A personal reflection on PBL, by Natia Bendeliani

My story with PBL started when I decided to do a PhD, with minimal knowledge but with an eagerness to learn more about it. Skimming endless papers on PBL and finding the right loop for my research, I realized that I was falling in love without actually seeing PBL in a real classroom. Later on, I attended PBL class as a student and then participated in a workshop about PBL, but my understanding of how it really works and feels to be a PBL student or tutor was not completely clear.

Then I found the article ’what can PBL do for Psychology, but what can Psychology do for PBL?’ which has become the possibility of experiencing the whole essence of it. In September 2022, I was invited to Linköping University, where I had an opportunity to attend the PBL course, hosted by Sally Wiggins Young.

By the end of the course, I was able to analyze how learning happens in PBL class and what is the role of problems in this process.

‘But how does it work?’ This was my driving question in the course and as a learner, I’ve experienced it and now I will try to reflect on it. An intriguing puzzle or problem arises situational interest in the learner which leads to focused attention, and increased concentration. This phenomenon is described as a cognitively induced experience of knowledge deprivation (Schmidt, et al 2011). ‘Knowledge Deprivation’ is the combination of words I was looking for to describe my state after the first session of the PBL course because after brainstorming I identified many gaps and I wanted to revisit all articles I have ever read about PBL. At this moment, compared to my previous experiences, I was intrinsically interested and wanted to understand what is being studied and I had a situational necessity to know and understand whatever I was reading. Doing reading independently, without realizing the application of it did not happen to be memorable. “When information is presented out of context, or for some unspecified possible future use, students may not appreciate the importance of the information, which may affect their motivation to learn”(Hunt, Chalmers, 2012, p. 148). I would characterize this process as a very safe process, the learner does not need to face failure, but she/he sees gaps, which could be closed on stage 7 on the PBL wheel (Acquiring knowledge). While in a traditional classroom, when the teacher asks direct questions and tries to examine your prior knowledge can not always become the prerequisite of learning, but the moment of avoiding shame. In literature, this approach to learning is called deep learning. A review of the literature demonstrates that PBL does enhance a deep approach to learning because students are involved in the process of developing and explaining hypotheses, and searching for evidence to explain, conceptualize and apply (Dolmans et al, 2015). Several studies where micro analytical measurement approach is used have demonstrated that from the phase of problem presentation to the identification of learning goals the situational interest is increasing significantly, and when students start self-study and they take steps to the elaboration of what was learned the situational interest is decreasing, but not substantially (Schmidt, et al 2011).

‘But what is the nature of the problem?’ which is becoming the starting point in PBL class, that was the second question I wanted to address because as a tutor, we are supposed to design problems for the class. At the same time, it becomes a stairway to self-directed learning. In the article ‘All problems are not equal: Implications for Problem-Based Learning’ attention is made to the external factors that define the difficulty of the problem, which are external to the learner because factors such as level of domain knowledge, reasoning skills, experience in solving problems, etc. are the characteristics that can not be controlled by teacher/tutor. As I learned, the focus shall be made on the degree of complexity which is measured by the number, level of advancement, and degree of abstractness of concepts involved in solving problems. Complexity is also measured by the so-called solution path length, which refers to the steps needed for students to overcome. A second important parameter is the structuredness problems which encompass the following characteristics: transparency, stability, and predictability. Notably, the number of possible interpretations form ill-structured problems, and vaguely defined problems are considered highly ill-structured (Jonassen, Hung, 2008). Reflecting back to the vignette, we were given in the first session, seemingly it was ill- structured because it could have had many interpretations and we found it quite difficult to come up with one specific formulation of the learning outcome. Even though not all parties were happy with the given formulation of the problem, it still remained possible for everyone to do self-study and narrow down the topic they were interested it. Researchers identify two types of interpretations of problems. Vaguely defined problem, that can be interpreted in multiple ways and the second type is related to viable (feasible) solutions. By the end of the article general principles of designing problems are given, which we shall be considering while designing PBL problems. PBL problems should be open-ended, ill-structured but with a moderate degree of strucuturadness, on the other hand, complex, however, the degree of complexity should be motivating, challenging, adapted to students’ prior knowledge, cognitive development and readiness and last but not least, it should be authentic, which means that it’s adapted to the student’s future or potential workplace and are contextualized (Jonassen, Hung, 2008, p.16).

As a final saying, reflection can not be completed here, because in the PBL process not only designing problems but collaborative learning happens to have very significant importance because PBL as a whole concept of learning is based on a constructivist approach, but discussing cognitive benefits of group collaboration might need deeper analysis and it can elaborated in different paper.

References

Jonassen, D. H. , & Hung, W. (2008). All Problems are Not Equal: Implications for Problem-Based Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 2(2) https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1080

Brodie. L. (2012). Problem-based learning. In L. Hunt, D. Chalmers (Ed.), University teaching in focus (2nd ed., pp. 145-

164).Routledge.

Dolmans, D. H. J. M., Loyens, S. M. M., Marcq, H., & Gijbels, D. (2015). Deep and surface learning in problem-based

learning: a review of the literature. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 21(5), 1087–1112. doi:10.1007/s10459-

015-9645-6

Schmidt, H. G., Rotgans, J. I., & Yew, E. H. (2011). The process of problem-based learning: what works and why.

Medical Education, 45(8), 792–806. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04035.x

Lämna ett svar

Din e-postadress kommer inte publiceras. Obligatoriska fält är märkta *