2.1

Adapting modalities

During the earliest days of the COVID-19 pandemic, the PBL Projects team realized that they needed to modify their traditional face-to-face delivery of professional development to an online format. Prior to the pandemic, the project team were accustomed to offering the PBL professional development initiatives in-person only; therefore, the modules needed to be modified for virtual learning, and the facilitators needed to rethink how to best administer the PBL Challenges in an online classroom space.

The project team worked diligently to pivot their methodology for teaching PBL virtually, working closely with participants to assure their level of preparedness matched that of in-person training. The result was a newly imagined, innovative, 21^st century approach to teaching and learning, and a group of educators equipped to deliver the modules online. Using a virtual Zoom® classroom and utilizing its breakout room feature, the project team was able to emulate the traditional PBL classroom “roundtable” experience in which multiple teams of 3-4 students would work together to solve a problems and the instructor would “float” from team to team offering guidance and direction.

This approach was successfully used in summer 2021 to train 24 STEM educators from across the U.S., Europe and Mexico in the use of the Advanced Photonics Manufacturing PBL Challenges. The training involved teams of 3-4 STEM educators working through four PBL Challenges just as their students would so that they could experience firsthand the challenges their own students would face in an online team-based PBL activity.

2.2

Creating successful student teams

The PBL Challenges, pre-pandemic, were not only mission-based, but also based on rapport between educators and students⁴. In addition, collaboration and collegiality between students in a given PBL group was emphasized by most educators at the onset of a new challenge. As PBL leaders transformed the delivery modality into the virtual space, many PBL educators were left wondering if they would be able to build camaraderie in the online learning environment that mirrored the successful collaboration that their students typically experienced in person.

The data uncovered by this study reveals that the majority of teachers and professors, both at the high school and college level, felt that they were able to successfully transition the collaborative component of PBL into the online learning modality. Teachers and professors immediately began to utilize strategies to create groups, most using the alphabetical or randomized selection that they had commonly used pre-pandemic. Some facilitators surveyed their students before the challenge began, administering questionnaires about learning styles and lifestyle/schedule restraints and grouping students accordingly. Still yet, other educators allowed students to choose at least one familiar groupmate to help ease the transition into the online learning platform. Most educators encouraged students to connect personally, outside of the confines of the PBL challenge, to speak more informally and set meeting times. All of these strategies helped to create fully functioning, successful teams as PBL challenges were administered in their new format.

The deliberations that occur organically during in- person PBL challenges do not occur the same way in the online format; therefore, students relied on digital communication tools to assure strong communication within groups in the online learning space. Students reported using modern technology and applications to bolster communication between groupmates, and indicated a high level of comfort in using these tools. The primary purpose for these communications was to discuss and organize tasks, check in regarding progress, and debrief after confusion. Among the most popular communication tools were Google Meet®, Zoom®, and Discord®, as well as traditional text messaging. Students reported that they didn’t form personal bonds with groupmates; rather, that they had formed strong professional and academic rapport based on a process-oriented project. According to the data gathered, this is what they expected, as there was not an initial expectation of creating personal friendships during the course. In fact, the majority of students surveyed most often relied on a pre-set, formal meeting with their groupmates and did not reach out beyond the confines of a scheduled meeting. Given this, students still reported feeling comfortable with their partner or group.

Students reported feeling successful during their PBL challenges in regards to peer collaboration. Most believed that their success during the challenges was primarily individual, yet not hindered by their groupmates. The vast majority of students surveyed felt either moderately or highly successful in their group, with one student reporting that their group didn’t function as highly as they’d hoped. Overall, students understood the mission of the PBL challenges, and valued the collaborative nature of them.

2.3

Student engagement

Authentic student engagement is a primary mission of PBL. As PBL modules shifted to a completely online environment, facilitators were tasked with maintaining the same high levels of student engagement as they did when delivering the challenges in person. Educators reported that at the onset, the notion of maintaining high levels of student engagement online seemed overwhelming; most reported that after beginning the projects, high levels of communication between students and facilitators helped student engagement sustain its levels compared to in-person learning. Several educators even believed that student engagement in the virtual space increased from in-person learning, citing the students’ autonomy or self-motivation as potential causes.

Facilitators reported that other factors may have led to positive student engagement during the PBL cycles, such as offering virtual office hours, being specific with expectations and due dates, and differentiating the amount of support or autonomy given to each group, depending on specific needs. Students reported that they felt engaged with the PBL process, noting that it required them to prioritize group communication and stay up-to-date on responsibilities among their group. The majority of students cited personal responsibility and accountability to their partner or group as a central reason that they were able to maintain high levels of engagement with PBL work. This is consistent with current research in the field regarding student engagement in an online PBL environment⁵.

There were several outliers in this data set, which included the belief that student engagement on the whole had sharply decreased both before, during, and after the pandemic. This speaks to an overarching concern shared by teachers at all levels of education. Overall, the data supported the notion that although there were some challenges, student engagement in the online PBL environment mirrored the high-level of engagement in the in-person classroom. Current research studies have found similar results, acknowledging both the benefits and challenges of student engagement in online PBL settings⁶.

2.4

PBL and self-motivation

Among the most remarkable data gathered during this study was student perceptions of their self-motivation and self-efficacy regarding the PBL challenges, and how this juxtaposed instructor perceptions of student motivation. Students overwhelmingly reported that their motivation, excitement, and determination during the PBL modules were high or very high, and that they didn’t believe participating in the PBL challenges online hindered their ability to successfully complete the expectations of the modules. Students reported a high satisfaction level with the work, as well as a high confidence in their ability to complete it successfully, aligning with research in the field⁷. They believed themselves to be highly motivated intrinsically, driven primarily by their determination to complete the task well and work effectively with a group. Overwhelmingly, students believed that their experience online would be just as effective or impactful versus on in-person learning experience. Nearly half of the participants indicated a preference for learning online as opposed to on-ground.

In opposition to this data, many instructors reported that they perceived their students to be less intrinsically motivated as compared to motivation levels before COVID-19. Instructors reported that some students appeared to be disengaged and apathetic during some aspects of the PBL challenges, some even believing that motivation was more instructor-driven, rather than intrinsically driven by the student. Overall, this information exposes a glaring disconnect between student experience and instructor perception during PBL challenges.

2.5

Instructor feedback

A key indicator in student success with virtual PBL challenges was their accessibility to their instructor, and the quality and timeliness of the feedback the instructor provided to groups. The majority of students reported that they felt supported by their teacher or professor, and knew several different modalities in which to reach him or her, including email, office hours, or even by cell phone. Students reported a high level of comfort in making contact with their instructor, and felt that they would receive help or clarification as needed by making this contact. Furthermore, students also felt confident that their instructors would provide timely feedback on assignments or modules within the constructs of PBL. Students reported that specific feedback and conversations with their professors helped them during difficult stages of a PBL challenge, paralleling many years of research on this topic. Conversely, instructors cited specific and timely feedback as a core component to their approach with the online learning modules. The research on feedback aligns with this data⁸, underscoring the importance of strong communication between instructor and student, and highlighting the importance of providing timely, detailed, student feedback, especially in a completely online learning environment.

3.1

Program highlights

Students

Instructors

3.2

Recommendations for future implementation: