LITERATURE
Today’s students will function professionally in what has been described as the ’knowledge society’, and Jarvis (2001;2003) has analysed the changes which lead to, and characterise, this new age. Lifelong learning is now a prerequisite for the economic survival of society. The notion that education and training occur during adolescence and are solely a preparation for, and separate from, life and work, has been overturned within less than one generation. There is a growing focus on qualities such as learning to learn, self-management and self-confidence, negotiation and critical thinking. The skills of collecting and interpreting information and using knowledge in all its forms are a priority in a society that is, for the first time in human history, information rich. This has profound implications for higher education. Furthermore, Drucker (1993), states that the kind of knowledge concerned is not just any knowledge. It is knowledge that can be applied for results – knowledge that can be applied systematically and purposefully to define what new knowledge is needed, and to accomplish systematic innovation.
It is important to note that the acquisition of these particular skills is exactly the basis for formulating the Batchelor of Technology (BTech) research project in Civil Engineering at the CPUT, and provides, in general, the raison d’être for research as the teaching strategy of choice for higher degrees
(Slatter,1998; 1999a; Slatter et al., 1995a; 1995b; Slatter et al., 1997a; Slatter and Peterson 1997b).


Slatter (1998; 1999a), identifies formal tuition and research as the two learning modes prevalent in tertiary institutions. A widespread and non-trivial problem is bridging the divide between these two. On the one hand, there are students who achieve good grades under the formal tuition regime. They are drawn into higher degree studies and then flounder because they have not successfully adapted to the new mode of learning. On the other hand, there are supervisors who regard research as a task which is mechanically performed by students who are automatically expected to be good researchers on the grounds of their good performance at undergraduate level.
Arguably, the major difficulty here – for both the student and the supervisor – is the role reversal, which typifies the divide between formal tuition and research (Slatter, 1998). The typical undergraduate learning experience is not student-controlled. The student usually has little or no controlor responsibility concerning timetabling, course structure, content and evaluation Students remain dependent on the lecturer to take responsibility and accountability for these issues. Within the context of a research project, this situation is reversed and the student must take the initiative for independent study and investigation. A simulation of true-life problem solving is thus realistically achieved.
It is also useful to view the subject of this article from an educational psychology perspective. A central thesis in the educational approach which underpins the BTech Project Progamme Slatter et al., (2004), is that learning through research is qualitatively different from learning through subject teaching (Slatter, 1998). Furthermore, as students engage with the research learning modality, the different forms and processes of engagement with knowledge enable students to make conceptual shifts. This acts as an unlocking mechanism or vehicle for allowing the development of skills needed for problem solving, critical thinking and communication to the sophisticated levels that are required. The research pertaining to this study is thus located in the ‘students’ experiences-oflearning’ framework that prioritises learning from the learner’s perspective (Martin and S.lj., 1976).


The students are introduced to research methodology at the beginning of the year when they either have to find a researchable topic, or join a research group such as the Flow Process Research Centre (FPRC), where researchers make topics available to the students. The next phase is to prepare a proposal, which is evaluated by the research staff of the department. These early interventions help to assure that students acquire the necessary skills and have selected
research topics that are practical and feasible. Members of the lecturing staff are designated to the respective students to assist them with the research process. This involves regular interviews and report back sessions with the students.
During this period the students are also introduced to project management topics as shown above. These skills are then applied to assist students in managing their projects in the course of the year. Some students have admitted that without these tools, they would not have been able to finalise a project of such magnitude within one year.
The course is managed by means of elearning, using Web-CT.. This has led to a marked improvement in the effectiveness of communication between staff and students. Students use the facility to discuss matters of common interest on a discussion board. It has become clear that the integration of project management, in such a way that it facilitates active learning, is of prime importance.
`
SUBJECT EVALUATION / ASSESS-MENT
Project Management and Dissertation 4 is a continuous evaluation subject – which means that the final mark does not rest upon any formal and final examination. The subject consists of lectures, tests, assignments, reports, presentations, and a written dissertation. The assessment of the project management section is achieved through the evaluation of students’ assignments and tests, a risk analysis of the research project, and five progress reports on the research project compiled during the year. The research staff then assesses the dissertation and a proforma is used to adjudicate marks. The draft dissertation is corrected so that the students can improve the final version of the research project with a sound knowledge of what is expected of a good dissertation.
Students also have to present their work to their peers and to lecturing staff by means of a poster presentation at the University’s annual Engineering Conference. These summary presentations of five minutes prepare them for a final power point presentation of 15 minutes, which is assessed. The mark allocation for the subject is tabulated below
Project Management:
2 x Tests 50%
3 x Assignments 30%
Risk analysis 5%
5 x Progress reports15%
100% x 0.5 = 50%
Treatise:
Proposal 10%
Treatise 80%
Final Presentation 10%
100% x 0.5 = 50%
100%
It is vitally important to note that evaluating the process is at least as important as evaluating the final product.


LECTURER INVOLVEMENT
In the past the research staff were generally responsible for managing the research component. This meant that three staff members had to assist between 40 and 60 students. Support by staff involved finding of topics, marking the draft and final versions of the proposals, as well as the literature reviews and theses. In addition to this, it also required dealing with all the intermediate problems related to the research.
The ideal has always been to involve the entire departmental staff cohort in supervising the students. High lecturing loads and a general reluctance of staff to become involved in research have previously inhibited this process. The integration of the two institutions into a technical university has changed this, and for the first time a large number of the staff have become involved in managing the research. Their involvement entails the following:
. At the start of the year lecturers are asked to provide research topics in their fields of expertise. These are made available to the students who then have to approach the lecturer and discuss the project before asking him / her to become his / her mentor for the year.
. The lecturer has to check students’ draft proposals, making sure that the projects are feasible.
. When the proposal has finally been approved, the students are supervised by a specific lecturer responsible for between 2 and 6 students, and for arranging 3 to 4 weekly progress meetings.
. At the meeting, chaired by the lecturer, the students report on the progress of the previous month, as well as the proposed programme for the following month and any problems which have been encountered. The minutes are recorded by one of the students and distributed to the rest. These forums are very helpful to the students, as they learn from each other in a constructive way.
. The lecturer also screens all the sections of the treatise before they are handed in for final assessment.
These measures have assured that more students are supervised by lecturers with expertise in a particular field, whereas previously only a few lecturers had to oversee a large group of students.
This has proved to be a good form of intervention, as students encountering problems with their research are identified at a much earlier stage.
Students soon learn that they have to take the initiative themselves – staff is there to guide and facilitate – not to solve the problem. This is where the role reversal is most acute.


THE STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE PROGRAMME
The following quotes from students constitute part of the responses to a set of exercises in Higher Order Thinking Skills that the students asked to complete during the year. They provide invaluable insight into the problems that students experience when they are suddenly exposed to a different mode of learning. In the following two sections unedited quotes are presented. Each of the following sets of students self-reports indicate the contrast in the learning milieu that students experience. The self-reports are taken from a cross-section of the studentbody, a number of whom are second and even third language English speakers.
STUDENTS SELF REPORTS ON EXPERIENCE OF LEARNING THROUGH SUBJECT TEACHING
DESCRIPTION OF THE SUBJECT LEARNING PARADIGM
’Subject teaching is the traditional way of teaching. For this method a teacher is required that possesses the required knowledge, experience and information about the subject. A set curriculum is followed with selected aspects of the subject being conveyed. The student is presented with this curriculum at the start of each subject and is informed of his/her requirements to pass the subject. It presents the students with a framework that forms his idea around the subject and contents thereof. It does not facilitate any extended thinking around the subject that might include more aspects and lead to a wider framework that the one designed. The student consults prescribed textbooks and no need to consult non-prescribed textbooks is created. The information conveyed by the teacher is seen as correct and just and is not challenged resulting in the underdevelopment of critical thinking and reasoning.’
THINKING DEVELOPMENT
‘Thinking skills are not adequately developed through subject teaching, this is because one tends to study for the ’right answers’ and studying is confined, the brain works as a storage devise that only produce(s) stored information when requested to do so. Questions such as; "why and what if", are not part of the daily thinking because it is presumed that the information given by the lecturer does not need to be improved because that is what is going to be asked in a class test or examination.’
LEARNING APPROACH
‘Subject learning is often linked to regurgitating information. In many cases the work and material is just recalled and not understood. Understanding the work is expected to occur as the student is forced to work through structured examples, this does not seem to incorporate that nobody learns in the same manner. Without understanding the student does not have value added learning. Students are able to study days before an exam and still do well, as it is easy to recall information in the format that the structured syllabus has defined.’


WORKPLACE PREPARATION
‘When a student is tasked with solving a problem, he/she already has all the background information in order to correctly interpret the problem, and the given problems have one or a very restricted number of solutions. The student generally knows this and therefore only has to work towards that solution, using the information (tools) given to him... As far as preparation for the workplace is concerned, in the real world, the problems that the students will be faced with will be varied and the nature and scope of is often unknown or at least not always apparent. The student might be able to excel at tasks, when working in a position where a senior positioned colleague channels through information to him/her. The student will find it difficult however to work at a high position then that, as he/she is ill equipped to tackle any obstacles in unchartered territory.’
STUDENTS SELF REPORTS ON EXPERIENCE OF LEARNING THROUGH RESEARCH DESCRIPTION OF THE RESEARCH LEARNING PARADIGM
’This is one of the trickiest ways of learning because you have yourself a platform to use for your research and at times you do not know where to start... It is one of the biggest challenges because all of a sudden you are given a huge task of coming up with a research topic by yourself. This type of stepping up come with lots of demanding workload that one might not be used to and it put one to a test and it teaches you ways of handling pressure. As the challenges get bigger a person can experience a lot of stress, and you also learn ways of dealing with that... This method of learning might not Seem easy
because it just been introduced at BTech level and where the level of expectations is very high ....You get to learn more than what you thought you could learn, and some of the things you learn are outside the scope of the curriculum.’
THINKING DEVELOPMENT
‘I personally think and believe that conducting research develops your thinking skills. Since you are to answer questions that rose about a particular matter, the information you find triggers you to think more so that you can answer whatever question is there. You also learn to back-up your thinking because you do not just answer the main question but the sub-questions as well, such as, and then, so what and what if.’
LEARNING APPROACH
‘Learning through research has an unstructured approach to learning, cause it allows you to set the scope of the subject, where you have to teach yourself on how to solve the problems, proving facts and come up with the relevant solutions and recommendations, thus encourages critical thinking on how to approach the problem by becoming more involved in the subject. It develops the ability on how to tie the theory and practice together.’
WORKPLACE PREPARATION
‘It is certainly more challenging in terms of self-motivation and self-discipline. Academically it is also a notch above what I have become accustomed to in previous years of study. The dissertation has certainly me for a working environment. I have to do weekly reports in a formal meeting on the progress that I have made in my research during the previous week. I have to work in a team and communicate continuously with members of the team. I have to compose monthly written reports to my mentor on the progress made. I believe that all of these factors have developed the skills generally required by any type of business or enterprise.’