gghjjkll;lkjjn

1. Problem Based Learning:
A Case Study
Presented by: Deana Halonen
Ph.D. Candidate, M.S.W., H.B.S.W
halonen@cc.umanitoba.ca

2. Agenda
• Problem Based Learning (PBL)
– Characteristics
– Basic Steps
– Advantages
– Limitations
• The Case Study
• Major Findings
• Students Perceptions

3. Problem Based Learning (PBL)
• Began in 1950’s as a movement to
restructure medical education at
McMaster University (Canada)
• Unlike traditional instruction that
culminates in a problem after basic
instruction on facts and skills (sometimes
in the form of a test or exam), PBL begins
with a problem, teaching facts and skills in
a relevant context

4. Characteristics of Problem Based
Learning
• Requires students to solve authentic, real-
life open-ended problems with many
correct answers possible
• Authentic problems are those real-life
issues faced by doctors, nurses, social
workers, police officers, lawyers,
engineers, business administrators, pilots,
etc., etc., etc.

5. Characteristics of PBL
• Emphasizes students’ pre-existing
knowledge; “start with what you know”
• Students actively participate by helping
plan, organize, and evaluate the problem
solving process
• Interdisciplinary connections stressed
• Students undertake authentic roles

6. Basic Steps of Problem Based
Learning
• Students divided into groups
• Real problem is presented and discussed
• Students identify
– What is known in relation to the problem
– What information is needed
– What strategies or next steps to take in order to
“learn” the information/knowledge/skills needed
• Individuals research different issues, gather
resources

7. Basic Steps of PBL (con’t)
• Resources evaluated in group and new
information/knowledge/skills shared/taught to
rest of the group
• Cycle repeats until students feel that problem
has been framed adequately and all issues have
been addressed
• Possible actions, recommendations, solutions or
hypotheses are generated
• Tutor groups conduct peer/self assessments

8. Facilitators and Problem Based
Learning
• Teachers are seen as the “facilitator” and
are key to these learning environments
• Model higher-order process skills
• Probe for student understanding
• Never identify issues or state an opinion
while students are framing the problems

9. Advantages of Problem Based
Learning
• Greater retention and recall of knowledge
• Interdisciplinary:
– can require accessing and using information from a
variety of subject domains;
– Better integration of knowledge
– Integration of classroom & field
• Development of life-long learning skills
– How to research
– How to communicate in groups
– How to handle problems

10. Advantages of PBL
• Learning environment that is
– Active
– Cooperative
– Self & peer assessed
– Student centred
– Highly effective
• Learning environment that provides
– Prompt feedback
– Opportunities to account for personal learning
preferences & multiple intelligences
– Opportunities to allow for a variety of levels of
learning

11. Advantages of PBL
• Learning environment that enhances
critical thinking and problem solving skills
• Greatest strength of PBL is:
– Increased motivation
– Increased student satisfaction
– Increased Student-student interaction
– Increased Student-instructor interaction

12. Limitations of Problem Based
Learning
• Requires significant pre-planning and
development of
– Authentic problems, cases, situations
– Resources available for students
• Literature
• Resource people
• Professionals in the field
• Requires an authentic commitment and
willingness to honor the knowledge, experience
& skills that students bring to the learning
experience

13. Limitations of PBL
• Requires a change of Paradigms
– A shift of focus from what faculty teach to
what students learn
– A view of the Instructor as facilitator of the
learning as opposed to “the one expert”
whose role is to “bank knowledge” (Friere)
through lectures or classroom demonstrations

14. Resources & References
• Problem-based learning, especially in the
context of large classes Available online at
http://www.chemeng.mcmaster.ca/pbl/pbl.htm
• Stepien, Senn & Stepien (2000) The Internet
and Problem-Based Learning: Developing
Solutions through the web
• Rankin (1999) Handbook on Problem-Based
Learning Challis Resource Centre
• Duch, Groh & Allen (2001) The Power of
Problem-based Learning: A practical ‘how to’ for
teaching undergraduate courses in any
discipline

15. The Problem
• Imagine you are at the end of a phone line with a group
of students who are situated throughout a region,
province, Canada, possibly beyond. It is a 3 hour class
and you know that while students can hear you, they
can’t see you or each other.
• You have no idea if someone is chatting, has gone to
the washroom, is reading the newspaper, making the
weekly shopping list, or even left class for the day.
• You want to ensure that students are connecting with the
material, connecting with you (the Instructor), connecting
with each other and connecting with the institution.
• You know that students report general dissatisfaction
with ‘distance education’ and learning at a distance from
their instructors.

16. The Case Study
• How does Problem Based Teaching affect
student satisfaction in Social Work
courses delivered through virtual
audioconferenced Distance Education
classrooms?

17. Problem Based Learning
Social Work EducationDistance Education

18. Methodology
• Within a group of students enrolled in a 2
year dual diploma program,
Instructor/Researcher taught 4 (3 credit
hour) courses:
• 2 for 1st
year students: 1 using PBL & 1
using Lecture Based Teaching
• 2 for 2nd
year student: 1 using PBL & 1
using Lecture Based Teaching

19. Data
• Throughout the term, all students were
required to maintain a journal and reflect
on:
– What they were learning
– How they were learning it
– How they knew they were learning it
– How would they demonstrate that they were
learning it

20. Data (2)
• Some classes were audio-taped
• Some classes were video-taped
– In the first ½ of the course
– In the second ½ of the course
• Instructor/Researcher maintained a journal
recording the classroom learning activities that
students engaged in
• Researcher/Instructor maintained a journal
recording students reactions and levels of
participation in the classroom learning activities

21. Data (3)
• At the beginning of the term, all students were provided
with an explanation about the research and asked to
complete a sheet of paper and indicate whether or not
they would participate in the research project. The sheet
of paper was then placed in a sealed envelope and
mailed to an independent third party
• Since all students filled in the form, no one was able to
tell who chose to participate and who chose not to
participate, including the Instructor/Researcher
• Once all evaluation was completed and Final Grades
were submitted to the Registrar, the Independent third
party released the signed sheets of paper to the
Researcher/Instructor

22. Data (4)
• One to one or focus group interviews were held
with those students who had consented to
participate in the research project
• Data was gathered on:
– The student’s experience and their perception of:
• Level of learning in PBL & Lecture courses
• Level of satisfaction with PBL & Lecture courses
• Level of participation in PBL & Lecture courses
• What they were doing differently in PBL & Lecture courses

23. Findings
• The Students
– 59 in 4 courses >19 Year 1 & 22 Year 2 > 14
agreed to participate
– 12 of the sample were female & 2 were male
– Physically located in 8 different communities
• 7 in Northwestern Ontario
• 1 in Northeastern Ontario
– Grade Point Average ranged from 2.96 to 4.0
with average being 3.4

24. Final Grades (cf)
Cf LB 1st
yr PBL 1st
LB 2nd
yr PBL 2nd
0 – 49 3 1 0 1
50 – 59 1 1 0 1
60 – 69 10 5 0 4
70 – 79 6 4 3 3
80 – 89 3 4 6 9
90 – 100 8 3 13 11
TOTAL 31 18 22 29

25. Major Findings
• Retention Rate was 100%
• Actively engaged
• Satisfaction
• Participation
• Collaboration
• Learning
– Construction of Knowledge
– Application of knowledge
– Retain Knowledge

26. Students Perceptions
• Stimulating
• Humane
• Challenging
• Exchange with others
• Resources

27. Students Perceptions
• What were they doing differently?