1. Can problem-based learning in interdisciplinary teams work effectively online? Ian Hutt Bland Tomkinson University of Manchester

2. Project Managing Humanitarian Aid Designed/taught by: Bland Tomkinson Unit leader: Paul Chan Management of Projects Programme (MACE) “Interdisciplinary Sustainable Development” (MSEC) Collaboration with Keele & Staffordshire Funded by NTFS

3. Project Managing Humanitarian Aid Social Constructivist Approach No formal lectures Small, interdisciplinary groups (~8 students) Solving “wicked problems” (scenarios) Facilitated discussions Group, individual and peer-assessed reports Issues of scalability and logistics Feasible for Distance Learning?

4. Online Groupwork PBL? Aftermath of the Indonesian Tsunami, 2004 Strategy for transitional accommodation Only online collaboration allowed

5. Structure & Tools Presentation Collaboration Assessment Online briefing material News websites Documentary (BoB) Group discussion forum File exchange Group Wiki Group Wiki report Reflective journal

6. Data Collection Submitted Reports – All groups and individuals successfully submitted Nominal Group Process – Groups generate +ve/-ve comments and vote – Blackboard/wiki scored strongly as a –ve Online Survey – 15 Qs, 5pt Likert scale – 62.5% response rate (15/24)

7. Technical / Training Q1. Technical problems prevented me from using Bb9 and the online tools effectively. (5/15 agree) Q2. I received sufficient instruction to be able to use Bb9 and the online tools effectively. (1/15 disagree)

8. Presentation Q3. The websites and other online resources presented through Bb9 provided useful background to the scenario. (1/15 disagree)

9. Collaboration - groupwork Q4. My group was able to collaborate effectively online.(3/15 disagree) Q8. I found that my group was able to engage effectively with the facilitator online.

10. Collaboration - tools Q6. The discussion groups and similar tools enabled my group to communicate even when we were not all online. (11/15 agree) Q5. The online tools provided enabled my group to hold effective online meetings. (5/15 agree)

11. Other Tools Q7. My group used additional online tools (e.g. Facebook) to collaborate online. (14/15 agree) Facebook:11 Skype:12 Email:12 Mobile Phones:5 Google Docs:1

12. Preferences Q9. I prefer meeting online to meeting face-to- face. (3/15 agree) Q10. I contributed more to the online discussions than I would in a face-to- face meeting. (2/15 agree)

13. Creativity “I think It was a good experience, but a hard one ” “I found it hard to fulfil our commitment when collaborating online.” “Communicating through computer or other tools is time consuming” Q11. I feel that working online made our collaborations less creative. (10/15 agree)

14. Conclusions Limited success – All groups collaborated and submitted. – Effective group communication part of the challenge. – Students probably would not agree...! Lessons learned – Synchronous communication tool (Pronto) – Greater familiarity required