Executive Summary: Beyond Instruction

In a presentation to UNC Charlotte’s Belk College of Business, EduSourced detailed a strategy for formalizing and scaling the school’s Experiential Project-based Learning. Reflecting on observed EL activity across the over 100 schools that use EduSourced and data collected in the company’s annual Experiential Project-based Learning Benchmark Report, three levels of Experiential Project-based Learning structure are detailed. Each level is expanded upon in this paper to identify a topic that is rarely discussed: the necessary support structure behind Experiential Project-based Learning.

Building a support structure for Experiential Learning is the difference between an ad-hoc, unscalable EL offering and a being able to offer EL projects that are consistently higher quality for both students and employers. The latter is sustainable and can be leveraged into student recruitment and improved industry relations. This paper details the spectrum of support structures that can be developed for Experiential Project-based Learning.

How to Scale Experiential Project-based Learning and Do More Projects

Scaling to do more projects is a common goal for both business and engineering schools but it is the outcome of a support system that must be implemented first. The ideal EL support system should include:

• Institutional Project recruiting, most often to supplement faculty project sourcing efforts.
• Record-keeping to know the past project clients, past students, and data on project outcomes for both parties.
• Clear ownership of Experiential Learning: employer-based EL projects do not occur naturally. Faculty may choose to do projects in their courses, but these projects are demanding to administer and so, in order to scale project volume, an owner of Experiential Learning is necessary.

Level One: Ad-hoc

Level One is the default position. Many schools have a project-based learning course or courses that rely entirely on the individual effort of instructors or faculty with no support or organization by the school itself. High-quality, high-impact projects can happen under level one, but without any support structure from the school, this approach is not sustainable. If the instructors who choose to teach under this model with no school support leave, the EL offering at that school no longer exist. At this stage, a school’s projects should not be used promotionally for student recruitment as there is no guarantee project opportunities will exist by the time incoming students reach that course.

The Outcome of Level One

Employers may get substantial value of these projects, but there is no institutional safeguard for consistency and typically no institutional record of projects. At this stage, there is not enough substance to tout these projects to a school’s employer ecosystem for reputational gain.

What level one does offer is a foundation that can be built upon for future growth. A support structure can be developed around faculty and instructor expertise gained from projects delivered at this stage, provided the faculty or instructors involved are willing.

However, in some cases, these faculty are suspicious of school efforts to involve themselves and common concerns include:

• Worry that the school will coopt the faculty’s personal connections used to source projects.
• Concern for additional process being forced on them by the school while teaching EL projects is already very demanding and time-consuming, especially when done without support.

Schools should be offering to support the instructor or faculty and reduce their burden, not add to it. Supporting willing faculty leads into level two, detailed below.

Level Two: Sustainable Experiential Project-based Learning

Level two is defined by having an owner of Experiential Learning at the school and cataloging project activity across the school. Note that school in this case means college-level and that this is almost never done atthe university or institutional level.

Characteristics for Experiential Learning Owners

Ideally, this role is dedicated (as in not another responsibility added onto an existing role). Schools often hire for industry experience. If creating a new position is not feasible, responsibility for Experiential Learning should be granted to an existing position with enough authority within the school to successfuly collaborate with both faculty and employers.

Experiential Learning leaders do not have to be proscriptive with faculty about how to teach their project-based courses and they should not disintermediate existing faculty-employer relationships for project sourcing as these relationships are valuable as the third most common source of all project sourcing (2024 Experiential Learning Benchmark, page 18). This role ideally supplements and supports faculty who want assistance with recruiting projects and/or administering their projects with operational issues like project monetization, student team matching, etc. This support can be delivered with a tool like EduSourced, which was designed to support project-based learning based the principles outlined in this paper.

Supporting, Not Detracting, From Existing Faculty Efforts

If existing faculty and instructors who teach project-based learning are not interested in support (or if there are none), part-time instructors can be recruited from industry explicitly to teach projects in additional courses. Not every PBL course has to participate in this support structure. Having unsupported PBL is superior to having no PBL, so recruiting instructors within the institution to teach PBL for the first time, or recruiting new instructors altogether, is the path forward for growth at many schools. EduSourced’s Experiential Learning Benchmark Report includes several mentions of this approach from participating schools with several suggestions to recruit instructors with industry experience to deliver high quality industry projects in the classroom.

The Outcome of Level Two

The beginnings of a formal EL program, achieved via program ownership, is sustainable enough within the school to be promoted to employers and prospective students. Project monetization, if desired, becomes possible with this level of structure and there is essentially a stake in the ground to begin building institutional reputation on for EL for your school. This EL reputation can be immensley valuable in differentating the school to potential students and strengthening employer relationships. This value can be difficult to independently measure, but should not be overlooked.

Level Three: Full Integration of Experiential Project-based Learning

At Level Three, project-based learning is fully integrated with the school and its identify. Project participation does not have to be required for all students (though it often is at this level) but any student who would like to, can participate. Level Three schools have a dedicated Office of Experiential Learning with at least one full-time staff person whose sole responsibility is to oversee and support project-based learning. Additionally, this office coordinates collaboration with other offices like Career, Advancement, Corporate Relations, etc. to assist in recruiting projects and educate their external constituents on the school’s Experiential Learning offerings. All projects are recorded and archived with reporting available on project client history and student (and client) impact. The EL office has visibility into many, or even all, projects happening at the school and can provide assistance to instructors or faculty who wish to learn best practices for this teaching method.

The Outcome of Level Three

Level Three provides further enhanced consistency for both students and project clients, made possible by a school-wide effort to recruit projects, resulting in higher quality projects. Project-based Learning is deeply rooted in the school’s identity and can be leveraged with employers and also be a centerpiece for student recruitment. Having a dedicated office of EL makes this level fully sustainable into the future. Projects can be substantially monetized, if desired, particularly if a “boutique,” optional project-based learning course or program is part of the school’s offering (monetizing projects at large scale remains difficult).