Problems of Teaching in Problem
Based Learning
Maria Teresa Moreno
University of Delaware
Background Information
• During the first semester of 2004, the
Department of Chemistry offered 11 sections of
Chemistry 1 to first year students.
– Six sections: Problem Based Learning (PBL).
– Five sections: a more traditional approach to science
instruction.
• 60 students in each section, approximately 660
students participated in the study.
• An experimental design with random assignment
of participants to both conditions.
Background Information
• The basic measure , a pre and post-test that
incorporated questions for each of the levels of
Bloom’s taxonomy.
• The hypothesis that “PBL develops higher order
of thinking skills among first year college
students more effectively than other non- PBL
approaches” was strongly supported by the data
(see, Moreno and Landa, 2005).
• The present study done from an interpretative
qualitative framework is a follow-up study to the
previous one.
Study Questions
1.
How do students in the Department of Science
react to innovative teaching practices? In
particular, how do they react to the
implementation of Problem Based Learning?
2. How does the analysis of qualitative data that
reflects the students’ point of view complement
the findings of the quantitative study?
The Two Types of
Instruction
Treatment Group
Students met two days a week and worked
in groups formed at the beginning of the
semester.
• At the beginning of the learning unit,
students were presented with a problem.
• Students, guided by the instructors and
TA’s, solved a series of activities (in pairs
and in groups) and held discussions that
would lead to the solution of the problem.
The Two Types of
Instruction
Control Group
• Students also met two days a week.
• One of the weekly sessions was entirely
devoted to lecture using overheads (50
minutes) and then 10 minutes for questions.
• Second session, students formed small
groups at random, to solve exercises and
problems with the assistance of the
faculty and the TA’s.
Methods
Sample
• Nine students, four from the non-PBL classes, and five from the
PBL classes, were interviewed in depth.
Data collection
• Nine in-depth interviews were conducted, transcribed, coded,
interpreted and analyzed, the software package NVivo was used.
Each interview transcript was 6 to 8 pages double-spaced.
• Document analysis , the University Strategic Plan (2000-2010).
• Informal interviews with University administrators and faculty
members were also conducted to cross the info.
• Data collected in the quantitative study, demographic
information and students’ grades and scores.
Interview Protocol
• 1.Can you please describe how the class looked like? What
did the professor do and what did you guys do in class?
• 2. Can you name the activities or different sort of things
that, in your opinion, have helped you learn better? Can you
also explain how these activities have helped you to learn?
• 3. Which topics or areas of the course have you mastered?
How did you learn that?
• 4. Do you think your skills of problem solving have been
enhanced through this instruction? If so, how?
• 5. How was your group experience? When was it good?
When was it bad?
• 6. Any comments, suggestions or anything you would like to
add?
Methods
Data analyses: the coding process
• The interviews were coded keeping in mind the research
question and the questions from the in-depth interviews.
• Students’ answers were first coded separately regarding
their condition: PBL or non PBL , 42 categories were
developed. These categories were then merged and 20
categories resulted.
• These 20 categories, included: learning, effective group
work, ineffective group work, topics better learned, topics
not learned, time constrains...
• We then integrated more categories until we came up with
five and finally three.
• Three narratives were finally elaborated :learning, students’
group work experience, and the problem of time
management. (see Nvivo)
Findings to our First
Question
1. Problems and scenarios as meaningful
learning experiences regardless of the
type of instruction….
1. Students have stated that problem solving, is a
better strategy for learning….
“In Chemistry if we were doing an activity and
we were stuck, we had the instructors to help
us through the difficulties… it is much better
to learn this way. As you are solving and doing
things, if you make a mistake the instructor
gives you feedback, you start making a better
sense of things…Whereas in math 101 you had
to solve the exercises by yourself at home.
You did not know if your procedure was right or
wrong until the day of the test.”
However, there is still some sort of feeling of “risking
something”, by not having the instructor lecturing to them or
clarifying things…
“Since the activities were organized first by pairs
and then with the intervention of the whole group;
if at some point one of the pairs would get stuck
and decided to call the instructor for help, since
we were so focussed on our own task , the
instructor would help the other pair and we would
not have a chance to listen to that particular
explanation. Who knows, maybe it was something
important and sometimes there is no time in class
for each of the pairs to share everything they
have talked with the instructor. Maybe what they
had solved was complex or maybe there were
interesting issues there, or it was just difficult.
Who knows, we missed the explanation.”
2. Group Work Experience (group dynamics)
As Johnson and Johnson have stressed, only when all conditions of
cooperative learning are satisfied cooperative learning works
well in higher education (Johnson and Johnson, 1998).
One of the students in the PBL condition, referring to the way in
which group work was structured said:
“It's very cool. So two pairs work simultaneously and these
activities were complementary I mean: the first pair "A" would
solve one part and the other pair "B" would do the other part,
and then we would put both parts together. You needed both
sides of the information and you needed that both were correct.
So we would put the information together and among the four of
us we would solve the group task which was shorter."
Group Work Experience
Students on the non-PBL condition referred to
the last task in the group dynamic work as being
too difficult to solve, impossible to finish, and
only completed when a genius in the group "saw"
something that the others could not see. One
student reported:
"The last questions were more difficult and we
almost never could finish them, very few times we
attempted to solve the last questions."
Group Work
Students in the PBL sections experienced a difference
between the groups they experienced in high school and the
group work experienced at college. This is what one student
said:
-Well the group I've had here (in college) people were willing to
work if not all of them then the great majority. Everybody
wanted to get a good grade. In high school we did not work we
just ordered pizza when we got together in somebody's house
and had fun.
- And what are the factors that in your opinion contributed to
make these college groups really work?
- I guess that everybody wanted to pass the course. They all
know that this is a required course, and there is some pressure
right there. But then as the semester went by, the pressure
was left behind, and we worked together because we liked to,
we were delighted.
3. The Problem of Time Management
Students reported problems of time management (in both conditions)
and (only in the non-PBL conditions) , this was aggravated with the
misunderstanding of the role of the TAS
Here are two excerpts:
1.
- Has time been always enough for you?
- No, not always, sometimes he would leave us stuff to do for the next
class.
- And what would you do in those cases?
- We would take it home.
- Then if you had the option to take it home, why would you copy the
answers from another group?
-Because we only had one or two days, and it is not that I can devote
all that time for that particular homework. I have taken six
courses this semester; I was taking calculus, more tough courses,
besides there is not always time for us to get together as a group.
3. The Problem of Time
Management
“Sometimes I just did not have any time left. I had
taken six courses this semester, I had tests,
laboratory reports to do, so I could not read that
much. Besides, I do not like studying on Sundays.
Even if it is only Sunday, I need one day off. So
sometimes during the week I tried to look for
some free time in between classes or in the
mornings, stuff like that…I guess I just tried to
study remembering the past classes and maybe
trying to read a bit more.”
Findings to our 2nd
Question
Findings to our 2nd Question
• “PBL leads first year college students
majoring in science, to employ higher order
thinking skills”.
• Nevertheless, this analysis has allowed us
to see the underlying complexities in the
process of implementing methodological
innovations in higher education.
Discussion
Discussion
• Problems and scenarios have provided a
meaningful learning context for students.
• College provides a natural environment for team
work. At this stage, students are more concerned
about passing the course.
• Interestingly, lectures are still valued by
students; they offer some sort of a psychological
confidence to them.
• Unfortunately, time management ended up being a
serious problem, propitiating in a couple of
circumstances cheating and plagiarism.
• The qualitative analyses has allowed us to get a
more in-depth look at issues that occur in the
classroom setting and that complicate teaching.
Discussion
• It was clear to all the faculty members who participated in
this study that developing higher order of thinking skills
among students is a ”must do” in higher education.
• As a consequence of having participated in this study, the
chemistry faculty, regardless of the type of instruction,
gets together every semester to plan the mid-term and
final exams.
• They design these tests including items of different levels
of cognitive demand and making sure that items of higher
cognitive demand will be assessed and scored accordingly
(i.e., using rubrics).
• One of the best contributions of the study has been the
motivation to improve the quality of teaching in higher
education among chemistry faculty at this university.
References
Anderson, L.W.,&Krathwohl, D.R. (Eds.).(2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and
assessment: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New
York: Longman.
Bretel, L., (2003) Entrevistas a estudiantes que llevaron cuatro o más cursos ABP en
Estudios Generales Letras de la PUCP, entre los años 2001 y 2002. Lima:
PUCP. Abril del 2003 (in press).
Boud, D., and Feletti, G., (1997) The challenge of problem-based learning. New York:
St. Martin’s Press.
Duch, B., Grog,S. Allen,D., (2001) The power of problem based learning. A practical
how to for teaching undergraduate course in any discipline. Sterling, VA: Stylus
Publishing.
Johnson, D., Johnson,R., & Smith, K., (1998)Cooperative learning returns to college.
What evidence is there that it works. Change July/August 1998.
Lampert,M., (2001) Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. Yale University
Press.
Moreno M.T., Landa, V., (2005) An experimental design to study the effectiveness of
PBL in higher education, in first year science students at a university in Peru,
South America. College Quarterly. Volume 8 Number 2.
Plan Estratégico 200-2010 (2000) "Formación integral en tiempos de cambio" - PUCP