What is PBL and CBL?

From Wikipedia:

Problem-based learning (PBL) is a student-centered pedagogy in which students learn about a subject through the experience of solving an open-ended problem found in trigger material. The PBL process does not focus on problem solving with a defined solution, but it allows for the development of other desirable skills and attributes. This includes knowledge acquisition, enhanced group collaboration and communication.

The PBL tutorial process often involves working in small groups of learners. Each student takes on a role within the group that may be formal or informal and the role often alternates. It is focused on the student's reflection and reasoning to construct their own learning.

The role of the tutor is to facilitate learning by supporting, guiding, and monitoring the learning process.^[2] The tutor aims to build students' confidence when addressing problems, while also expanding their understanding. This process is based on constructivism. PBL represents a paradigm shift from traditional teaching and learning philosophy,^[3] which is more often lecture-based.

Some useful links concerning CBL:

The transformational promise of Challenge-based Education. An overview of CBL with examples of how it has been implemented.

Challenge Based Learning Guide. Best practices when conducting challenge campaigns.

Guide to Challenge Driven Education (KTH).

CBL and Habits of Mind. A graph representing CBL stages and "key attributes exhibited by successful and intelligent problem solvers".

How does CBL (Challenge Based Learning) relate to PBL?

Here is an excerpt from "Challenge-based learning in higher education: an exploratory literature review", a paper by Silvia Elena Gallagher and Timothy Savage (2020) , available in draft form here, final version here (subscription based or paid).

1. Introduction

Challenge-based learning (CBL) is a growing approach in third level education and has been promoted as a means for students to align the acquisition of disciplinary knowledge with the development of transversal competencies while working on authentic and sociotechnical societal problems (Nichols & Cator, 2008; Nichols, Cator, & Torres, 2016). This flexible approach frames learning with challenges using multidisciplinary actors, technology enhanced learning, multi-stakeholder collaboration and an authentic, real-world focus.

While the term CBL has appeared in academic literature since 2001 (Giorgio & Brophy, 2001), publications range from standardized CBL frameworks, hybrid approaches, and general educational interventions using challenges in their design. This mass of different approaches using the same term in different ways creates challenges in its definition and in conceptualizing its research landscape.

1.1. Origins of CBL

“A challenge-based learning experience is a learning experience where the learning takes places through the identification, analysis and design of a solution to a sociotechnical problem. The learning experience is typically multidisciplinary, takes place in an international context and aims to find a collaboratively developed solution, which is environmentally, socially and economically sustainable.”(Malmqvist, Rådberg, & Lundqvist, 2015).

The earliest mention of CBL within academic literature described the STAR Legacy Cycle; used primarily at Vanderbilt University. This approach contained six phases; challenge, generate ideas, multiple perspectives, research and revise, test your mettle, and go public (Birol, McKenna, Smith, Giorgio, & Brophy, 2002) in a project focussed enquiry cycle. Derived from the How People Learn pedagogical framework, it was used for module development to enhance student learning experiences (Birol et al., 2002). Several case studies were published based on this approach within the disciplines of engineering and biotechnology (Barry, Brophy, Oakes, Banks, & Sharvelle, 2008; Lovell & Brophy, 2014).

In 2008, Apple published a report as part of their “Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow – Today” project, describing how they developed a CBL approach by working with American educators. CBL within this context describes a three phased approach to teaching; engage, act and investigate. Through this process, students collaborate with academia, industry and extra-academic actors to solve real world challenges through creative and authentic experiences. From this publication, a wide variety of case studies, hybrid approaches and research literature emerged describing how many third level institutions used CBL to increase student collaboration and engagement (Chanin, Sales, Santos, Pompermaier, & Prikladnicki, 2018), develop 21st century skills (Cheng, 2016) and face real world problems in their learning (Cheung, Cohen, Lo, & Elia, 2011). In addition, a variety of other studies using the CBL term were published using more bespoke approaches. Many suggest that CBL was not a completely new approach and emerged via aligned pedagogies (Kohn Rådberg, Lundqvist, Malmqvist, & Hagvall Svensson, 2018).

1.2. Aligned pedagogies

CBL is often used interchangeably, or in the same definition, with other similar pedagogies such as project based learning (PjBL) and problem based learning (PBL) (May-Newman & Cornwall, 2012). However, CBL has its own frameworks, definitions, and approaches. Binder, Nichols, Reinehr, and Malucelli (2017) describe how CBL differs from PBL and PjBL with its absence of predefined study, content or challenge. Stakeholders from multiple settings are used in CBL to support students, as opposed to being supported solely by professors or project managers (Garay-Rondero, Rodríguez Calvo, & Salinas-Navarro, 2019), and act as co-researchers and designers, rather than facilitators (Membrillo-Hernández et al., 2018). Unlike PBL and PjBL, CBL has a focus on sustainability issues and demands a verifiable and urgent solution (Garay-Rondero et al., 2019). In addition, the focus is not on the final product, such as in PjBL, but the process is viewed as being as important. However, there are some commonalities between CBL, PBL and PjBL; its use of a problem or challenge such as PBL, and its use of a project such as PjBL. Nonetheless, in the same way that PBL and PjBL differ (Dobber, Zwart, Tanis, & van Oers, 2017), CBL should be understood as an approach of its own.

At a higher conceptual level, active learning is noted as being an overarching approach used by CBL (Hernández-de-Menéndez, Vallejo Guevara, Tudón Martínez, Hernández Alcántara, & Morales-Menendez, 2019; Kalinga, Ibwe, Mvungi, & Tenhunen, 2018; Membrillo-Hernández, J. Ramírez-Cadena, et al., 2019; Suwono, Saefi, & Susilo, 2019); however, the term experiential learning (Chanin et al., 2018; Detoni, Sales, Chanin, Villwock, & Santos, 2019; Gama, 2019) and inquiry learning (Martin, Rivale, & Diller, 2007) are also used in a similar manner. These approaches are now being used in third level institutions seeking to move to a more student-led means of teaching and learning.

1.3. CBL in third level institutions

The broad defining features of CBL strongly align with the strategic goals and policies of many third level institutions. Transversal skills and competencies, such as collaboration and innovation, are commonly integrated into institutional policy and curricula to improve student employability and post-university life. The acquisition of such skills requires a different means of teaching students whereby they actively develop these skills rather than focusing on strict disciplinary learning objectives. Student-led approaches, such as CBL, can support this type of skill development and have been identified in third level policy and strategy as key to institutional reform, student progression, and mobility (Gaebel, Zhang, Bunescu, & Stoeber, 2018).

Industry and community collaboration are also identified by institutions in strategic goals and research funding applications. Improving the link between academia and industry is crucial for the advancement of knowledge, innovation in design and development, and providing solutions to transdisciplinary societal problems (Trinity College Dublin, 2020). Sustainability and the SDGs are also mentioned in many institutional policies and align with all university disciplines (Franco et al., 2019; Lozano et al., 2015).

CBL, at its most broad understanding, ties into all these factors, however, it is a very different approach compared to traditional pedagogical approaches common to many institutions. Understanding how CBL is being employed in third level institutions, at what curriculum level, and how it is assessed, is crucial to the long-term applicability and adoption of this approach.