978-1-4244-7310-6/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE

Integrating critical thinking and problem solving

skills in the teaching of technical courses: The

narrative of a Malaysian private university

Hairuzila Idrus

Department of Management and Humanities

Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS Tronoh, Perak

Hazadiah Mohd Dahan

Faculty of Education

Universiti Teknologi MARA Sek. 17, Shah Alam, Selangor

Normah Abdullah

Faculty of Education

Universiti Teknologi MARA

Sek. 17, Shah Alam, Selangor

Abstract - This paper seeks to discuss the teaching

approaches employed by the lecturers at a private

university in integrating one of the soft skills, which is

critical thinking and problem solving skills in their

teaching of technical courses. In addition , this paper

also addresses lecturers’ and students’ perceptions on

the integration of these skills in the teaching and

learning of technical courses in order to find out

whether there is any significant difference in their

perceptions. The methods used to obtain the data were

survey questionnaires and interviews. The results

indicate that critical thinking and problem solving skills

is placed as most important soft skills by the lecturers

and the final year students and is being integrated in

the teaching by employing problem-based learning

approach, project oriented problem-based approach

and project-based approach. The results also reveal that

there is no congruence between the lecturers and

students in the way they perceived the integration of

critical thinking and problem solving skills in the

teaching of technical courses. The results are then further discussed.

Keywords – critical thinking skills, problem solving skills,

teaching, technical courses

I. INTRODUCTION

Employers are now emphasizing that success as

an engineer requires more than simply strong

technical capabilities; also needed are skills in

communication, the ability to lead and work

effectively as a team member, and an understanding

of the non-technical forces that affected engineering

decisions [1]. Reference [2] concurs with [1] when it

indicates that technical skills alone will not make an

engineering graduate a good engineer. Many

employers have said that over the years, they have no

problem finding candidates with good academic or

technical qualifications but find difficulty in getting

people who can work with people and processes [2].

However, in an increasingly global, technological

economy, it is not enough to be academically strong;

instead, young people must also be able to work comfortably with people from other cultures, solve

problems creatively, write and speak well, think in a

multidisciplinary way, and evaluate information

critically [2]. These skills are known as soft skills.

Nowadays, having straight “As” is no longer enough

to help one secure a job or give one a competitive

lead in career advancement. What carries more weight appears to be soft skills rather than

brainpower or technical skills. Reference [3] reports

that several studies have been done on university

graduates and found that the complaints from the

employers were that graduates lack soft skills. As a

result, there exists an employment gap where there is

an excess of jobless graduates and a vacuum of

unfilled job vacancies. The Malaysian government

has spent millions on retraining graduates to help

them secure jobs but reference [3] argues against

such initiatives. He strongly feels that it is the

responsibility of the universities to ensure graduates have relevant skills to gain employment and soft

skills development should be imbued into the

educational syllabi.

2010 2nd International Congress on Engineering Education, December 8-9, 2010, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

258

978-1-4244-7310-6/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE

One of the components of skills identified in soft

skills is critical thinking and problem solving skills.

Based on the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia,

graduates or students with the skills should be able to

think in a critical, creative, innovative analytical

manner which includes the ability to apply knowledge. Elements that must be possessed under

this aspect are the ability to identify and analyze

complex situation in addition to making evaluations

that are justifiable. They should also have the ability

to expand and improve thinking skills, to provide

ideas and alternative solutions [4].

Thus, institutions of higher learning play a vital

role in generating the necessary human capital with first-class mentality needed to transform Malaysia

into a fully developed nation [5]. As such, the

Malaysian government has placed human capital

development as one of the priority areas in the

country’s development agenda under the Ninth

Malaysia Plan which runs from 2006 to 2010 [6].

This is due to the fact that focusing on this area

according to reference [6] will enable the country to

raise its capacity for knowledge, creativity and

innovation, which are essential elements in the

context of globalization. This has led to the government making it a requirement for the public

universities in Malaysia to incorporate soft skills into

the undergraduate curriculum so that the graduates’

employability becomes more enhanced.. The

Malaysian Institute of Higher Learning interprets soft

skills as incorporating aspects of generic skills which

include the cognitive elements associated with non-

academic skills. The Ministry has identified seven

soft skills to be implemented at all higher learning

institutions which are communicative skills, critical

thinking and problem solving skills, team work force,

lifelong learning and information management entrepreneur skill, ethics, moral and professionalism

and leadership skills [4].

