Essential Readings in Problem-Based Learning , livre ebook

ESSENTIAL READINGS IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING
Edited by Andrew Walker, Heather Leary, Cindy E. Hmelo-Silver, and Peggy A. Ertmer
Purdue University Press West Lafayette, Indiana
Copyright 2015 by Andrew Walker, Heather Leary, Cindy E. Hmelo-Silver, and Peggy A. Ertmer.
Printed in the United States of America.
Cataloging-in-Publication data on file at the Library of Congress.
Print ISBN: 978-1-55753-682-2
ePDF ISBN: 978-1-61249-367-0
ePUB ISBN: 978-1-61249-368-8
CONTENTS
Foreword
Sophie M. M. Loyens
Acknowledgments
Section 1. The Process and Structure of Problem-Based Learning
Edited by Cindy E. Hmelo-Silver
Overview of Problem-Based Learning: Definitions and Distinctions
John R. Savery
All Problems Are Not Equal: Implications for Problem-Based Learning
David H. Jonassen and Woei Hung
The Learning Space in Problem-Based Learning
Cindy E. Hmelo-Silver
Theoretical Anchors for Barrows’ PBL Tutor Guidelines
Kareen McCaughan
Problem-Based Learning: Goals for Learning and Strategies for Facilitating
Cindy E. Hmelo-Silver and Howard S. Barrows
Section 2. New Contexts for Problem-Based Learning
Edited by Peggy A. Ertmer
Essentials for PBL Implementation: Fostering Collaboration, Transforming Roles, and Scaffolding Learning
Peggy A. Ertmer and Krista D. Glazewski
Blended Learning and PBL: An Interactional Ethnographic Approach to Understanding Knowledge Construction In Situ
Susan Bridges, Judith Green, Michael Botelho, and Peter CS Tsang
Examination of Content Acquisition Using Problem-Based Learning in Career and Technical Education Courses at the Middle School Level
Kimberly Hodges
The GlobalEd 2 Simulations: Promoting Positive Academic Dispositions in Middle School Students in a Web-Based PBL Environment
Scott W. Brown, Kimberley A. Lawless, and Mark A. Boyer
Section 3. Combining Problem-Based Learning With Other Interventions
Edited by Heather Leary
Building Theory-Practice Nexus in Pre-Service Physics Teacher Education Through Problem-Based Learning
Jennifer Yeo
Problem-Based Learning as the Instructional Approach to Field Learning in the Secondary School Setting
Loretta M. W. Ho and Lung S. Chan
Distributing Scaffolding Across Multiple Levels: Individuals, Small Groups, and a Class of Students
Sadhana Puntambekar
Preparation for Future Learning: Exploring the Efficacy of Problem-Based Learning and Cross-Curricular Experiences
Karen Swan, Phil Vahey, Ken Rafanan, Tina Stanford, Louise Yarnall, Mark van ’t Hooft, Annette Kratcoski, and Dale Cook
Problem-Based Learning as a Means of Revealing Unseen Academic Potential
Shelagh A. Gallagher and James J. Gallagher
Drugs, Devices, and Desires: A Historical Exploration of Medical Technology
Patangi K. Rangachari
Section 4. Summarizing and Assessing the Impact of Problem-Based Learning
Edited by Andrew Walker
A Scientometric, Large-Scale Data, and Visualization-Based Analysis of the PBL Literature
Hanjun Xian and Krishna Madhavan
A Meta-Analysis of Problem-Based Learning: Examination of Education Levels, Disciplines, Assessment Levels, Problem Types, Implementation Types, and Reasoning Strategies
Andrew Walker, Heather Leary, and Mason Lefler
Exploring the Relationships Between Tutor Background, Tutor Training, and Student Learning: A Problem-Based Learning Meta-Analysis
Heather Leary, Andrew Walker, Brett E. Shelton, and M. Harrison Fitt
PBL Effectiveness, Tensions, and Practitioner Implications
Johannes Strobel and Angela van Barneveld
Epilogue: The Future of PBL
Andrew Walker, Heather Leary, Peggy A. Ertmer, and Cindy E. Hmelo-Silver
Index
FOREWORD
Sofie M. M. Loyens
When I think about essential readings in PBL, several “classical” pieces come to mind, bringing me back to the start of my studies at my alma mater, Maastricht University. Of course, there was Howard Barrows’ article of 1986. In 1986, Dr. Barrows greatly contributed to the conceptual clarity of PBL not only by describing its educational objectives, but also by mentioning the different varieties of what was called PBL, depending on the chosen focus in a particular environment (e.g., lectures, cases, problems). For each of these varieties, he explained how and to what degree they fostered the educational objectives. He concluded in his article: “All descriptions and evaluations of any PBL method must be analyzed in terms of the type of problem used, the teaching-learning sequences, the responsibility given to students for learning, and the student assessment methods used” (Barrows, 1986, p. 485). The collection of articles presented in this book, Essential Readings in Problem-Based Learning , address these four essential factors mentioned by Barrows: the problems used and descriptions in Section 2, teaching-learning sequences and student responsibility in Sections 3 and 4, and assessment of students and PBL in Section 5. In addition, the articles give a state-of-the-art overview of where PBL practice and research stand today.
As Henk Schmidt pointed out, PBL can be considered “one of the few curriculum-wide educational innovations surviving since the sixties” (Schmidt, van der Molen, te Winkel, & Wijnen, 2009, p. 2). Why is this the case? I believe this is because of the factors that Barrows (1986) mentioned that together foster students’ learning and make PBL a unique instructional method.
First, using a problem as the starting point can both inspire and motivate learners. In addition to earlier work that stressed the importance of prior knowledge, and processes of elaboration (e.g., Anderson, 1990) and collaboration (e.g., Slavin, 1996) for learning, recent research has focused on the more motivational and affective effects of the problem as the starting point and has demonstrated that students’ interest increases after reading the problem and decreases again after they have gained knowledge about the topic presented in the problem (Rotgans & Schmidt, 2011, 2014). Students’ anticipatory response to a topic should hence be taken into account, since it can influence subsequent learning activities. Higher levels of initial topic interest have been shown to positively impact autonomous motivation, self-study time, and persistence (Wijnia, Loyens, Derous, & Schmidt, in press). In short, the problem, presented at the very start of the learning process, is one of the cornerstones of PBL. Unfortunately, the term “problem” has caused some conceptual confusion in PBL research, since some thought the main objective of PBL was the development of problem-solving skills and argued this could better be achieved by forms of direct instruction (e. g., Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). However, not all PBL problems can be neatly solved because they are often ill-structured and, in that case, the closest students can get to some kind of solution is to understand the problem in terms of its underlying mechanisms (Loyens, Kirschner, & Paas, 2012).
Recently, I read that the term “trigger” better captures the meaning of the problem in PBL (Barrett, Cashman, & Moore, 2011) and I tend to agree. Section 2 of this volume addresses the role of the problem in PBL and also describes the role of the tutor within the PBL process. Of course, the initial problem discussion represents only the start of the process and from there on, students subsequently engage in self-study activities and report back to each other a few days later to complete the PBL cycle. The tutor guides this process and can be considered the beacon in students’ learning process, setting out the contours on the one hand, but allowing students to fill them in on the other.
Second, the fact that PBL relies on group discussions and students’ self-study activities and that the number of lectures is limited contributes to students’ engagement in their own learning. Students themselves are the key players in PBL and have responsibility over their learning processes. There are misconceptions concerning this responsibility, which is sometimes mistakenly labeled as independence or leaving students to their own devices. However, scaffolding is present in many ways in PBL, including the use of a tutor and the provision of suggested readings to support novice learners. If the gap between the degree of responsibility students can handle and the degree of responsibility expected based on the given instructional strategies is too large, destructive friction will take place, which is detrimental to learning (Vermunt & Verloop, 1999). Sections 3 and 4 address the issue of scaffolding in PBL and also discuss teaching-learning sequences, highlighting new contexts for PBL, which sometimes require adaptations (e.g., online PBL). PBL in the 21st century undoubtedly encompasses the possibilities of technology, although some studies report challenges for slow readers (Liu, 2004) and lower achieving students (Jeong & Hmelo-Silver, 2010) while using technology-based learning environments.
Future developments and research are needed to optimize the use of technology for all PBL learners and Section 3 discusses potential candidates in this respect. Adaptations may also arise from combining PBL with other interventions, described in Section 4, such as inquiry-based learning and field/workplace learning.
Finally, it is only natural that instructional method implementations should go hand in hand with evaluation and research on its effectiveness. Historically, PBL research has focused on the i