Gathering Around Incidental Learning

Andrea and I led tonight's session on problem-based learning and project-based learning. This was our second evening gathering, following Trent's facilitation of a discussion on game based learning. (see previous post below!)

Something that I realized that we did not actually discuss was the definition of terms like Problem-Based versus Project-Based Learning. To me, it seems that both types of practice engage students in collaborative learning with defined roles and structures, however problem-based learning tends to have higher stakes in terms of applicability to real-world situations versus project-based learning which may not have a deliverable for an audience. Specifically, according to Nilson, problem-based learning tends to involve real-world, human-situational, open-ended, high-uncertainty, and risky challenges with multiple respectable solution. This is in contract to project-based learning that may involve some aspect of the aforementioned challenges and opportunities with lower-stakes if no dissemination is present. Second, the very nature of problem-based learning is to approach a problem - to solve an issue, question, or complicated situation; whereas a project-based approach can refer to a mode of learning that may not be seeking resolution but does incorporate group work.

We discussed readings by Nilson and Crawford & Machemer. The Nilson book is of particular interest to me because it has research-based pithy chapters that look at a variety of approaches and structures for teaching, assessment, and learning. The Crawford & Machemer article focuses on incidental learning as an important component for PBL. I selected this reading because I feel that we under-value incidental learning in the academy. I am reminded of this every time that I have students in my courses participate in the Smithsonian Institution Transcription Center projects. To transcribe a bumblebee label, students often perform additional tasks beyond the primary task of transcribing a label. This takes the student down the rabbit hole of critical thinking. And, I am always incredibly pleased to witness this. But, how can we measure this type of work beyond the framing of the course content and rubric?  I do not ever ask students to locate Ecuador on a map as part of a museum studies course; but their work at finding this country on the map and then locating a specific city to ensure that their transcription was accurate demonstrates incidental learning, critical thinking, and integrative learning (See here for discussion of AACU's value rubrics, including integrative learning.)

Juilee going over project sites developed
by her students at RIT.

Discussing what works and what doesn't.

Below are three lists. The first is the number of my RIT project sites that we viewed: 

https://ritmuse.wordpress.com/
http://library.rit.edu/depts/archives/history-exhibits-listing/people
https://muse.rit.edu/transcribe/
http://sbawalkingtour.weebly.com/

The second list consists of sources that we read in preparation for tonight's discussion:

• Crawford, Pat and Patricia Machemer. 2008. Measuring Incidental Learning in a PBL Environment. Journal of Faculty Development. 22:2 (May 2008): 104-111.
• Nilson, Linda B. 2010. Teaching At Its Best: A Research Based Resource for College Instructors. 3E. San Francisco: Wiley.

The third list consists of sources that might be useful for further discussion:

• Quinlan, K. (2000). "An Evaluation of a Literature Database to Support Problem-Based Learning." Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 11(2/3), 27-39.  (keen on developing the idea of the facilitator model rather than sage on the stage)
• Savin-Baden, M., & Major, C. H. (2004). Foundations of Problem-Based Learning. Berkshire, England: Open University Press.
• http://plpnetwork.com/2013/01/10/problem-vs-project-based-learning/ (good distinctions drawn between both terms)
• List of 16 value rubrics from the AACU:  https://www.aacu.org/value-rubricsVALUE Rubrics, organized by learning outcome

In April, we will meet to discuss our plans for a works-in-progress/lessons learned/future steps in thinking about GBL/PBL relative to digital humanities and social sciences. This will be a preparatory meeting for our presentation and discussion at the RIT THATCamp on Friday, May 6.  Working on a session that close to the unconference of THATCamp may be unnerving to some; however...an unconference, in Tom Scheinfeldt’s words, is fun, productive, and collegial, and at THATCamp, therefore, “[W]e’re not here to listen and be listened to. We’re here to work, to participate actively.[…] We’re here to get stuff done.” 

Though slightly unnerved, I love the spirit of THATCamps — I have been to several myself. So I look forward to sharing my work and to learning from all of you, too.