Why Problem-Based Learning Fits Well to Adult Learners - Coursework Example

Table of Contents Table of Contents 1 Abstract 2 1 Introduction 3 2 Problem-Based Learning 4 2.1 Theoretical Underpinnings of Problem-Based Learning 6 2.2 Assessment and Outcomes of Problem-based Learning 7 3.0 Conclusion 9 4 References 10 Abstract While not disputing the advantages of the traditional teacher-centric, lecture-based teaching approach, it needs to be complemented with other teaching and learning strategies. Lectures provide student with an explanatory overview of a subject but hardly give them the opportunity to engage with it and, as such, attain anything more than a surface understanding of the issue(s). Therefore, concomitant with lectures, it is incumbent upon teachers to utilize other teaching approaches. The teaching approach which a lecturer/professor selects should be informed by the subject in question. As the focus of this paper was on the health science, the teaching approach selected is the problem-based approach. As argued, this approach is particularly suited to the health sciences since it teaches through real-world examples and effectively forces students to engage with, and delve deep into, the subject. 1 Introduction The learning-teaching paradigm appears straightforward: students attend classes, teachers teach and students learn. The simplicity apparent in the aforementioned is deceptive; if learning and teaching were that simple, then why are undergraduate students struggling to achieve acceptable grades and why are university/college teachers and lecturers finding it increasingly difficult to incite student interest and engagement with subjects? Several researchers have argued that the roots of the aforementioned problem lie in the passive learning approach which seems to predominate in university campuses. As per this argument, traditional teaching methods, centered on the primacy of the lecture, combined with passive learning in undergraduate health science classes, can be counter-productive to meaningful learning while inhibiting students' ability to apply knowledge (Barr & Tagg, 1995; Griffiths & Mayer-Smith, 2000; Ramsden, 1999). Mazur (1996) notes that lecturing can be problematic because students do not benefit from lectures that simply reproduce written material already available in texts or from notes that they can read beforehand, while critical thinking is often not required during lectures. Students schooled in this manner typically lack the ability to apply their knowledge to novel situations, and exhibit only surface learning rather than deep understanding (Senk & Thompson, 2002). These problems are widespread across institutions of higher learning, where traditional practice remains privileged, and despite the attention of many curriculum theorists and researchers, learning within the undergraduate science classroom remains largely unchanged and unquestioned. Innovative approaches that are more student-centered, such as those that foster group learning, have been shown to be useful (Bossert, 1988, 1989; Johnson & Johnson, 1989, 1993; Yuretich, Khan, Leckie & Clement, 2001). However, such approaches have not been widely embraced by undergraduate science instructors. This divide between curriculum theory and practice leads one to inquire more deeply into what we know about learning in the undergraduate science classroom. innovative strategies that have been tried in post-secondary science classrooms include cooperative learning and related small-group activities, problem-based learning, thinking aloud pair problem solving, role-playing and the use of analogies. In this paper I will consider the case of problem-based learning. In so doing, the benefits and disadvantages associated with its use will be clarified. 2 Problem-Based Learning The assumptions of problem-based learning include that: content is learned in the context in which it will subsequently be used; learning is an active process; adult learners are intrinsically motivated, self-directed, have knowledge and experience to contribute; problem-solving must be practiced with real-life problems to become proficient problem-solvers; and, life-long learning is a skill to be internalized and practiced (Barrows, 1985). Problem-based learning has become a ubiquitous term with many definitions (Charlin, Mann, & Hansen, 1998; Harden & Davis, 1998), what Barrows referred to as a “genus for which there are many species” (Hardin & Davis, p. 317). Barrows terms his species of problem-based learning authentic problem-based learning. The term authentic has been added because inherent within the process are activities that the student must master to function in the intended health care role: developing the ability to reason using the hypothetico-deductive reasoning process; completing a history and physical examination; directing their own learning; and becoming familiar with the diagnosis and management of common pathologies that patients will present with in clinical practice (Barrows, 2000). Barrow’s (1996) considers the “core model” of authentic problem-based learning as having the following elements; student-centered learning in small groups where the problem “becomes the organizing focus and stimulus for learning” (p. 5) as well as the “vehicle for the development of clinical problem-solving skills” (p. 6). Faculty become facilitators directing the content and process, modeling metacognitive behavior that the students will assume as time goes on. The role of independent study as part of the process becomes the foundation for life-long learning. Since no texts are prescribed for learning, students have any and all resources at their disposal, much akin to how they will keep up to date as seasoned practitioners. Albanese and Mitchell (1993) defined problem-based learning as “an instructional method characterized by the use of patient problems as a context for students to learn problem-solving skills and acquire knowledge about the basic and clinical sciences” (p. 53). Others define problem-based learning by listing the elements that comprise the approach. Vernon and Blake (1993) listed the components of problem based learning, which include “(a) the study of clinical cases, either real or hypothetical (b) small discussion groups, (c) collaborative independent study, (d) hypothetico-deductive reasoning, and (e) a style of faculty direction that concentrates on group process rather than imparting information” (p. 551-2). Problem-based learning is an instructional method, which can be implemented curriculum wide or as an adjunct to traditional teaching methods where only specific cases are used to supplement instruction. Both ways of using the problem based learning method can remain true to the definition of authentic problem-based learning. The foundation of problem-based learning is the ill-structured case or clinical scenario that is presented to groups of students working collaboratively to determine the initial hypotheses, identify learning issues necessary to rule-in or rule-out each hypothesis, and recognize gaps in knowledge. These learning issues are then researched individually and the group reconvenes to discuss what they have learned, to determine if the hypotheses can be accepted or rejected based on this new knowledge, and to identify additional areas of learning still needed. A tutor facilitates the process (Barrows, 1996). Problem-based learning incorporates methods to support learning in all three stages identified by cognitive psychologists; memory acquisition, retention, and access (Norman & Schmidt, 1992). Prior knowledge is activated during the hypotheses generation phase as learners discuss their current knowledge and identify learning issues. Elaboration of knowledge occurs when the group reconvenes after conducting independent research on their assigned learning issues and a discussion ensues. Theoretically, since the information is logged into memory in the form of a case, recalling the initial case when similar cases are encountered in clinical practice should occur. Studies have shown that students in the problem-based learning environment did not score as well on initial tests of learning, but scored better than a lecture-based group on the same knowledge after six months. However, since the immediate test of learning was a multiple-choice test, the appropriateness of the assessment method was called into question in assessing learning from a problem-based method (Eisenstaedt; Tans, Schmidt, Schade-Hoogeveen, & Gijselaers, as cited in Norman & Schmidt, 1992). While few theory-based guidelines exist on how to construct the problem or case in problem-based learning, case design is important (Gijselaers, 1996). Albanese & Mitchell (1993) noted: “Barrows (1986) suggests that problems that are relatively unorganized, unsynthesized, and open-ended will better promote the application of clinical reasoning skills, structuring of knowledge in useful contexts and the development of self-directed learning, and will also be more motivating” (p. 72). A good case typically is ill structured and ambiguous, stimulates group discussion, provides opportunities for identifying learning goals, and fosters self-directed learning (Washington, Tysinger, Snell, & Palmer, 2003). In addition, the problem should direct students to specific content, techniques, ideas, and domains of knowledge while simulating a situation likely to be encountered in clinical practice (Barrows, 1985). 2.1 Theoretical Underpinnings of Problem-Based Learning The foundational theories behind problem-based learning include information processing, constructivism and social constructivism. Norman and Schmidt (1992) suggested that problem-based learning is grounded in information processing. Three principles of this model apply: activation of prior knowledge, encoding specificity, and elaboration of knowledge. Activating prior knowledge provides the foundation from which to build new knowledge structures. Encoding specificity refers to learning that occurs in a similar context for which it will be later used, which promotes transfer of learning. Elaboration of knowledge occurs when discussions ensue, questions are answered, explanations are provided to peers, and a critique of the work is carried out. From a cognitive psychology perspective, according to Glaser, (as cited in Gijselaers 1996) assumed that: “learning is a constructive and not a receptive process, that cognitive processes called metacognition affect the use of knowledge, and that social and contextual factors influence learning” (p. 14). To facilitate learning, instruction should focus on solving real-world problems, teaching metacognitive skills for self regulation of learning, providing varied perspectives for problem-solving and practice in doing so, and collaborating with other students to learn their unique beliefs (Mandl, Gruber, & Renkl, as cited in Gijselaers, 1996). Problem-based learning seems to be a good fit with the tenets of cognitive psychology. Tenets of constructivism include (a) understanding is unique to the individual; (b) individuals construct their own meaning based on prior knowledge and experience; (c) not having the answers motivates learning; and, (d) learning is a social process (Greening, 1998). Constructivism assumes an active learning process, which, to some degree, requires that the learner be self-directed (Peters, 2000). The relationship of constructivism and problem-based learning to the principles of adult learning and Andragony seems apparent. The adult learner is one who: a) can self-direct learning, b) can draw upon life experiences as an adjunct to learning, c) the need to learn is related to social roles, d) wants to be able to apply knowledge for current problem resolution, and e) has an internal locus of control as a basis for learning (Merriam, 2001). 2.2 Assessment and Outcomes of Problem-based Learning Assessing the effectiveness of problem-based learning is problematic for many reasons. Learning centers around an ill-structured and often ambiguous problem for which there may not be a right or wrong answer (Jones, 2002). Learning occurs as students work through these cases and, given time constraints, may not complete them. However, it is the process of these cases where learning actually occurs that is the true value of problem-based learning. This, however, makes summative assessment difficult. Problems arise in comparing lecture-based programs with this teaching method due to sample or selection bias (Antepohl & Herzig, 1999). In addition, for most of their academic careers students have been taught by the lecture method. Entering a problem-based learning course often requires becoming accustomed to the process as the content. Performance is bound to suffer. Albanese notes (2000): Expecting students who have risen to the top after 15+ years of being cultivated and culled by a traditional educational approach, in what might be likened to an education genetic engineering process, to suddenly excel in a different type of educational milieu seems to be overly optimistic. (p. 732) Instituting problem-based learning in less than the full curriculum also becomes difficult for students to navigate. When time constraints occur, students are more likely to focus on lecture-delivered content than learner-driven exploration. Instituting a curriculum-wide renovation into problem-based learning is thought to be more successful than using both problem-based learning and traditional learning modes within the curriculum (Albanese, 2000). Many of the studies reported in the literature evaluated problem-based learning with evaluation criteria typically used to assess lecture-based formats. Of these, the multiple-choice question format has received the most criticism. Although psychometrically more sound, the use of multiple-choice tests as the assessment upon which progression in the program is based promotes "teaching to the test", which is incongruous with problem-based learning (Nendaz & Tekian, 2000). Thought to measure only lower levels of cognitive activity, these questions can be structured to measure higher-level skills if more response options are included, which will decrease guessing and “cueing”. Other assessment tools found to be useful are short-answer questions, the extended-matching item format, which includes numerous alternatives for each question, and the Progress Test, which is a series of true false questions based on the terminal program objectives and given to students multiple times during their tenure (Nendaz & Tekian, 2000). Critical thinking and clinical reasoning skills are essential in the medical and nursing fields. Since the focus of problem-based learning is on cases, this allows students not only to develop a clinical basis of knowledge, but also to learn problem solving and clinical reasoning skills (Barrows, 1996). However, studies that have been conducted do not bear this out. Studies have shown that students from problem-based learning programs include more irrelevant information when preparing a case than their more traditionally educated counterparts (Claessen & Boshuizen 1985). Patel, Groen, and Norman (1991) noted that students in a problem-based learning modality employed backward reasoning skills, included more incorrect data, and demonstrated indecisiveness with diagnostic skills. A well-respected study done at Harvard revealed no differences between students in a problem-based learning program and traditionally educated students on diagnostic reasoning tests (Moore, Block, & Mitchell as cited in Albanese & Mitchell, 1993). Research by Hmelo (1998) demonstrated that health science students in a problem based learning curriculum outperformed students in a problem-based learning elective as well as those in a traditional curriculum. Those students in the problem-based learning curriculum provided richer or more elaborate explanations on several parameters: coherence and comprehensiveness, reasoning strategies, and use of scientific concepts, which may reflect deep learning described by Beattie, Collins, and McInnes (1997). Outcome measures reported by Albanese and Mitchell (1993) in their metaanalysis of the problem-based learning literature reviewed reports on basic science examinations which showed those students in a conventional curriculum out-scoring those in a problem-based learning tract in four out of six studies. On the clinical science examinations, however, the problem-based learning students had better scores in 70% of the studies, only one of which showed a statistically significant difference. 3.0 Conclusion As has been evidenced in the above, problem-based learning is particularly suited to adult learners, especially within the context of science and health education. This particular learning approach incites students to bring their own experiences to the fore and, importantly, imposes the imperatives of deep exploration of subject matters upon them. Effectively disallowing learning through rote memorization and standing out as the antithesis of surface learning, problem-based learning has profound benefits for health science students. 4 References Albanese, J. (2000). Problem-based learning: Why curricula are likely to show little effect on knowledge and clinical skills. Medical Education 34, 729-738. Albanese, M.A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68(1), 52-81. Antepohl, W., & Herzig, S. (1999). Problem-based learning versus lecture-based learning in a course of basic pharmacology: a controlled, randomized study. Medical Education, 33, 106-113. Barr, R., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning - a new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27(6), 12-25. Barrows, H.S. (1885). How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclinical years. New York, N.Y.: Springer. Barrows, H.S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. In L.Wilkerson, & W.H. Gijselaers (Eds.), Bringing problem-based learning to higher education theory and practice pp. 3-12. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Barrows, H.S. (2000). Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Springfield, Il: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine. Beattie, V., Collins, B., & McInnes, B. (1997). Deep and surface learning: A simple or simplistic dichotomy? Accounting Education, 6(1), 1-12. Bossert, S. T. (1988-1989). Cooperative activities in the classroom. Review of Research in Education, 15, 225-250. Charlin, B., Mann, K., & Hansen, P. (1998). The many faces of problem-based learning: A framework for understanding and comparison. Medical Teacher, 20(4), 323-330. Claesson, H.F.A. & Boshuizen, H.P.A. (1985). Recall of medical information by students and doctors. Medical Education, 19, 61-67. Gijselaers, W.H. (1996). Connecting problem-based practices with educational theory. In L. Wilkerson & W.H. Gijselaers (Eds.), Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory and practice (pp. 3-11). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Griffiths, A. J. F., & Mayer-Smith, J. (2000). Understanding genetics: Strategies for teachers and learners in universities and high schools. New York: Freeman Press. Harden, R. M., & Davis, M.H. (1998). The continuum of problem-based learning. Medical Teacher, 20(4), 317-322. Hmelo, C.E. (1998). Cognitive consequences of problem-based learning for the early development of medical expertise. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 10(2), 92-100. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1993). Cooperative learning: Where we have been, where we are going. Cooperative Learning and College Teaching Newsletter, 3(2), 6-9. Jones, E.A. (2002). Myths about assessing the impact of problem-based learning on students. The Journal of General Education, 51(4), 326-334. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1 99 1). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press. Leonard, D. C. (2002). Learning Theories A to Z. London: Greenwood Press. Lundberg, C. (2003). Nontraditional college students and the role of collaborative learning as a tool for science mastery. School Science and Mathematics, 103(1), 8-17. Mazur, E. (1996, September). Are science lectures a relic of the past? Physics World, 9, 13-14. Merriam, S.B. (2001). Andragogy and self-directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89, 3-13. Nendaz, M.R., & Tekian, A. (2000). Assessment in problem-based learning medical schools: A literature review. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 11 (4), 232-243. Norman, G.R., & Schmidt, H.G. (1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 67(9), 557-565. Ramsden, P. (1999). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge. Patel, V. L., Groen, G.J., & Norman, G.R. (1991). Effects of conventional and problem based medical curricula on problem solving. Academic Medicine, 66, 380-89. Peters, M. (2000). Does constructivist epistemology have a place in nurse education? Journal of Nursing Education. Senk, S., & Thompson, D. (2002 . Standards based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? Mahwah. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Vernon, D.T.A., & Blake, R.L. (1993). Does problem-based learning work? A metaanalysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine, 68(7), 550-563. Washington, E.T., Tysinger, J.W., Snell, L.M., & Palmer, L.R. (2003). Developing and evaluating ambulatory care: problem-based learning cases. Medical Teacher, 25 (2),136-141. Yuretich, R., Khan, S., Leckie, M., & Clement, J. (2001). Active-learning methods to improve student performance and scientific interest in a large introductory oceanography course. Journal of Geoscience Education, 49(2), 111-119. Read More