Video summary

Capacitación ABRetos Parte 1 - Taller Presencial

Main summary

Key takeaways

Educational

Main ideas and lessons

  • Challenge-Based Learning (ABRetos) is an active, student-centered methodology that can be integrated across different university subjects and degrees.
  • A challenge is framed as:
    • an activity/task/situation that acts as a stimulus and a challenge for the student to complete, and
    • is connected to real-life, real-data situations (as opposed to simulated or teacher-made problems).

How ABRetos differs from related approaches

  • Compared to Problem-Based Learning (PBL):
    • ABRetos emphasizes real situations/data presented to students.
  • Compared to Project-Based Learning (PjBL):
    • In projects, the final product/outcome is more predefined (prototype/model/proposal/result).
    • In challenges:
      • the problem is real, but
      • the solution is open and varies across groups/majors/careers—students generate different responses.

Teacher role

The teacher shifts toward:

  • mentor/guide who encourages students to tackle complex real problems
  • designer of the learning experience, including:
    • questions,
    • resources,
    • feedback points, and
    • evaluation criteria

Evidence-driven approach

ABRetos requires an evidence-driven approach:

  • students gather/verify data,
  • observe and visit when needed,
  • interview relevant people, and then
  • define the real problem before proposing solutions.

Evaluation emphasis

Proposed solutions should be evaluated with attention to:

  • sustainability and impact
  • feasibility and viability (which solution can realistically work)
  • sometimes peer evaluation of which proposals are best

Methodology: How a challenge is structured (detailed phases)

The video presents a methodological framework proposed by Apple (as stated), where a challenge runs through phases. The order can be adapted, but it generally follows this sequence:

  1. Discovery (teacher-initiated, student-informed)

    • Teachers identify a real, specific problem using sources such as articles.
    • Students immerse themselves and begin collecting information.

  2. Team phase

    • Students form teams, ideally balanced by skills (not just affinity).
    • Teams become familiar with the problem.
    • They begin brainstorming initial solution approaches.

  3. Feedback stage (first cut)

    • Teams present a general initial idea (“how we will solve the challenge”).
    • Teachers provide feedback and help refine ideas.
    • Adjustments may be needed due to teachers’ greater knowledge of feasibility/constraints.

  4. Application / Solution development (prototype/implementation planning)

    • Teams design and develop the solution step-by-step (students move through design, then application).
    • Teachers mentor to prevent distraction and keep progress aligned with the plan.

  5. Evaluation of solutions (presentation + selection)

    • Students present possible solutions.
    • The most viable solution is selected using rubric criteria (and/or discussion/vote).

  6. Final evaluation

    • Evaluation considers:
      • impact
      • sustainability over time
      • feasibility (best and most viable)
    • Peer evaluation can be used (students judge among presentations).

Timing note (as stated): A challenge can be posed early; solutions may be reached by a later milestone (e.g., “milestone 5” mentioned). Discovery typically starts the process.

Instructional design guidance: What teachers must build

What teachers must create for each phase

  • A guiding essential question (clear, concise) that directs the entire challenge.
  • Questions, guides, and activities aligned to each phase/milestone.
  • Resources so students can complete the activities (examples mentioned):
    • research databases (e.g., “Research for Life” within the university resources),
    • online tools such as Mentimeter,
    • university-funded information repositories (as referenced).
  • Feedback points at stages where teams present partial ideas.

What teachers must be careful about

  • Students should not be told the problem only in a declarative way (e.g., “It’s no use if you just tell them ‘this is the problem’”).
  • Students must:
    • gather evidence,
    • verify and analyze data,
    • investigate causes and context, and
    • interview/observe when relevant.

Evaluation principles (explicit criteria)

Evaluate proposals based on:

  1. Sustainability (can it last / remain sustainable over time?)
  2. Impact (does it improve the situation compared to alternatives?)
  3. Feasibility/viability (is the solution realistic and workable?)
  • Optional: peer evaluation (which group’s proposal best reduces the targeted problem).

Example challenge used in the video (paper reduction)

Problem theme

  • Environmental impact of paper consumption and waste.
  • Students consider that paper production and consumption contribute heavily to environmental damage (greenhouse gas emissions mentioned).

Central question example

  • “How can I reduce paper usage and prevent further environmental pollution?”

Challenge scope example

  • Reduce paper usage at a university headquarters during a specific administration/year (as referenced).

Example solution types proposed by different student groups

  • Use digital tools and submit work through Moodle to reduce paper.
  • Use digital presentation tools (e.g., Moodle, Canva, etc.).
  • Require that physical submissions use recycled/sustainable paper or paper from recyclable sources.

Judgement criteria

  • sustainability, impact, feasibility, and possibly peer evaluation.

AB Challenges vs AB Projects (key distinction stated)

  • In AB Projects: teachers influence/define the outcome earlier (e.g., deliver a report by a certain milestone), so the expected deliverable is more controlled.
  • In AB Challenges: teachers do not control the final solution; they assess the resolution of the real problem, and solutions can differ widely between groups.

Final workshop activity described

  • Participants work in groups to create:
    • a challenge proposal tied to issues identified in the university context (examples given: turnstiles/access, infrastructure limits, internet coverage).
  • They are asked to design:
    • the general idea,
    • activities,
    • an implementation approach, and
    • evaluation.

Speakers / sources featured (as named or clearly identified)

  • Dr. Morales (explains the Apple-based methodological framework and phases)
  • Dr. Balboa (quoted/mentioned as informing the group activity)
  • Apple (source of the referenced challenge-based learning framework)
  • Workshop moderator / facilitator(s) (unnamed; leads introductions and explains key concepts)
  • Participants/representatives by field (unnamed individuals):
    • Business administration
    • Medicine
    • Medicine and psychology
    • Dentistry
    • Psychology

Original video