Transcript Computing Unit with Blackboard, Bachelor of Dental Surgery

Educational Approach
and Quality:
Does PBL support quality
learning outcomes?
Tracey Winning
School of Dentistry
The University of Adelaide
Educational Approach
and Quality
 Objectives
To share knowledge and experience
of learning and teaching in PBL
 review published outcomes of PBL

Why PBL?
Quality Student Experience
 Student-centred focus 1, 2
 Improve integration of basic science and clinical
education 1, 2
 Develop skills, understandings, qualities and
dispositions appropriate to employment:3
 life-long learning, critical thinking and decision
making, independent working, teamwork, flexibility,
oral communication, time management, planning
and organisational ability
 Evidence-based decision making approach for
patient management 4
1. Institute of Medicine, 1995; 2. General Dental Council, 2002; 3. The Pedagogy for Employability
Group, HEA, 2006; 4. Institute of Medicine 2003
Why PBL?
Learning Theories : Social constructivism
Meaningful learning is most likely with: 5, 6, 7
– authentic, real activities,
– modelling and coaching, ie, how to think and act as a
practitioner,
– interactions: ‘inquiry and exploratory talk,’ 8
– collaboration: students and staff,
– reflection: content and strategies,
– working independently: staff step back.
 Co-construction of new knowledge for ‘real-world’
contexts, linked to prior knowledge.
These elements inform the design of problem-based learning (PBL)
with the aim to support meaningful student learning. 9
5. Brown et al. 1989; 6. Savery & Duffy, 1995; 7. Brophy, 2002; 8. Wells, 2002; 9. Dolmans et al., 2005
What is PBL? 10, 11
Principles
Characteristics
 Problem = organiser  Problem = authentic professionally relevant situation
 Encountered first
for learning
 Student responds as practitioner
 Learner-centred
 Students involved in deciding what, how to learn
 Construct own knowledge & understanding
 Guidance/scaffolding provided by teacher as a
‘facilitator’ of learning
 Educational approach  Multiple learning and teaching methods
(not a method)
 Organised around problem: small groups, collaborative
& independent research, peer learning and teaching,
reflection and self-management
10. Barrows 2000; 11. Charlin et al., 1998
What is PBL?
Educational Outcomes 10
 Systematic approach to patient and analysis of their
situation
 Contextualised and integrated knowledge, skills,
behaviours
 Self-directed (independent) learning skills, lifelong
 Team skills
 Motivating, enjoyable learning experience
10. Barrows 2000
PBL Package Purpose
Package must provide opportunity for
students to: 12
 Think and act as practitioner


develop new, professional knowledge, skills and behaviours
apply new, professional knowledge, skills and behaviours
 Develop learning skills


 Is
collaborative, independent study
discussion and critique of learning
there support that PBL can achieve these
educational outcomes?
12. Adapted from PROBLARC 2000
Outcomes: Systematic
approach to analysis of
patient situation
 Developing systematic enquiry skills:



Graduates self-rated as better at problemsolving skills 13
Improvement in clinical reasoning strategy
more accurate hypotheses and coherent
explanations with basic science knowledge
Improved diagnostic ability with PBL using
clinical contexts 15
13. Schmidt et al., 2006; 14. Hmelo, 1998; 15. Schmidt et al., 1996
14
Outcomes: Contextualised
and integrated
knowledge, skills, behaviours
 Basic and clinical science knowledge
 Critical thinking, logical argument (eg explain,
test, justify their assumptions, knowledge,
reasoning)
 Communication/interpersonal skills
 Preparation for practice and clinical skills
Outcomes: knowledge, skills,
behaviours 1
 Basic and clinical science knowledge



Several reviews have reported equivocal outcomes
re basic science knowledge development 16, 17, 18
Better skills in applying knowledge 18
Significantly better performance on Medical Board
exams (I & II) 19
 Critical thinking
 Higher critical thinking disposition which was
maintained (to a lesser degree over
subsequent 2 y) 20
16. Albanese & Mitchell, 1993; 17. Vernon & Blake, 1993; 18. Dochy et al., 2003; 19. Hoffman et al., 2006;
20. Tiwari, et al., 2006
Outcomes: knowledge, skills,
behaviours 2
 Communication /interpersonal skills

High levels of communication skills in PBL graduates
(self 13 and clinical directors/co-workers 21, 22)
 Preparation for practice



Graduates felt better prepared than their peers from
conventional curricula 23
Graduates self-rated as better at professional skills
(eg physical examination) 13 and were rated above
average by clinical directors 22
Better clinical periodontics performance in OSCE (NS
difference for examination of patient) 24
13. Schmidt et al., 2006; 21. Rolfe and Pearson, 1994; 22. Dean et al., 2003; 23. Mennin et
al., 1996; 24. Rich et al., 2005
Outcomes:
Self-directed learning
 Identifying own learning needs and resources
 Information literacy skills (eg identify, locate, evaluate
and use information)
 Identifying and utilising appropriate learning processes
(eg self-testing, concept maps, diagrams, teaching
others, applying knowledge to novel situations)
 Developing time management and organisational skills
 Monitoring and evaluating learning processes and
outcomes
Outcomes:
Self-directed learning 1
 Identifying needs and resources:


> 60% (average) learning issues match faculty-identified
learning issues; identify other relevant learning issues 25, 26
plan and undertake research in own time, using selfidentified resources 27
 Information literacy skills
 Graduates self-rated as better at self-directed learning 13, 22
and using information resources 13
13. Schmidt et al., 2006; 22. Dean et al., 2003; 25. Dolmans et al., 1993; 26. Sigrell et al., 2004;
27. Blumberg 2000
Outcomes:
Self-directed learning 2
 Learning processes/approaches
 PBL associated with learning for meaning (deep) 28, 29,
30, 31
 Developing time management and organisational
skills

Graduates self-rated as better at planning, efficiency
and time management 13, 22 and rated highly by clinical
directors 22
 Monitoring and evaluating learning processes and
outcomes:

Updating of current knowledge for practice 32
13. Schmidt et al., 2006; 22. Dean et al., 2003; 28. Coles, 1985; 29. Newble and Clarke, 1986; 30. Vu
et al., 1998; 31. Richardson et al., 2007, in press; 32. Shin et al., 1993
Outcomes: Team Skills
 Group function:

Group dynamics




Working relationships (eg respect, trust, valuing, etc);
Communication (eg negotiation, discussion, giving and
receiving feedback);
Conflict management, (eg trouble-shooting dysfunctional
groups: domination, non-participation, exclusion, ‘short-cutting’,
‘sponging’)
Group process



Roles & responsibilities (eg leader, scribe, researcher, recorder/
administrator);
Monitoring and evaluating group functioning;
Organising
Outcomes: Team Skills
 Group dynamics

Graduates self-rated as better collaboration skills 13, 22
 Group process

Graduates self-rated as better at skills required for
running meetings 13
13. Schmidt et al., 2006; 22. Dean et al., 2003
Outcomes:
Student satisfaction
 improved enjoyment, student interaction, and
flexibility in their programs 16, 30, 33, 34
 overall satisfaction strong for PBL experience 35
and better cf with conventional curricula (CEQ) 31
16. Albanese &Mitchell, 1993; 30. Tiwari et al., 2006; 31. Richardson et al., 2007, in press; 33.
Rohlin et al., 1998; 34. Townsend et al., 1997; 35. Lyon and Hendry, 2002.
Conclusion
 Evaluation of PBL indicates achieving some of
educational outcomes; these link to quality
higher education learning outcomes
 Issues in interpreting results due to variable
implementations of PBL and limited use of
theoretical basis: need clear definition of
programme processes to assist in
interpretation 10, 11
 Research needed to identify key elements of
context that are required to achieve PBL
outcomes 9
9. Dolmans et al., 2005; 10. Barrows 2000; 11. Charlin et al., 1998
References 1
Albanese MA, Mitchell S. 1993 Problem-based learning: A review of literature
on its outcomes and implementation issues. Acad Med 68(1): 52-81.
Barrows H. 2000 Problem-based Learning Applied to Medical Education.
Springfield, Illinois: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine
Blumberg P. Evaluating the evidence that problem-based learners are self
directed learners: A Review of the literature. In: Evensen D, Hmelo CE, eds.
Problem- Based Learning: Research Perspectives on Learning Interactions.
Mahwah; Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc, 2000:199-227
Brown JS, Collins A & Duguid P. 1989 Situated cognition and the culture of
learning. Educational Researcher 18: 32-42
Brophy J. 2002 Introduction. In: Social Constructivist Teaching: Affordances
and Constraints. Ed: Brophy J. JAI: Amsterdam pp ix-xxii.
Charlin B, Mann K, Hansen P. 1998 The many faces of problem-based
learning: a framework for understanding and comparison. Medical Teacher
20:323-330.
Coles CR. 1985 Differences between conventional and problem-based
curricula in their students’ approaches to studying. Med Educ 19(4):308309.
Dean SJ, Barrett AL, Hendry GD, Lyon PMA. 2003 Preparedness for hospital
practice among graduates of a problem-based, graduate-entry medical
program. MJA 178:163-167.
References 2
Dochy F, Segers M, Van den Bossche P, Gijbels D. Effects of problem-based
learning: a meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction 2003;13:533-568.
Dolmans DH, Gijselaers WH, Schmidt HG, van der Meer SB. 1993 Problem
effectivenss in a course using problem-based learning. Acad Med 68(3):207213.
Dolmans D, De Grace W, Wolfhagen IHAP, van der Vleuten CPM. 2005
Problem-based learning: future challenges for educational practice and
research. Med Educ 39:732-741.
General Dental Council 2002 The First Five Years. General Dental Council,
London.
Hmelo CE 1998 Cognitive consequences of problem-based learning for the early
development of medical expertise. Teach Learn Med 10(2):92-100.
Hoffman K, Hosokawa M, Blake R Jr, Headrick L, Johnson G. 2006 Problembased learning outcomes: ten years of experience at the University of Missouri
- Colombia School of Medicine. Acad Med 81(7):617-625.
Institute of Medicine 1995 The mission of education. In: Dental Education at the
Crossroads: Challenges and Change (Report by Committee on the Future of
Dental Education, Division of Health Services). Ed: Field MJ. National
Academy Press, Washington. pp 88-143.
References 3
Institute of Medicine 2003 Health Professions Education: A bridge to quality.
(Report by Committee of the Health Professions Education Summit). Eds:
Greiner AC, Knebel E. The National Academies Press, Washington.
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10681#toc (accessed 11-9-07).
Lyon PMA, Hendry GD. 2002 The use of the Course Experience Questionnaire
as a monitoring evaluation tool in a problem-based medical programme.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 27(4): 339-350.
Mennin SP, Kalishman S, Friedman M, Pathak D, Snyder J. 1996 A survey of
graduates in practice from the University of New Mexico's conventional and
community-oriented, problem-based tracks. Acad Med 71: 1079-89.
Newble DI, Clarke RM. 1986 The approaches to learning of students in a
traditional and in an innovative problem-based medical school. Med Educ
20:267-273.
PROBLARC 1994 Constructing a Problem. Workshop papers: Designing and
Writing PBL Packages, June 30th and July 1st, 2001, Adelaide. Newcastle,
NSW: Problem Based Learning Assessment and Research Centre, The
University of Newcastle.
Rich SK, Keim RG, Shuler CF. 2005 Problem-based learning versus traditional
educational methodology: a comparison of preclinical and clinical periodontics
performance. J Dent Educ 69(6): 649-662.
References 4
Richardson J 2007 Medical Teacher 29: in press
Rohlin M, Petersson K, Svensbter G 1998 The Malmo model: a problem-based
learning curriculum in undergraduate dental education. Eur J Dent Educ
2:103-114.
Rolfe I, Pearson S. 1994 Communication skills of interns in New South Wales.
MJA 161:667-670.
Savery JR & Duffy TM. 1995 Problem-based learning: An instructional model
and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology 135:31-38
Schmidt HG, Machiels-Bongaerts M, Hermans H, et al. 1996 The
development of diagnostic competence: comparison of a problem-based, an
integrated, and a conventional medical curriculum. Acad Med 71(6): 658664
Schmidt HG, Vermeulen L, van der Molen HT. 2006 Longterm effects of
problem-based learning: a comparison of competencies acquired by
graduates of a problem-based and a conventional medical school. Med Educ
40:562-567.
Sigrell B, Sundblad G, Rönnås P-A. 2004 To what extent do students
generate learning issues that correspond to pre-set faculty objectives? Med
Educ 26(4): 378-381.