for equipment are provided, but students must develop their own experimental designs and data collection and analysis protocols. TA involvement is greatly reduced compared to previous courses to promote independence and self-reliance. In previous work, students indicated that this approach helped them develop their critical thinking and problem-solving skills, and increased their confidence in their engineering abilities. Anecdotal evidence and an analysis of the survey data in that study suggest that one possible reason for the benefits outlined above stem from students’ imposed self-reliance and ownership of their work, coupled with a freedom to experiment with no consequences for failure. To explore this question, a questionnaire was sent to the current cohort of students, asking them to qualify their enjoyment of the course (level of enjoyment, workload, perceived relevance), the effectiveness of the course (perceived knowledge and skill development), as well as their perceived level of agency in the course (perceived freedom and autonomy regarding content and research direction). Students were then invited to a focus group to further elaborate on the course and reflect on their overall experience during the undergraduate studies, whether they felt they had agency or ownership during their studies, and whether they believe problem-based learning should be implemented in other courses earlier on in the program. Responses were thematically analyzed, and are presented in this paper.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle