Design of an Integrated Project-Based Learning Curriculum: Analysis Through Fink’s Taxonomy of Significant Learning

Contribution: In this article, integrated problem-based learning and critical reflection are shown to contribute to significant learning experiences, without needing to increase course hours and course assignments. Background: With the advances in technology, such as artificial intelligence, there is a shift in teaching and learning paradigms, where integration and critical reflection of one’s learning become as important as foundational knowledge and its application. In engineering education, the trend has been to increase the hours students spend in the classroom to compensate for this shift. Intended Outcomes: In this manuscript, the design and implementation of integrated project-based learning referred to as the integrated learning stream (ILS) is discussed. The aim is to show how ILS fosters significant learning through learning communities, critical reflection, and learning how to learn. Application Design: In ILS, significant learning experiences were created by taking a holistic view of the students and their communities. The curriculum moved from being content-centered to learner-centered, providing a classroom community where there is respect for individual voices and care for society. Findings: A qualitative content analysis of students’ reflections, comments, and course artifacts found the students were able to learn materials more efficiently and apply their learnings to solve real-world problems. The students developed better habits that improved their learning and their well-being. Students’ comments demonstrated that they were feeling enjoyment from their learning experiences while being challenged to learn more.


I. INTRODUCTION
E NGINEERING educators require students to learn widely varying topics in their degrees.As educators and practitioners, real-world engineering goes beyond learning each topic deeply, rather engineers must be able to integrate across topics.Despite this, programs normally splits into separate courses that are distinct silos, where there is limited obvious connections between courses [1].Most students only start to see the integration of topics in their final year capstone design experience, but even that is not guaranteed.In many cases, because courses exist in silos, the laboratories and projects have a limited scope and require knowledge application based on that specific course.However, to solve real-world problems, students benefit from making connections between material from several courses [1], [2].
Observations from the University of Calgary's Schulich School of Engineering (SSE) in the Institutional 2017 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) data highlight some of these persistent challenges in engineering education, with the following opportunities for improvement identified by student survey responses.
1) Reflective Learning: SSE had much lower scores relative to the rest of the university.Qualitative comments showed students wanted to understand the application of content.2) Real-World Applications: Qualitative comments discussed the substandard level of real-world applications.3) Student Workload: Qualitative comments focused on excessive and unnecessary assignments and high workload.To address these issues, leadership at SSE asked themselves: "What if we could blow up the engineering curriculum and start from scratch?What would we do differently?"They agreed that it would be important to 1) break down the silos of content between courses to support students in knowledge integration and 2) ensure that students work in design project-based learning (PBL) teams throughout their degree on projects that emphasize this inter-relatedness.Following these discussions, the ILS was born to develop and deliver material from across courses with more emphasis on interactivity and a focus on the PBL and team aspects of all learning activities [1], [3] The development and implementation of ILS are discussed in detail in Section III, with a brief overview provided here.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.For more information, see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Authorized licensed use limited to the terms of the applicable license agreement with IEEE.Restrictions apply.
First piloted in 2019, the second semester of the second year (sophomore) of the Electrical Engineering degree at SSE has been delivered through integrated problem-based learning.The material for all five required courses is covered in a collaborative environment with integration across the courses driven by both the material and through a large PBL design spanning the whole semester.For a given topic, students engage in learning experiences from multiple courses alongside each other (e.g., the theory of filtering in Course X and its practical circuit implementation in Course Y).
The integrated PBL experience for the past several years has been the design and implementation of a digital audio player for purpose-built applications.The students also have weekly reflection sessions where they reflect on their learning achievements and approaches to learning.The student reflection data was analyzed in [4], using self-determination theory as the theoretical framework [5].In particular, the focus was put on how ILS was able to achieve the themes of competence, autonomy, and relatedness.
Further development of the ILS Program over the years and group research goals have led to an alternative perspective of the impact using a theoretical framework based on Fink's Taxonomy of Significant Learning [6].This framework suggests that significant learning will more likely occur when curriculum design accounts not only for elements of the cognitive domain (foundational knowledge, application, and integration) but also for the affective domain (the human dimension, caring, and learning how to learn).Most engineering curricula focus on the cognitive domain, with little attention paid to purpose-driven curricula for developing the affective domain.
Although the ILS curriculum was not explicitly designed with Fink's Taxonomy in mind, several aspects of it implicitly support the development of the affective domain for students.In this manuscript, reflection data collected from ILS students through the first two years (2019 and 2020) is analyzed using this taxonomy as a theoretical framework.The aim is to explore if and how ILS is supporting the development of the affective domain and supporting significant learning for the students, using Fink's Taxonomy.The main contributions of this article are as follows.
1) Describing the integrated problem-based learning design across five courses in the electrical engineering program.2) Implementing three aspects of significant learning, caring, learning how to learn, and human dimension as part of the integrated project-based curriculum.3) Analyzing students' reflections and artifacts to understand the impact of the new curricula.The main impact of the work presented in this article is to see an increase in students' significant learning.Findings show that in addition to their significant learning experiences, students also expressed feelings of joy and confidence when interacting with the technical material.They expressed a closer relationship with and appreciation of the instructors', and the students related the material learned across topics.
The next section covers the background literature and scholarly work on relevant topics.Following that, in Section III describes the ILS curriculum.In Section IV the research methodology, data collections, and participants are outlined.Results, discussions, and conclusions of the impact of implementing all six dimensions of Significant Learning are given in Sections V-VII.

A. Integrated Curricula
The collaborative nature of engineering means the curricula should also promote "integrative, synthetic thought processes" [7].Rather than hoping our students can make the connections between the content and real-world applications, an integrated curriculum approach intentionally provides contextual connections for students learning process [6].Integrated curricula aim to remove the boundaries or silos between courses, and blend the material to provide more systems thinking and deeper learning through real-world contexts [8].
A survey of integrated learning found a variety of approaches ranging from integrating a single topic into a course, to integrating concepts like biology into the engineering curriculum, to full integration across disciplinary boundaries [7].Integrated learning can be individual courses working together, requiring them to be "interdependent upon one another and bound by a common thread of knowledge" [1].An integrated curriculum should provide "an authentic context to connect these subjects to enhance student learning" [6].
Fogarty [9] uses the analogy of a "periscope" where we have a single, narrow focus on one discipline at a time.Alternatively, the sequenced model is more like a pair of "eyeglasses" where there are separate lenses connected through a common frame [9].The ILS approach fits this connected model which is like the "view through an opera-glass, providing a close-up of the details, subtleties, and interconnections within one discipline" [9].
Scholars from the science of learning provide additional understanding to the value of integrating student learning experiences.
1) Situated cognition theory states that understanding the application of knowledge and skills is as important as understanding the knowledge and skills themselves [6].This underlines the importance of the learning process, including contextual information.2) Based on functional MRIs, to remember new information our brain must make connections with existing knowledge [7].For students, this means integrated content, creates stronger pathways by continuously relating new information to old information.One group of authors outlined three main advantages to the integrated programs [1].
1) It provides motivation and encourages more meaningful learning experiences for students by introducing interdependent content.
2) It allows faculty to better approach the curriculum holistically, promoting less repetition and easily tying concepts together.
3) Finally, the curriculum supports a framework where students attach knowledge to previous knowledge, rather than presenting disjointed material across courses where students need to develop their own knowledge frameworks [1].The integrated curriculum presents some challenges.It typically requires a fundamental change in practice and beliefs of the faculty members, and they may be resistant to the amount of flexibility required [1].Also, "Making cross-cutting STEM connections is complex" and faculty may find it challenging to make interdisciplinary connections [7].For students, "connecting ideas across disciplines is challenging" especially when students "have little or no understanding of the relevant ideas in the individual disciplines" [10].Scaffolding the integration process for the students can support them in re-examining their ideas about learning and knowledge development.
While social connections are often not the primary intention of integrated curricula, the learning communities developed from this approach greatly enhances the learning experience.One of the main outcomes of integrated learning is that "teachers and students need to work cooperatively in the educational process to ensure successful learning" [11].Active learning and PBL are common in integrated curricula, where students naturally form strong learning communities in this environment.The learning communities "help learners build interdisciplinary links and social links within a community" [1].This applies to faculty too as they collaborate to plan, design, and implement the curriculum.
The next section dives into PBL further and connects it with integrated learning approaches.

B. Project-Based Learning
PBL approaches learning through team-based open-ended projects that are student-led, fostering collaborative learning, problem-solving, critical thinking, autonomy, motivation, and lifelong learning [12].It is rooted in a constructivist approach to knowledge with three main principles: 1) learning is contextual; 2) students should be actively engaged in the process of learning; and 3) learning is acquired through collaborative learning, social interactions, and knowledge sharing [3].These principles are typically achieved through an ill-defined problem that is situated in a real-world context, where students integrate theoretical and practical knowledge with limited constraints to achieve an end product or artifact that represents their new learning and skills [3], [8].Through this process, the responsibility of learning and problem-solving shifts from the instructors to the students.In a supportive environment, students are given significant responsibility and autonomy to make decisions and seek new knowledge necessary to solve the given problem [3].
Although the implementation of PBL can widely vary across contexts [13], research shows consensus on the significant benefits of implementing PBL.These include long-term retention, increased satisfaction of students and teachers, highertest scores, increased confidence, career preparation skills, improved collaborative skills, and broadening students' thinking [12], [14].A study looking at student learning gains in electrical engineering found gains from PBL were twice those from traditional lecture formats [12].Another study looked at the epistemological thinking of mechanical engineering students, where the scholars posited that "higher levels of epistemological development tend to display expert engineers' thinking patterns" [14, p. 197].They found PBL approaches exposed students to diverse perspectives which broadened their thinking, and the hands-on nature of PBL supported a deeper understanding of the course materials [14].
In addition to the positive benefits of PBL, there are some challenges to be considered.First, this is a new way of learning for students where they are required to self-direct their learning.They often feel less content is covered and express being uncomfortable and frustrated with the open-ended and unclear nature of the tasks and requirements [8], [12].It is common to see resistance early on, and this emphasizes the importance of the instructors' ability to scaffold learning, providing students with sufficient foundations in the introductory concepts before engaging in PBL.This can be considered a "two-phase" PBL approach, effectively guiding students' learning and motivation for learning through the process to minimize the cognitive load and dissonance with the transition to a PBL curriculum [3], [12].
Teaching staff can also struggle with transitioning to this collaborative approach, which could be connected with the shift of power, where instructors no longer control students' learning, and sometimes students may follow a path the instructor had not even considered [15].Although some research shows PBL can be achieved without increased workload and resources [16], the additional creative planning, reflection, and mental load required to teach PBL must be acknowledged.
Finally, it is important to consider the power relations within peer groups due to social class, gender, race, ethnicity, and other hierarchical factors that can lead to unequal learning and participation among group members [3], [17].As instructors, it is important to integrate discussions of social equity and social justice teamwork development workshops to support students in increasing their awareness [18].

C. Integrated Learning and PBL
The approach to learning taken in this article and the ILS Program is integrated PBL.This approach is similar to the systems level approach described in PBL taxonomies, where systems approaches have a high level of coordination across courses, allowing for "alignment of more student-centered learning" [13].
For example, in Finland, through an integrated PBL approach, they observed that students found their learning and studying to be more meaningful, and instructors found it increased collaboration across the different courses and topics [8].In a Mexican engineering school, integrated PBL was applied across three courses (Physics, Mathematics, and Computer Science).When comparing to the traditional lecture approach, the students achieved higher-overall GPAs, and higher on some standardized engineering knowledge tests [19].In Spain, an electronic engineering degree used an "integrated, Fig. 1.Representation of Fink's Taxonomy, and how ILS aims to achieve integration of its elements to achieve significant learning (adapted from [6]).
multicourse, PBL methodology" to challenge students and support critical thinking.Their project was well received by faculty and students alike, with similar challenges to those already mentioned: complex logistics and organization, integrating and synchronizing material, and project coordination and supervision across large class sizes [20].
These examples show there is interest in combining methodologies from integrated learning and PBL into technical and engineering contexts.In this work, we extend and add to this previous scholarship by reviewing the results of ILS through the theoretical framework of Fink's Taxonomy of Significant Learning.

D. Taxonomy of Significant Learning
The taxonomy of significant learning developed by Fink [6] describes if "students were not learning even basic general knowledge, they are not developing higher-level cognitive skills, and they are not retaining their knowledge [. . .] There is no significant difference between students who take courses and students who do not."Fink suggested students need to engage in significant learning that also improves their individual lives in addition to their social interactions, inspires them to be informed citizens, and prepares them for work [21].
There are six categories in Fink's Taxonomy, as shown in Fig. 1.Foundational knowledge involves the subject-specific information students need to understand and remember.Application refers to turning knowledge into action.This can include critical, creative, and practical thinking.Skill development is also a subcategory of application.Integration refers to the connections students make between the course material and their own personal, social, and work lives.The connections can also be made between courses and whole disciplines.The human dimension allows learners to consider learning in the context of their lives or others' lives.This can also include self-image and self-ideals, self-awareness, leadership, teamwork, and many similar dimensions.Caring encourages learners to care about something as a result of a learning experience.This can include developing an interest in a topic, caring about issues, and developing a commitment to live well.And, finally, learning how to learn offers students the opportunity to gain knowledge about learning itself.This can include becoming more efficient at learning and becoming self-directed to continue learning beyond the course.
An important feature of Fink's Taxonomy is its relational and interactive nature.It is not hierarchical like Bloom's Taxonomy [22].Each aspect of Fink's Taxonomy is related to the other aspects and achieving one will enhance the possibility of achieving the others.The circular structure of Fink's Taxonomy is meant to illustrate that learning is multidirectional.The original goal of the ILS curricula was to add the integration element, however, the authors realized it is not just the integration of the content, but also the integration of all elements of the taxonomy which achieves significant learning.The authors argue that the ILS design comes much closer to achieving this.

III. CONTEXT AND CURRICULUM REDESIGN
This section provides the context of the secondyear (Sophomore) electrical engineering curriculum at the University of Calgary, and a description of the redesign to achieve the ILS curriculum.The ILS design is placed in the context of what is meant by integrated PBL and significant learning.

A. Context
University of Calgary engineering students take a common first-year with foundational knowledge, after which students choose a program specialty.The eight-month academic year is split into a Fall semester (September to December) and a Winter semester (January to April).Over the last decade, enrolment in electrical engineering has been in the range of 90-130 students annually.For second-year electrical engineering, their Fall semester consists of courses in differential equations, programming, digital circuits, wave and modern physics, and a complementary studies option.The Winter semester consists of courses in signals and transforms, computer organization, circuit analysis, introductory electronics, and engineering design.
Before the ILS Program in 2019, these courses were taught in a traditional sense: isolated courses in silos with no deliberate effort to connect ideas across courses, held mostly in traditional lecture theatre spaces (auditorium seating) with some lab studio time.After the leadership team deliberated about innovating the curriculum, the Winter semester was chosen as the test case to pilot a different way of supporting student learning.The set of five courses were chosen as they lend themselves well to a curriculum structured around a central design project which links all of the technical course material.A design project was developed to act as the glue integrating the technical knowledge.
Authorized licensed use limited to the terms of the applicable license agreement with IEEE.Restrictions apply.

B. Curriculum Redevelopment
In 2019, the first installment of ILS was delivered with 36 students, in 2020 half the second-year students participated (about 70 students).Since 2021, all students in secondyear electrical engineering participate in the integrated PBL learning approach.
All courses, tutorials and lab activities for the five courses take place in one room, meaning the students and teaching team have one landing place for all activities.This format builds a sense of "home."The room is a studio environment with tables of four students where all experiential learning activities take place.Students can draw up carts with a power supply, oscilloscopes, and other measurement and design tools to their tables for design and testing during class hours.
Having one 'home' space offers flexibility for scheduling; instructors can swap times with others on an as-needed basis so material from separate courses can be sequenced well to feed into the integrated design project.Most courses deliver their material using some flipped learning (students engage with video lectures outside of scheduled hours and then participate in experiential learning during scheduled hours).Each course has its own assessment elements (e.g., midterm exams and labs) and assigned grade, with a few elements are shared amongst courses (e.g., design and testing of analog-to-digital conversion circuit).
The initial curriculum goal was to emphasize the integration of subjects.Although the individual technical courses still cover material in a fairly isolated way, the design project throughout the semester brings these isolated ideas together.Students immediately see the context of the theory they are learning, why it is important for practical applications, and how ideas from different courses must be woven together to accomplish design goals.For example, students participate in designing, building, and testing slope ADC using a microprocessor and external circuitry.This requires them to integrate ideas from their computer organization class (they use the counter from the microprocessor), comparator and amplifier circuity from their circuits class, integrator circuitry from their electronics class, and sampling and aliasing theory from their signals and transforms class.

C. Curriculum Redevelopment
To enable students to adapt to the new teaching and learning environment, ILS leveraged student learning communities.These communities enabled students to persist in classes, deepen understanding, and develop social connections [7], [11].Learning communities were made up of groups of six to eight students.These communities were made randomly from the class roster, however, there were three considerations in forming the learning communities to best-support learning and a sense of community.
1) The learning communities had either none or more than three women, self-identified nonbinary, or transgender students in a group (see [23] and [24] for a rich discussion on team gender dynamics).2) Due to the pandemic virtual learning environment, students were all over the world, and we aimed to include a maximum of two different times zones in each group, with at least some students in the local time zone.3) If a student indicated social anxiety toward group work, we placed them with peers that would best support their learning (e.g., peers who expressed collaborative approaches to learning and peers who showed evidence of higher-emotional intelligence, see [25]).Originally, it was thought that the integration of subjects would be the most interesting aspect of the success of ILS.However, the data and anecdotal evidence suggested that one of the most positive influences on student learning was the formation and development of persistent long-term teams through the use of learning communities.Having the students work in the same groups for every activity helps form bonds and build trust so that teams help each other with all of their learning (not just their labs), and how those social factors are so important in effective learning strategies.

D. Projects
The year starts with several team-building activities, conflict resolution workshops, and the creation of a team contract.On week two, the students dive right into their project, using an agile project management method (using a three-week sprint cycle).The main driving integrated PBL experience for the past several years has been the design and implementation of a digital audio player for purpose-built applications.In each three-week sprint, teams regularly present their products, receive feedback, and reflect through retrospectives.After each retrospective, the students in each group work on planning the project deliverables and schedule for the next three weeks, or the next sprint.
To give students autonomy in their creative process, the students have complete control over the audio product they make and the user who will be using the product (e.g., it could use audio as an input, such as a device, that translates Morse code beeps to written words, or it could use audio as an output, such as a device, that beeps when a plant needs water).The final project deliverables show how the product works (technical outcomes), who are the intended users, what makes it compelling to use, and how it utilizes the outcomes of each course in ILS.The product must abide by the following constraints.
1) It must be built using the electrical components from the courses covered in ILS. 2) Produce or use sound waves, or control a servo, or sample a sensor.
3) It must be designed for a specific target audience or demographic that the team specifies.4) It must include some sort of user interaction.5) It cannot contain store-bought electronic kits unless approved by the course instructors.The students set the scope of their project at the beginning of the semester, and revisit this scope at the beginning of each three-week sprint to ensure that the project is doable within the time and with the resources available.The students are allowed to pivot their projects if the initial idea is not suitable for implementation.To see a variety of project examples, during 2021 when the course was fully virtual due to COVID-19, we created a website where students submitted "pitch postcards" with their initial ideas (see the website https://integratedlearning.ca/[accessed April 11, 2023]).
The project brings in the human dimension by focusing on human-centered design and empathy.The students are asked to produce a user profile, empathy map, value proposition canvas, story-boarding and user interview and research.The course instructor and the teaching assistants provide feedback every three weeks at each retrospective, where the students give a pitch for their product and show their prototype.The teaching team (including instructors from other courses) provides feedback on the functionality, technical aspect, presentation, and innovation of the product.There are marks assigned for participation in the retrospective, however, these are completion-based.This approach to assessment brings more intrinsic motivation to the students, as students want to be proud of their pitch and receive high-quality feedback from the teaching team as they work toward their final product.

E. Reflections
Another key element incorporated across ILS was weekly self-reflection activities.Critical reflection tools help both students and instructors to deepen and understand student learning [10].When applied in engineering classrooms, selfreflection has been shown to promote engineering attributes, such as life-long learning and improved teamwork [2], [26].Reflections took on various forms in ILS, but the main goal was to encourage meta-cognition in students.This allowed them to think critically about what they had learned and how they had learned, but also about the interconnectedness of subjects within ILS and the application of this to their design projects.Each course set aside a portion of their grade for the weekly reflection activities to show their importance.Although the reflections were mostly graded for completion, it was emphasized to students the intrinsic value of engaging authentically, and students began to appreciate the value of reflecting more over the semester.

IV. METHODOLOGY
For this research, qualitative content analysis with a deductive approach was used with the taxonomy of significant learning theoretical framework.Here, the participants, data collection, and data analysis process are summarized.

A. Participants
The data analyzed for this article includes data from the first two years of the modified curriculum (2019 and 2020).In the pilot year, 34 students enrolled in the ILS Program, with 18 students who consented to have their student artifacts used for research (53% participation).In 2020, there were 71 students enrolled in the ILS Program with 32 students consenting to participate in research (45% participation).Approximately 27% of participants were women, which is a similar reflection of the class demographics each year.Other demographic information was not requested from the students.However, based on incoming student demographic data from 2019, the engineering student body is generally about one-third white, one-quarter Asian, 10% South Asian, 10% Middle Eastern, with a small percentage of South American and African [27].In electrical engineering, about 3% of students identify as indigenous, 29% of students are international students, and less than 5% of students are above the age of 25.

B. Data Collection: Student Artifacts
Four student artifacts were used for this research, two from each year of data being analyzed, as summarized in Table I.Each of the student artifacts chosen represents a diverse spread of assignments and activities related to the ILS Program.Overall, they provide insight into student perspectives, reflections, and learnings within ILS.By analyzing a wide spread of activities, the authors can better approach their research question to understand how ILS promotes and integrates the elements of the taxonomy of significant learning.Table I also shows the number of participants for each assignment.

C. Data Analysis
The data was analyzed following Elo and Kyngäs' qualitative content analysis process [28] (see Fig. 2 for summary of qualitative coding process).For the individual coding, the focus was on the three elements of the taxonomy of significant learning that are less typically covered in engineering: 1) caring; 2) human dimension; and 3) learning how to learn.
The process started with three of the authors (RP, YJ, MP) each individually coding different student artifacts, with a focus on deductively coding to the mentioned three categories.During this coding process, each person determined their own subcategories and results before writing a summary of their findings with about 30-45 representative quotes.After discussing the results together, the fourth author (LB) reviewed the results summaries and did an overarching analysis pulling out higher-level categories and themes across the individual coding analysis results.These categories were then discussed and summarized into themes for the final results.

V. RESULTS
In this section, a summary of the results within three areas of Fink's Taxonomy, caring, human dimension, and learning how to learn [6] is provided.Within each, the findings are exemplified with representative student quotes for each of the themes noted by PYY-ID (participant year and identification number).This approach follows recommendations in qualitative data analysis, where there is an emphasis on the importance of using participant data to illustrate the results.

A. Caring
The caring dimension discusses the development of feelings, interests, and values.The students' reflections showed that they were able to develop skills in all these areas.They also showed intrinsic motivations to learn more.The students' reflections exemplify they had more interest in doing something, either internally (something that bubbled up from themselves and a feeling) or externally (topics, methods, or concepts that made them pay attention and care).Three subthemes emerged in the caring dimension, as illustrated here.
1) Sense of Empowerment and Pride When Mastering Technical Topics: Students often discussed how much they "enjoyed" learning and how much "fun" and "exciting" learning had become.This parallels findings from others on how PBL experiences support students in broadening their thinking [14].For example, one student talked about how through their learning they felt empowered, "I was very intrigued by the new information which I was learning, and it made me feel empowered as an individual to be gathering so much information successfully."(P20-13) Another student emphasized how the PBL component was one of the most exciting elements for them, which parallels much of the literature showing increased student engagement in PBL activities [3].
"The highlight of this semester was getting to work on our audio player project.It was exciting to see our idea come to life."(P19-25) 2) Developing Interest or Value for the Topic: The students showed an increased interest in the topics they were studying.The students discussed how different methods of teaching, helped them care more about the concepts, increasing their motivation [1].For example, one student mentioned how seeing the applications helped them see value in the content."To drive my interest, I also need to know the applications of my topic, if not its difficult for me to relate it to my fundamental knowledge.When I was researching filters, I enjoyed the concrete topics where I could visually see what was happening to the signals."(P20-25) Many of the students' reflections included goals of developing stronger feelings and joy with the material [2].This student emphasizes how as they improved their learning skills, their interest in the topics also increased."Even though I didn't realize it before, I am now better at asking relevant questions and thinking about applications and "what if's" past what we are doing in class.The effort I put into my work I think is getting better because I enjoy what I am doing more now, more than ever."(P20-24) 3) Caring for Self and for Others: The students were also able to look back and reflect on how they put their learnings into their value system.The students expressed values for themselves as well as expressing values for others and how to give back to society.Students commented on how they can develop better habits in their daily lives, for example, this student began integrating more self-care.
"I will introduce more structure to my daily routine, by planning blocks of time for studying and selfcare."(P19-18) Several students also commented how applying their technical skills to real-life problems, teaching empathy and humancentered design has made them think more about the work they are doing and that they have become more empathetic, such as is exemplified in these two students.
"In ILS we have had many opportunities to make sure our products are not selfishly made and are extremely empathetic with the users of our product allowing us to refine our project to something feasible and impactful."(P20-33) "Hopefully this would allow me to work with others to develop technologies needed to help solve problems for people worldwide."(P20-02)

B. Learning How to Learn
During ILS, the students learned how to improve their learning and how to engage with specific material as a part of the process of learning.Some of the specific parts that incorporated this aspect of the Significant Learning Taxonomy [6].When analyzing this data, there was an emphasis on the different structures in the ILS Program that fostered learning how to learn.

1) Intentional and Regular Reflections:
The design of ILS supported intentional reflection across all courses and activities [2], [26].Beyond the weekly reflections, the design project followed an agile project management style on a three-week cycle of reflection and retrospective.This allowed them to discuss their progress and their individual learnings, while also receiving feedback from the instructional team.The students described the learnings from this process using words, such as "organized," "less worried," and "more successful."Students often commented on the regular routine of reflections and how it supported them in being more effective in their learning.For example, one student said: "This semester I started to finish things when they were assigned, and I found I had more free time to do what was required of me, such as thinking of questions to ask." (P19-31) 2) Learning Strategies: As part of the course, the students also had several modules on learning strategies where they discussed the best practices.The students discussed how even a high-level reflection on their ability to use the learning strategies is helpful to get them thinking about the techniques.In their reflections, students committed to using the different learning strategies, for example, this student commits to using the lecture preview and review learning strategy because it will help them with "understanding what I have learned, what I am about to learn, and how they fit together."(P20-07) Later, students were asked to reflect on if they maintained these commitments.Supporting students in learning how to learn goes beyond talking about learning strategies, and should provide opportunities to reflect on the implementation of these learning strategies.This same student furthered their reflection at a later date, noticing that the classes they practiced good learning in through lecture preview and review were the classes they were doing better in, "this was a great idea I wish I had done this more.I could describe this as each course being a puzzle, and each lecture being a puzzle piece, and the strategy above being putting that puzzle together."(P20-07) At the end of the semester when reflecting, it was evident that many students had achieved this dimension of Fink's Taxonomy.This student exemplifies this in their final reflection where they understood what type of learning worked best for them.
"The biggest thing that I learned about my own learning [in ILS] is that I like to connect new things to past knowledge and experiences.This helps me to be able to have a tree of knowledge where everything is connected, instead of having random blobs of information."(P20-08) 3) Positive Changes in Feelings and Attitudes: The learning how to learn dimension had a positive impact on the students' outlook on life, which is something Fink emphasizes is important for significant learning [6].Several students discussed how their feelings and attitude toward their learning and their impact on the world change.The students expressed how their feelings of anxiety and nervousness were replaced with feelings of confidence and open-mindedness.An example of a student discussing their learning strategy is as follows.
"I found that the way to research something totally new that worked for me was to approach it with an open mind, not expecting to understand everything on the first go.Taking the pressure off allowed the activity to be enjoyable and stress-free; this improved my learning."(P20-09)

C. Human Dimension
The human dimension involves students learning about themselves and others.There were several aspects of the ILS Program that discussed the human dimension, including reflection activities, team-building exercises, classes on human-centered design, empathy, and entrepreneurship, and the teacher/student role reversal activity.
1) Reflections: Through reflection exercises, the students learned about themselves, their peers, their instructors and the people who will be impacted by their work.The students also showed a willingness to take responsibility for their learning.For example, one student commented: Authorized licensed use limited to the terms of the applicable license agreement with IEEE.Restrictions apply.
"As much as teachers have made it their career to shape youth's minds, it becomes more about a student's will to seek understanding and seize opportunities as they grow into adults."(P20-35) 2) Team-Building Exercises: The students talked about the importance of developing a community of support for the immediate and also for the future, and how the ILS format provides an environment where students can learn about teamwork.
"I was also able to develop more of a support group this semester compared to previous ones.I'm now good friends with everyone in my LC [learning community] and have a large group chat with most of the students in the class.This will provide me with a bunch of people I can reach out to for support for the rest of my university career and beyond."(P20-02) The students were able to move from frustration with their group to feeling they were able to work together collaboratively.They learned that to be able to function as a group you need to be able to talk about your feelings.
"It is a great idea to force a group of people to work together for a whole semester continuously.In previous years we only see lab partners once every 2 weeks, and they change between courses.We have time to actually know the strengths about each of us and find a way to work more efficiently with this knowledge."(P20-37) 3) Human Centered Design: The ILS PBL experience required students to consider the needs of the customers and develop a human-centered design mindset.This emphasized the human dimension of learning.For example, "This allows individuals to not be judged for using such a device.Thus, requiring us to know how to make something 'hip'."(P19-17) In addition, many students discussed using empathy to design their products or when working as a team.Two examples are: "In ILS we have had many opportunities to make sure our products are not selfishly made and are extremely empathetic with the users of our product allowing us to refine our project to something feasible and impactful."(P20-33) "There are many contributing factors in being a good team player.I often exhibit empathy to try and put myself in the shoes of my teammates, and I have found this skill to be beneficial in our overall dynamic."(P20-05) 4) Teacher/Student Role Reversal: The students were asked to research a topic and then teach this topic to their peers.This showed the human dimension of learning where the students had to put themselves in the roles of the instructors.The reflections from students provide evidence that the students gained insight into their learning as well as an appreciation of the roles the instructors play.
"Academic success is a team effort, after all."(P20-07) "Making sure you convey the right amount of information without overcomplicating the topic is a tricky thing to do, and I am glad so many professors care enough to do this for students."(P20-04) Through these experiences, students made stronger connections with professors.For example, one student said: "One thing I will do next semester is get into more contact with profs and TA's when I have concerns with my learning as I realize how valuable they really are for info."(P19-09)

VI. DISCUSSION
Through the ILS Program, the authors were able to achieve multiple dimensions of Fink's Taxonomy of significant learning, specifically extending to caring, learning how to learn, and human dimensions [6].Looking broadly at the results presented above, a few main themes emerge.When ILS was first started, the focus was on integrating course content across five courses.After running the program for a year, it became evident that ILS's biggest asset was not necessarily the integration of technical content or even PBL, but rather all the activities that were performed to support these.This finding parallels other work which talks about the key recommendations for successful implementation of PBL centering around supporting students, supporting group work, and student autonomy [3].Notably, none of these recommendations are focused on the project or curriculum content.
Although content integration was not as prominent, integration again becomes prevalent through the integration of the different dimensions.Within the design of ILS, caring, learning how to learn, and human dimensions were not added to the core course content, but rather they needed to be integrated.As Fink says, "teachers do not automatically have to give up one kind of learning to achieve another" [6].This is evident in the way students talk about their learning.They do not just talk about how they developed each of these dimensions, but rather how through gaining foundational knowledge and application in the ILS PBL experience, they were also able to develop these dimensions.
For example, students felt "empowered" as they learned new topics and they "enjoyed" the content more.They talked about learning how to learn by having "a tree of knowledge where everything is connected" (P20-08) and that learning knowledge is more enjoyable than having an "open mind."Students also emphasized that working together and "knowing the strengths" (P20-37) of their teammates supported their ability to gain foundational knowledge and how they would apply this to their future careers.
Further integration occurred across the three dimensions.Students emphasized how the learning communities provided them with a "support group" (human dimension), helped them reflect on their learning by better understanding their own "strengths and weaknesses" (P20-65) relative to their peers (learning how to learn), and how they "ended up enjoying it more" (P19-28) because they were working in a team (caring).This not only emphasizes the social links created from integrated learning communities [1] but it also highlights Authorized licensed use limited to the terms of the applicable license agreement with IEEE.Restrictions apply.
how the ILS experience was able to achieve the integrative nature of Fink's approach to the six dimensions, where achieving one dimension enhances the possibility of achieving the others [22].
The second important theme observed in the results is how ILS promotes critical reflection and the ability to learn to change [2].In Fink's work, he emphasizes that learning is a process of reflecting on new meanings in a nonlinear and nonhierarchical way [6].Across all of the results, the students emphasize the change they observed in their learning.Specifically, when reviewing the analysis, typically negative emotions were in the past tense, where students had critically reflected and ILS supported them in learning how to change their experience.When reflecting, many students talked about feeling "initially intimidated and stressful" (P19-18), feeling "very daunting" (P20-06), or "kind of nervous" (P20-05) and how previously they had "struggled with completely foreign and theoretical topics" (P20-06).However, through ILS they understood that they could "seek out resources" (P20-22), they could be "more consistent" with "planning and preparing" (P20-32), and "organize their work better" (P19-17).With these critical reflections and changes in their learning, they began to feel "genuinely excited" (P20-07) about the projects, "empowered as an individual" (P20-13), and "motivated to learn more about the topics" (P20-06), which aligns with Fink and other scholarly work that shows critical reflection deepens learning [10].

VII. CONCLUSION
Through integration and critical reflection, the overall impact of ILS and the PBL experiences was that authentic, significant learning experiences were created that align with Fink's Taxonomy.One student even said that it "reinforces how studying engineering was the right choice for me" (P19-03).Students were provided with "lasting change that is important in terms of the learner's life" [6].The curriculum moved from being content-centered to being learner-centered, where the inclusion of reflections and learning communities, as well as the integrative aspect of ILS, resulted in all six of Fink's categories being addressed, and in a truly integrated significant learning experience.

A. Limitations
The primary limitation of this work is the relatively small sample size of participants.Although in qualitative work, small sample sizes are acceptable for analysis to understand the participant experience [29], this is still an important limitation due to the type of data being analyzed.As the analysis for this work focused on student assignments and reflections, there was not a lush description of individual experiences that would be conducive to the small sample size.The research and results provides useful qualitative insights into the pilot program and possibilities for improvement for future engineering students.Future work will continue to collect more data over the years, as well as looking at collecting qualitative data that goes beyond the required reflection assignments, through more de-tailed and targeted questions that get at individual experiences within the ILS Program.

Fig. 2 .
Fig.2.Visual summary of the qualitative content analysis process followed.

TABLE I SUMMARY
OF STUDENT REFLECTION ASSIGNMENTS USED FOR QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS