Session T2C 1-4244-0257-3/06/$20.00 © 2006 IEEE October 28 – 31, 2006, San Diego, CA 36 th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference T2C-21 Work in Progress: Problem-Based Learning and Assessment of Competence in an Engineering Biomaterials Course Jevan Furmanski, Sheryl R. Kane, Shikha Gupta, Lisa A. Pruitt University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720 jevan@me.berkeley.edu Abstract – Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is implemented in a senior level undergraduate engineering biomaterials course. Preliminary results from student surveys, assignments, exams, and a comprehensive design project suggest that students indicate no improvement in student satisfaction compared to traditional instructional methods. Since PBL demands that students be active agents in the learning process, students’ self-assessment ability is critical to the success of the method. Responses to class surveys and student performance indicate disconnect between student self-assessment of understanding and the actual state, perhaps explaining the mixed success of the method. A new assessment rubric based on Bloom’s Taxonomy is outlined. The rubric provides a quantification of student understanding in specific competence areas, and may further elucidate student understanding as distinct from student confidence. The rubric also assesses the more sophisticated areas of competence, e.g. synthesis, analysis, and evaluation, that PBL emphasizes and that traditional grading underemphasizes. Index Terms – Bloom’s Taxonomy, Problem-based learning. INTRODUCTION The following work is taking place in the context of an annual course on the mechanical properties of biomaterials at the University of California, Berkeley. This course deals with the properties of both natural and synthetic biomaterials, and design and failure issues relevant to biological implants. The nature of the class requires the consideration of specific real world applications, making it an excellent candidate for non- traditional instruction methods. The instructional format follows the framework for problem based learning (PBL) as motivated by Dochy et al. [1]. Lectures serve as an introduction to new material, via case studies and actual clinical results. Assignments then reinforce core concepts through a combination of individual and group analytical and synthetic tasks. This report details initial results of the first application of PBL to this course. Methods of instruction, evaluation, and assessment of student satisfaction are detailed, followed by some initial results. METHODS Course instruction is problem-based, in that lecture and assignments emphasize real application, and the acquisition of knowledge and skills occurs in this context [2]. Lectures begin with a problem or case to study, and course concepts are introduced to elucidate or explain the case. Assignments range from basic application to a term design project that requires significant original synthesis and analysis. Almost all assignments are given in the context of the final design project as deliverables. Thus, the course is entirely problem-based, where information is both conveyed and applied in the context of open-ended, real-world constructions. Student response to the course format is gauged via surveys administered periodically during the course. These surveys are designed to measure satisfaction, confidence, and relative preference for the course format over that of traditional instruction. Understanding of course material is assessed using both a traditional grading scheme and a novel rubric based on Bloom’s Taxonomy [3]. Since the course format serves to emphasize the higher levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy, i.e. analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, it is expected that a Bloom’s rubric demonstrates this effect more directly than ordinary grading. The Bloom’s Taxonomy rubric here is not tied to the demonstration of enumerated skills, as in prior work [4]. Rather, it tests for the expression of the various skills implicit in Bloom’s taxonomy. Each has “indicators” to help the grader notice and distinguish application of the skills. For instance, in the Evaluation area of the rubric, there are two competency skills listed, e.g. Intellectualization and Fault Analysis. To demonstrate mastery, each of these must be expressed a number of times commensurate with the difficulty of the skill. The indicators listed in the rubric for Intellectualization are: “scrutiny/comparison of competing theories” and “subjectivity recognition”, and mastery might constitute as few as one or two uses of this skill. All work is assessed with the rubric by indicating both the use and frequency of the competency skills on the page as they are encountered. RESULTS & DISCUSSION One motivation for case-based instruction is that students may have a more enjoyable or gratifying experience. The survey results call this into question. Some students resisted taking the initiative to find information on their own, and resented the