“The label ‘PBL’ covers an amazing diversity of educational practices”, say Ryberg and Nørgaard (2013: V); citing Kolmos and Graaff (2003: 657), who observe the use of the acronym “ranging from problem-oriented lectures to completely open experiential learning environments”; as well as Barrows (1986: 485) who states it “addresses different objectives to varying degrees”; and recommends “any PBL method must be analysed in terms of the type of problem used, the teaching learning sequences, the responsibility given to students for learning and the student assessment method used”.
Barrows (1996: 3) summarises the “factors that motivated the need for curricular change”, the introduction of problem-based learning (PBL) in 1969, and developments that followed. Countless “approaches to problem-based learning”, representing a significant “variety of methods”, resulted in a notion with “far less precision than might be assumed” observes Barrows (1996: 5). Scholkmann (2020) reaffirms that “Variations in PBL implementation need to be seen as the norm rather than the exception, since local PBL practice will always diverge from the ‘original model’”. Despite “the many variations of PBL that have evolved”, Barrows (1996: 5-6) argues that “a core model or basic definition with which others can be compared is needed”, and outlines (paraphrased below) the original method developed for the medical school of McMaster University, Faculty of Health Sciences:
- Learning is student-centred, in that students must take responsibility for their own learning, identify what they need to know to better understand and manage the problem on which they are working and determining where they will get that information.
- Learning occurs in small student groups of five to nine students randomly assigned with a tutor for each curricular unit, giving students practice in working intensely and effectively with a variety of different people.
- Teachers/lecturers/tutors are group facilitators or guides, asking students the kinds of questions that they should be asking themselves to better understand and manage the problem. Tutors are not content experts and discouraged from falling back on old teaching reflexes and giving the students direct information and guidance
- Problems form the organizing focus and stimulus for learning, presented as a written case, case vignette, standardized (also called simulated) patient, computer simulation, videotape. The problems represent challenges students would face in practice, and provides the relevance and motivation for learning. The problems give students foci for integrating information from basic sciences and various disciplines.
- Problems are vehicles for the development of clinical problem-solving skills (professional practice) presented in a format similar to the real world. Students are permitted ask the patient questions, carry out physical examinations, and order laboratory tests.
- New information is acquired through self-directed learning, in that students are expected to learn from the bodies of knowledge and accumulated expertise by virtue of their own study and research, just as real practitioners do. Students work together, discussing, comparing, reviewing, and debating what they have learned.
Moust et al. (2005: 668) illustrate (Figure 1 below) the problem-based learning (PBL) process “connected with the various underlying learning principles in each phase of students’ learning”. They remark that “PBL can be seen as an example of a learning environment that fosters active, constructive, contextual, cooperative, and goal-directed learning”, and that research “has shown that implementation of these principles has a positive effect on students’ learning processes”.
Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20(6), 481–486. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.1986.tb01386.x
Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond. In L. Wilkerson & W. H. Gijselaers (Eds.), New directions for teaching and learning, 68, 3–13. Jossey-Bass. Electronically accessible from https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219966804
Kolmos, A., & Graaff, E. D. (2003). Characteristics of Problem-Based Learning. International Journal of Engineering Education, 2003(19), 657–662.
Moust, J. H. C., Berkel, H. J. M. Van., & Schmidt, H. G. (2005). Signs of erosion: Reflections on three decades of problem-based learning at Maastricht University. Higher Education, 50(4), 665–683. Electronically accessible from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-6371-z
Ryberg, T. & Nørgaard, B. (2013). Introducing Problem Based Learning in Higher Education. Journal of Problem Based Learning in Higher Education, 1(1), I-VI. https://journals.aau.dk/index.php/pbl/article/view/274/201
Scholkmann, A. (2020). Why don't we all just do the same? Understanding variation in PBL implementation from the perspective of translation theory. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 14 (2), Special Issue: PBLing the unPBLable. Electronically accessible from https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/ijpbl/article/view/28800/35707
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.