Shaban, Abdulwahed, Younes (2015), Problem-centric Process for Research-based Learning

http://dx.doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v5i2.4506

Short summary of the scope and focus in the article

-Introducing a systematic process to guide students in conducting research. -Students learned to master subjects by applying abstract concepts in practical research projects.
-It was found that research skills of a student are more effectively developed and improved while working on real-world problems under the supervision of experts and practitioners.

-The success of the RbL process depended on the commitment, collaboration and active participation of all members.
-Students who are not all steps clarified for them resist to engage effectively. -Having collaborators would help alleviate many difficulties and take some of the supervision and guidance load off the instructor. (Collaborators can help in identifying the research topics early to the students.)

-The instructor should provide students with previous works or data to start with, and pre-approve the papers to be reviewed by students.
-A close review of students’ produced work from all performed activities and continuous provision of feedback is essential.

-The quality of students’ work depends on the maturity of the students and the university, and the competition in the work market which can be a major motivation for students to excel.
-Pedagogical and psychological interventions are necessary to improve the interest of students with low motivations in smaller universities compared to students in leading universities.

Quote a statement that summarizes what the author claims they contribute to the field.

A pilot realization of the RbL process, and that its success depended on the commitment, collaboration and active participation of all its members.

In your own words, compare the results/arguments presented in the article with the authors’ claim(s) you identified in question 1.

I think the results presented are interesting and well analyzed. The authors have tried to take into account important and key ingredients that can influence a RbL process.

Is the argument that the authors provide solid enough based on the evidence and/or theoretical considertaions to convince you of their claim(s)?

The arguments provided make sense to me, interesting, and are based on solid evidence.

What is missing in the article?

The research has targeted MSc students (engineering design and software development -problem centric nature fields-). It would be interesting to understand and compare results of the same research at the BSc and PhD levels and different research fields to identify how much these findings are the proposed RbL process is transferable.

What was most interesting for you?

When RbL is used, a cyclic iteration of different steps should be traveled. The courses may offer a mix of theory and practice, and the RbL process helps achieving the practical objectives and learning outcomes of these courses. The process starts after essential theoretical topics are covered, then extends over the research course. It includes activities that are iteratively performed in order to solve a research problem. These activities aim to train students on research and help them to publish their findings in peer-reviewed venues. This process would help the setting of objectives, milestones, and work timeline. Detailed guide- lines on these activities are introduced through written and oral notes, meetings, and feedback from the instructor.

What can you learn from it?

The main method to conducting RbL in undergraduate research is through senior projects, curriculum-independent projects, summer research programs, paid part-time jobs, and internships with local industries. However, RbL course- integrated research can expose a larger number of students to research experience and as early as possible. Try to perform the cyclic approach proposed in this article to approach a RbL process.