Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
PBL and CDIO: Complementary models for engineering education development
KTH, School of Education and Communication in Engineering Science (ECE), Learning.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8664-6854
KTH, School of Education and Communication in Engineering Science (ECE), Learning. Aalborg University, Denmark.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0186-2839
2014 (English)In: European Journal of Engineering Education, ISSN 0304-3797, E-ISSN 1469-5898, Vol. 39, no 5, p. 539-555Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper compares two models for reforming engineering education, problem/project-based learning (PBL), and conceive–design–implement–operate (CDIO), identifying and explaining similarities and differences. PBL and CDIO are defined and contrasted in terms of their history, community, definitions, curriculum design, relation to disciplines, engineering projects, and change strategy. The structured comparison is intended as an introduction for learning about any of these models. It also invites reflection to support the understanding and evolution of PBL and CDIO, and indicates specifically what the communities can learn from each other. It is noted that while the two approaches share many underlying values, they only partially overlap as strategies for educational reform. The conclusions are that practitioners have much to learn from each other’s experiences through a dialogue between the communities, and that PBL and CDIO can play compatible and mutually reinforcing roles, and thus can be fruitfully combined to reform engineering education.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2014. Vol. 39, no 5, p. 539-555
Keyword [en]
CDIO, problem-based learning, project-based learning, PBL, educational development, curriculum development, change strategy
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Education and Communication in the Technological Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-185178DOI: 10.1080/03043797.2014.895703OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-185178DiVA: diva2:918999
Note

QC 20170505

Available from: 2016-04-12 Created: 2016-04-12 Last updated: 2017-11-07Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Exploring the dual nature of engineering education: Opportunities and challenges in integrating the academic and professional aspects in the curriculum
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Exploring the dual nature of engineering education: Opportunities and challenges in integrating the academic and professional aspects in the curriculum
2017 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Engineering education is both academic, emphasising theory in a range of subjects, and professional, preparing students for engineering practice. Ideally, these aspects are also in a meaningful relationship in the curriculum, but the dual nature ideal is simultaneously a source of tensions. This theme is explored in the context of engineering education development, represented by the CDIO (Conceive, Design, Implement, Operate) approach. Cases on programme and course level illustrate how the dual nature ideal is pursued in the integrated curriculum. CDIO is also compared with PBL (problem/project-based learning), and opportunities to further emphasise research in the CDIO community are explored.

Two critical accounts suggest widening the perspective from curriculum development per se, to the organisational conditions. First, the views of Carl Richard Söderberg (1895-1979) are compared with CDIO, showing considerable similarities in ideals, arguments, and strategies. This leads to a critique of the swinging pendulum metaphor. Then, experiences of unsustainable change leads to a model called organisational gravity, explaining the stability of programmes and implying two change strategies, with different availability, risks, resource demands, and sustainability of results.

Refuting a rationalist view on organisation, an institutional logics perspective is used to analyse the tensions within engineering education. It is suggested that the logics of the academic profession dominates over the logics of the engineering profession, hence favouring “teaching theory” over “teaching professionals”. The integrated curriculum strategy is contingent on educators’ ability to unite theoretical and professional aspects in courses, and on the collegial capacity for coordination. Finally, the CDIO initiative is conceptualised as a field-level driver of institutional innovation, identifying some strategies for legitimacy.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2017. p. 92
Series
TRITA-ECE ; 2017:2
Keyword
engineering education, professional education, dual nature, engineering education development, CDIO Initiative, CDIO approach, CDIO Standards, PBL, engineering education research, Carl Richard Söderberg, organisational gravity, institutional logics
National Category
Educational Sciences
Research subject
Technology and Learning
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-217315 (URN)978-91-7729-596-9 (ISBN)
Public defence
2017-12-13, Salongen, KTHB, Osquars backe 31, Stockholm, 14:00 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Note

QC 20171108

Available from: 2017-11-08 Created: 2017-11-07 Last updated: 2017-11-10Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Edström, KristinaKolmos, Anette

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Edström, KristinaKolmos, Anette
By organisation
Learning
In the same journal
European Journal of Engineering Education
Educational Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 131 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf