The document describes a case study on using problem-based learning (PBL) in social work courses delivered through distance education. The study found that PBL led to higher student satisfaction, engagement, collaboration, and learning compared to traditional lecture-based teaching. Students perceived PBL to be more stimulating and challenging, and they learned through exchanging ideas with others and using various resources. Retention rates were also higher with PBL.

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?