The reasons behind the need to strengthen

undergraduates’ soft skills ability are (1) Malaysian

graduates are unemployed not because they are not

intelligent but rather because most of them lack soft

skills [6, 7], and (2) the increasing globalization of work force and job market impose much more

competitive skills on Malaysian graduates, as

globalization leads to a demand for higher level skills

and techniques [6].

Very few studies have been conducted on students

and lecturers’ views on the integration of soft skills in

their teaching, much less on the teaching of technical

courses. Obtaining their views on this issue is of importance to the engineering education field

because they are the ones who are driving the

process. The authors are of the view that in order to

understand how to bring about a successful

implementation of soft skills in the course, we must

first have in the knowledge of how it is being

implemented from the perspectives of lecturers and final year students.

Thus, this paper seeks to discuss the teaching

approaches employed by the lecturers at a private

university in integrating one of the soft skills, which

is critical thinking and problem solving skills in their

teaching of technical courses. In addition , this paper

also addresses lecturers’ and students’ perceptions

of the integration of these skills in the teaching and learning of technical courses in order to find out

whether there is any significant difference in their

perceptions.

This study was conducted at a private university in

Malaysia which focuses on engineering and

technology. To find out how the integration of

critical thinking and problem solving skills is being implemented in the teaching of technical courses at

this university, this study addresses four research

questions: (1) what is the importance of integrating

critical thinking and problem solving skills in the

teaching of technical courses as compared to other

elements of soft skills from the lecturers’

perspectives (2) what is the importance of

integrating critical thinking and problem solving

skills in the teaching of technical courses as

compared to other elements of soft skills from

students’ perspectives, (3) what are the teaching

approaches being employed by the lecturers. This paper however, does not address the effectiveness of

the teaching methods as it only looking at whether

there is any congruence in the understanding of the

integration, which leads to the next research question.

Research question (4) is there congruence in

lecturers’ and students’ perceptions of the integration

of these skills in the teaching and learning of

technical courses. This is to see whether the

lecturers’ and students’ views on the integration of

the skills are shared.

II. METHODOLOGY

Given the scope of the study and the nature of the

investigations involved, the survey questionnaire was

used as the main method for data collection. There

are several reasons for this. First, a questionnaire

was utilized as a means of gathering the data because

the researcher was interested in gathering information

of quite a large number of respondents, second, a

259

978-1-4244-7310-6/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE

questionnaire is the most cost effective and less time

consuming means of data collection for the stated

purpose and also has the advantage of ease of

analysis [8]. Two sets of questionnaire have been

developed, adapted from studies conducted by [9],

[10] and [11]. The first set is for the lecturers, while the second set is for the students. Interviews were

also conducted with 6 of the lecturers as a means for

triangulation. Triangulation means comparing various

sources of evidence to determine the accuracy of

evidence [13]. It is essentially a way of cross-

checking data to establish its validity. Thus the

interview is conducted to support the qualitative data.

A. Sample

The subjects that provided the sample of lecturer

responses were from all lecturers who were teaching

the engineering courses at this private university.

These lecturers were from the four engineering

programs which are Mechanical engineering (ME),

Chemical engineering (CE), Civil engineering (CV),

and Electrical and Electronics engineering (EE). The

lecturers taken as respondents to this study were

those who are currently teaching and not on study or

sabbatical leave. All of them were selected to respond to the questionnaire since the number is not

large, only 125 lecturers. Out of 125 questionnaires

sent through the email and by hand, 90 lecturers

responded. The 90 completed questionnaires that

were used in the study represent a return rate of 72

percent.

The subjects that provided the sample of student

responses were from final year engineering undergraduates from four engineering programs

namely ME, CE, CV, and EE. The total number of

final year students is 901, which is quite a large

number, thus, random sampling was employed due to

the difficulty in obtaining the responses from all final

year engineering students. Random sampling would

also ensure that every individual in the population

had an equal opportunity to be selected for the

sample and to eliminate any possibility of potential

biasness [8, 12]. The students were selected through

stratified random sampling. Out of 453 questionnaires sent out, 300 were returned which

represents a return rate of 66.3 percent. With a

population of 901, for sampling error of 5 percent

with a confidence level of 95 percent, the sampling

should be about 269 [13]. Therefore, the 300

respondents obtained is an acceptable number.

B. Data analysis

The data collected for this study were analyzed

quantitatively using Statistical Package for Social

Sciences (SPSS) software. To answer research

question (1), (2) and (3), frequency distributions and

percentages were used to calculate the responses to

the items in the questionnaire. Cronbach’s alpha reliability test was used to examine the degree of

consistency between the items representing the scale.

Reference [14] suggests that frequently used scales

should have a minimum alpha value of 0.70.

Nevertheless for newly developed scales, a value of

0.60 is acceptable. Hence, in the context of this study,

0.60 was set as an acceptable value since the scale

being used is a newly developed scale. To answer

research questions (4), a chi-square test was used to

examine the differences between the lecturers’ and

students’ perspectives on the integration of soft skills

in technical courses. The respondents indicated their perception of the frequency of integration of each

task integrated in the teaching to enhance critical

thinking and problem solving skills on a 5-point scale

that ranged from Never which scored 1 to Always,

which scored 5. The tasks involved are processing

straightforward information accurately, working to

meet targets in an organized and consistent manner,

focusing on task and making an effort to avoid

inefficiency, recognizing what needs to be done,

taking initiative to get work done, drawing logical

conclusions, anticipating and preparing for future opportunities, making recommendations for future

opportunities, analyzing problems rigorously, and

implementing solution to problems rigorously. The

null hypotheses tested in answering research question

(4) using the chi-square test is:

Ho: There is no significant difference in the

perception of lecturers and students toward the

integration of critical thinking and problem solving skills in the teaching and learning of technical

courses.

III. RESULTS

The result of the study on the most important soft

skills attribute perceived by the same lecturers point

out that critical thinking and problem solving skills is

the most important to be taught to the engineering

students, followed by communication skills and

ethics. The students concur with the lecturers when

they also rate critical thinking and problem solving

skills as the most important skill, second

communication skills and third, leadership skills.

With these findings, the authors decided to probe further on the teaching approaches that the lecturers

260

978-1-4244-7310-6/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE

regularly employed to integrate critical thinking and

problem solving skills into their teaching.

In terms of the teaching approaches employed by

the lecturers, majority of them, about 77.7 percent

used problem-based learning (PBL), followed by

project oriented problem-based approach (POPBL)

63.3 percent and project-based approach 60 percent.

Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure the

reliability coefficient that assesses the consistency of

each item in the questionnaire. The result indicates that the alpha value is .90. Reference [14] notes that,

the generally agreed upon lower limit for Cronbach’s

alpha is .70. As such, the scale is considered highly

reliable

The finding on whether there is any congruence in

the perception of lecturers and students toward the

integration of critical thinking and problem solving

skills in the teaching and learning of technical courses shows that the p value was approximated to

be .012. Since p<.05, the Null hypotheses is rejected,

which points out that there is a significant difference

in the perceptions of the lecturers and students. The

data thus concludes that there is no congruence

between the lecturers and students in the way they

perceived the integration of critical thinking and

problem solving skills in the teaching of technical

courses. Table 1 below summarizes the frequency

occurrence of scores within each response category

for the lecturers and students.

TABLE I.

CRITICAL THINKING AND PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS

Responses Lecturers Students Row Total

Never n

%

0

0

5

1.3

5

1.3

Rarely n

%

1

0.2

19

4.9

20

5.1

Sometimes n

%

32

8.2

147

37.7

179

45.9

Often n

%

49

12.5

125

32.1

174

44.6

Always n

%

8

2.1

4

1.0

12

3.1

Column Total

n

%

90

23.1%

300

76.9%

390

100%

Note: Minimum expected frequency: .23 df = 33;

chi-square value = 53.960; p value = .012

From the table it shows that majority of the lecturers claim that they often integrate these skills in

their teaching, however the majority of the students

claim that the lecturers do integrate the skills but only

sometimes do so. In other words, the views of the

lecturers and students on the integration of critical

thinking and problem solving skills in the teaching of

technical courses at this university are not shared.

IV. DISCUSSION

In what follows is a discussion on the findings

according to the important soft skills elements,

teaching approaches and congruence of perceptions between lecturers and students.

A. Important soft skills elements

It is interesting to note that among the elements of

soft skills, it is the critical thinking and problem

solving skills which the lecturers place their most

importance on first, second are communication skills

and third, ethical skills. This is relevant to some of the criteria that are considered important in producing

graduate engineers [15], which are:

Professional competency that provides

engineers who are able to identify, formulate and solve engineering problems, responsible

professionally and able to use techniques,

skills and modern engineering tools for

engineering practice

Well respected and potential industry

leadership skills that provides engineers who

are able to understand impact of engineering

solutions in a global/social context,

knowledgeable of contemporary issues, able

to communicate effectively and be involved

in community or social projects

Moral and ethical soundness that provides

engineers who understand their ethical and

moral responsibilities.

261

978-1-4244-7310-6/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE

Thus, the lecturers’ emphasis on the soft skills

indicates their recognition on the skills that fit the

important criteria in producing graduate engineers.

This also is to address the problem on the lack of soft

skills amongst graduates which is often highlighted

by prospective employers: that the Malaysian graduates especially locals are viewed as technically

proficient but are lacking in soft skills especially

communication and analytical skills [6].

B. Teaching approaches

From the analysis, it can be concluded that the

teaching approaches employed by the lecturers do

emphasize the enhancement of critical thinking and

problem solving skills. Among the skills that students learn in PBL are solving real-life problems

where students learn to solve relevant and contextual

problems congruent with workplace skills,

developing initiative, performance ability and

enthusiasm. Another skill is solving problems

efficiently where students learn to develop the ability

to find and use appropriate resources for problem

solving. Some of the features of POPBL as

mentioned by reference [16] are anticipation,

planning and implementation are also present. As

indicated above, among the tasks included in the questionnaire are on these three features like

anticipating and preparing for future opportunities,

recognizing what needs to be done, and

implementing solution to problems. Thus, these

teaching approaches employed by the lecturers also

emphasize critical thinking and problem solving

skills as the skills are essential for engineering

students to become good engineers later. In addition,

these skills will make them more globally oriented.

In addition, PBL, POPBL and project-based

approach fall within the category of the democratic

instructional approach [10] which includes

pedagogical strategies such as simulation, problem

solving and group discussions. The approach earns its

reputation as democratic because it encourages

students to explore their attitudes and thus maximizing their inputs in the learning process.

According to Felder et al in reference [10], teachers

who rely more on democratic instructional

approaches are more successful in inculcating

affective soft skills in their students as compared to

those who do not. The finding shows that the

majority of the lecturers at this university do employ

the right approaches in their teaching to enhance the

students’ soft skills.

C. Congruence of perceptions between

lecturers and students

As shown from the result, the perceptions of the

lecturers of the integration of critical thinking and

problem solving skills in the teaching of technical

courses at this university differ from the students’.

However, the differences are not too distinctive as the

majority of the students claimed that the lecturers do

integrate critical thinking and problem solving skills

in their teaching but sometimes, as oppose to the claim made by the majority of the lecturers that they

often integrate the skills in their teaching. In other

words, the perceptions differ in the frequency of

implementation. This indicates that the students are

aware of the integration but the intention of the

lecturers is sometimes not obvious to them.

One possible explanation to this is that the

lecturers might not have explained explicitly the

learning outcome and the skills learned that were

expected from the students. In the interview with the

lecturers some of them do mention that sometimes

the learning outcomes are not clearly emphasized to

the students, as indicated in the interview excerpts

below:

Lecturer A: “Lack of emphasis should have been the

reason for the difference. Students are only aware of

the learning objectives if they are mentioned

specifically, which has been practiced by lecturers

for a few semesters now using learning outcomes and program outcomes. At the beginning o every lesson,

the learning outcome is mentioned. If soft skills

outcomes were stated in similar ways, probably then

students would have realized the soft skills have been

integrated in the teaching”.

Lecturer B: “It (learning outcome) should be made

more explicit and emphasized time and again rather

than just in the statement of intention”.

Lecturer C: “ Sometimes students failed to see what

is beyond the course syllabus, …. Therefore, they

have to be reminded at the beginning of the lesson

about the learning outcomes.”

A study in reference [17] discovers that one of the

factors leading to better teaching performance is to

emphasize the learning outcome and the lecturers’

expectations to the students. This is further

supported by reference [18] which mentions that one

of the effective approaches to teaching generic/soft

skills is for the lecturers to communicate the

importance of the skills that the lecturers expect the

262

978-1-4244-7310-6/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE

students to develop in the lesson or the course. In

addition, the lecturers must ensure that the students

understand the relevance of the skills to their

professional success.

V. CONCLUSION

Overall, the study found that the lecturers at this private university do place a strong emphasis on

critical thinking and problem solving skills while

teaching technical courses. The teaching approaches

employed by the lecturers are the ones that could

enhance these skills like PBL, POPBL and project-

based approach. Regarding the views of lecturers

versus the students’, even though the difference is

significant both groups agree that critical thinking

and problem solving skills are being integrated in the

teaching of technical courses but at varying degrees.

In other words, there is congruence between the

lecturers and students in the importance of critical thinking and problem solving skills but in terms of

implementation it is not obvious to the students.

Nevertheless, for the teaching to be more

effective, the lecturers must emphasize each learning

outcome to their students explicitly. This seems to

suggest that while the learning outcome is

documented and given to the students making them more explicit during lessons can enhance their

awareness and understanding of the outcome of the

lesson. If the learning outcome is not clearly

emphasized, the lecturers’ intention will not be

understood by the students. The learning outcome

must also include some, if not all, soft skills elements

that the lecturers expect the students to learn or

develop from the course.

REFERENCES

[1] L. J. Shuman, “ABET “professional skills” – Can they be taught? Can they be assessed?, ”Journal of Engineering Education.2005. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3886/is_200501/ai_n9521126

[2] C. Gewertz, “Soft skills’ in big demand,“ Education Week. 26 (40), pp. 25 – 27, 2007.

[3] C. Hii, “Soft skills essential for success in today’s workplace,” Sunday Star, p. N12, Sept. 23. 2007.

[4] Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia. Development of soft skills module for institutions of higher learning. Serdang, Selangor: Universiti Putra Malaysia, 2006.

[5] Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education. National Higher Education Action Plan 2007 – 2010. Putra Jaya: Malaysian Ministry of Higher Education, 2007.

[6] S. Roselina, “Soft skills at the Malaysian institutes of higher learning,” Asia Pacific Education Review, 10, pp. 309 – 315, 2009.

[7] M. P. Sibat, M.P. “Leaping out of the unemployment line,”.2005, http://www.calm.unimas.my/insite6/article_a.html

[8] W. Wiersma, W. Research methods in education. An introduction. 7

th edition. Boston: Allyn & Bacon , 2000.

[9] B. Aminuddin, H. Siti Hawa, M. I. Che Maznah, M. S. Raenah, Y. Mohd Azman, M. Y. Faizal, H. Azizan Hawa, & A. R. Shahinaz, “Soft skills development through university industry collaborations,” Proceedings of the Regional Conference on Engineering Education, Johor Bahru, 3-5 December 2007.

[10] M. Z. Kamsah, “Developing generic skills in classroom environment: Engineering students’ perspective,” Proceedings of Conference on Engineering Education 2004. Kuala Lumpur, 14 -15 December, 2004.

[11] R. Ziegler, “Student perceptions of “soft” skills in mechanical engineering,” Proceedings of International Conference on Engineering Education – ICEE 2007, Coimbra, Portugal, September 3 – 7, 2007.

[12] D. Davis, D. Business research for decision making. Australia: Thomson South-Western, 2005.

[13] L. Cohen, L. Manion, & K. Morrison, Research Methods in Education. 5

th. Edition. London: RoutledgeFalmer,

2000.

[14] J. F. Hair, R. E, Anderson, R. L. Tatham, & W. C. Black, Multivariate data analysis. Fifth edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998.

[15] M. M. N. Megat Johari, A. A. Abang Abdullah, M. R. Osman, M. S. Sapuan, N. Mariun, M. S. Jaafar, A. H. Ghazali, H. Omar, & M. Y. Rosnah, “A new engineering education model for Malaysia,“ Journal of Engineering Education, 18(1), pp. 8 – 16, 2002.

[16] Project-oriented learning. http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Project-oriented_learning.

[17] W. R. McGowan, & C. R. Graham, “Factor contributing to improved teaching performance,” Innovation in High Education, 34, pp. 161 – 171, 2009.

[18] D. R. Woods, R. M. Felder, A. Rugarcia, & J. E. Stice, J. E. “The future of engineering education III. Developing critical skills,” Chemical Engineering. Education, 34(2), pp.108-117,2000

263