Instructional Science 25: 97–115, 1997.
c 1997 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
97
Using multimedia to overcome the problems with problem based
learning
BOB HOFFMAN and DONN RITCHIE
Department of Educational Technology, College of Education, San Diego State University,
San Diego, CA 92182-1182 USA
Abstract. Much of the literature on problem based learning (PBL) is concerned with efficacy
or with guidelines on design or implementation. Relatively few articles focus on problems
with problem based learning, and none that we could find provided suggestions as to how
interactive multimedia might help alleviate those problems. In this article we begin with a
review of problem based learning including a rationale for its use in the curriculum. Then we
identify some of the problems inherent in designing and implementing problem based learning,
and end the article with a discussion of how multimedia might be used to address some of
those problems.
Key words: problem based learning, interactive multimedia
What is problem based learning?
Problem based learning is a student-centered pedagogical strategy that
poses significant, contextualized, real-world, ill-structured situations while
providing resources, guidance, instruction, and opportunities for reflection to
learners as they develop content knowledge and problem-solving skills.
Bridges (1992, pp. 5–6) outlines the chief characteristics of PBL:
1. The starting point for learning is a problem (that is, a stimulus for which
an individual lacks a ready response).
2. The problem is one that students are apt to face as future professionals.
3. The knowledge that students are expected to acquire during their professional training is organized around problems rather than the disciplines.
4. Students, individually and collectively, assume a major responsibility for
their own instruction and learning.
5. Most of the learning occurs within the context of small groups rather than
lectures.
Bridges’ definition of a problem as a situation “for which an individual lacks
a ready response” (p. 5) is expansive enough to imply opportunities as well.
For example, an engineer tasked with designing a bridge, while anticipating
98
numerous sub-problems, is also likely to view the job as an opportunity. This
is true for many professionals engaged in design, management, and other
creative enterprises.
Teachers who structure their courses around a problem based learning pedagogy typically use either a series of short- or intermediate-term problems, or
a single large problem for students to tackle. Regardless of size, the problems
are embedded in relevant, richly contextualized situations. Learners progress
through a series of activities in which they analyze problems; consider probable solutions; and plan, develop, and evaluate those solutions. The role of the
instructor is primarily “to guide, probe, and support the students’ initiatives,”
rather than to lecture, direct, or provide solutions (Kaufman, 1989, p. 286).
While instructor-led activities may still play a role in a PBL course, learners
pursue new skills and knowledge mostly on their own or in task groups using
a variety of resources.
The basic tenets of PBL are traced by some to ancient times.
The earliest models of teaching including the Socratic method rely on the
analysis of hypothetical situations involving solving problems or formulating strategies to discuss given situations (Ostwald, Chen, Varnam, and
McGeorge, 1991, p. 1).
Contemporary approaches to problem based learning were pioneered at
Case Western Reserve University in the early 1950s and now play an important role as the primary learning method at many secondary, post-secondary,
and graduate schools, particularly many medical schools (Savery, 1994).
Why use PBL?
The use of PBL has continued to increase over the last 40 years, and is
now included in a variety of disciplines from elementary grades through post
graduate schooling. This increase in use is attributable to the benefits of PBL.
Bridges (1992, p. 15) summarizes some of the claims made by advocates
of problem-based learning in comparison with more conventional didactic
methods:
1. PBL students develop “substantially more positive” attitudes toward the
learning environment.
2. Students tend to study for meaning rather than to reproduce instructorproffered material.
3. PBL students complete instructional programs in less time and with fewer
dropouts than do students in traditional learning environments.
99
4. Small differences in students’ basic knowledge of disciplines “favor traditional programs, but PBL students show steeper growth during period of
study.”
5. Clinical competence shows “small differences in favor of students in PBL
programs.”
These outcomes stem from a variety of features, including increased student
motivation, the collaborative teamwork used to structure solutions, the coaching or tutoring conducted by the instructor, and the inherent benefits of using
real-world problems. Real-world contexts and consequences appear to be an
important feature of PBL, and it has been found to enhance learning (US
Department of Labor, 1992), and increase the transferability of skills and
knowledge from the classroom to work (Stepien, Gallagher, and Workman,
1993).
Bridges (1992) offers an explanation for claims that PBL facilitates cognitive development and academic achievement:
PBL creates the three conditions that information theory links to subsequent retrieval and appropriate use of new information (Schmidt, 1983):
activation of prior knowledge, similarity of contexts in which information is learned and later applied, and opportunity to elaborate on that
information (Bridges, 1992, p. 8).
Knowledge elaboration takes place through team discussion, students
teaching peers what they have learned in individual study, debating how
information should be applied to the problem at hand, and preparing essays
about what each individual has learned while engaged in the problem solving
process (Bridges, 1992). Bridges goes on to say:
The feature of rich, real-world contexts is particularly important:
Encoding specificity in problem-based learning is achieved by having
students acquire knowledge in a functional context, that is, in a context
containing problems that closely resemble the problems they will
encounter later in their professional careers (Bridges, 1992, p. 9).
The functional context supplied by real-world problems provides one of
the key features of PBL, its motivational appeal.
It is the direct relationship between the motivation to solve a problem and
the subsequent learning that differentiates PBL from the more conventional didactic paradigms for education (Ostwald, Chan, Varnam, and
McGeorge, 1991, p. 1).
Another possible benefit of PBL is increased problem solving ability and
teamwork, both considered increasingly vital in most professional organiza-
100
tions. Early studies on this issue demonstrate real, if modest, gains. Gallagher,
Stepien, and Rosenthal (1992) compared the development of problem solving
ability between a group of students enrolled in a PBL course and those in a
more traditional class:
The hypothesis of significant improvement in [PBL] students was
supported in this study. However, the pattern of change was not consistent
across problem solving steps (p. 199).
Problems with PBL in the classroom
For all its promise, problem based learning poses a number of challenges for
students, instructors, and institutions alike. One weakness is that, at present,
many PBL courses rely primarily or exclusively on written or oral problem
statements and learning resource material. This may adversely effect transfer
between the problem situations in a course and similar ones in real life.
Sole reliance on written cases or verbal vignettes, as Bransford and others
(1989) have noted, may have dysfunctional consequences for the learner.
For example, the medical student who is trained to make a diagnosis based
on verbal vignettes may be at a loss when confronted with real patients
(Bridges, 1992, p. 97).
The small number of problems engaged by PBL students further complicates the issue of transfer. Working with single rather than multiple instances
of a particular type of problem may leave students somewhat unprepared to
cope with the variety of forms that complex, real world problems often take.
As mentioned above, some researchers found that scores on standardized
exams may be slightly lower for PBL students than for students enrolled
in traditional courses (Friedman, de Blick, Sheps, Greer, Mennin, Norman,
Woodward, and Swanson, 1992). While there are mitigating factors, such
as durability of retention and somewhat better initial clinical performance
for PBL learners, program designers must take into account students’ needs
to achieve competitive scores on certificating and other pivotal standardized
examinations.
Another barrier to implementing problem based learning is students’
initial discomfort with the increased degree of freedom they experience in
an academic setting. Most industrial and post-industrial cultures socialize
students to a model of schooling in which their role is more or less limited
to comprehension and synthesis of instructor-specified information, based on
instructor-formulated learning objectives, and participation in instructor-led
learning activities. These students, confronted with messy, real-world prob-
101
lems, lack the skills even to know where to begin analysis. This trepidation
towards self-directed learning often takes time and effort to overcome.
One of the more interesting findings was that first-year students expressed
difficulties with self-directed learning. They seemed to need at least 6
months to adapt to this new learning environment in which they are
responsible for what they study and how they study (Schmidt, Henny,
Boshuizen, and de Vries, 1992, p. 195).
Assessment of student learning outcomes in PBL classrooms can also be
more difficult than in traditional courses. Students may be responsible for
negotiating both learning objectives and assessment methods which emphasize individualized, criteria-referenced methods and de-emphasize standardized, norm-referenced methods. This shift in responsibility for evaluation
often requires time and effort from both students and instructors.
Other problems exist for course instructors. In traditional courses, all
students engage the same learning tasks at approximately the same pace.
Instructors orchestrate objectives, resource material, learning activities, and
evaluation homogeneously. PBL, in contrast, involves managing a variety
of learners as they progress at different rates through a variety of different learning objectives, requiring different resources at different times. The
pre-established instructional sequence gives way, for the most part, to more
complex, negotiated learning sequences.
Another management issue involves the amount of time PBL takes in
contrast to traditional instruction, from two perspectives. The first is the
investment of time involved in designing and producing appropriate problem
situations. Bridges (1992), based on his own experience, estimates that it
takes an instructor somewhere between 120 and 160 hours to analyze, design,
develop, and refine an effective PBL unit which will engage college students
for one to two weeks.
Second, the learners themselves may need more time to usefully engage
complex problem situations. They may go down “blind alleys” in their search
for information or potential solutions. If mastering the problem solving
process itself is one of the course goals, instructors must permit students
to make these types of excursions as part of the learning process. This draws
time and energy away from the balance of the course content. It may also
require new skills for the instructor, keeping students on track while permitting some room for error – walking the thin line between student exploration
and their being “lost in the wilderness.”
A problem with PBL, related to the locus of origin of learning objectives,
is that, to whatever extent instructors engage in planning courses, they limit
learners’ power of agency. Probably the most important limitation occurs
102
when the instructor selects or creates the problem case. In PBL, the learner
usually cannot manipulate the problem variables themselves.
This may or may not be similar to the problem solving process they face
in the real world. For example, the architectural student presented with a site
plan and a budget may face limitations that, in actual practice, are somewhat
more flexible. In real life, building sites might be exchanged or altered and
budgets are notoriously violable. This renders a well-delineated course problem potentially somewhat more static than those practitioners will face in
their professional practices.
Farnsworth (1994) summarizes some of the problems with implementing
PBL in this way:
The major objections to PBL are: (1) PBL is an inefficient method of
instruction since it requires students to gather information through selfdirected learning, (2) PBL is perceived as costly since it requires a greater
investment of faculty time to function as tutors, and (3) PBL is more
difficult and costly in terms of evaluation of student learning (Farnsworth,
1994, p. 137).
Strategies for employing multimedia to reduce the problems of PBL
As outlined above, PBL offers some advantages over traditional forms of
instructional delivery, but it brings with it a variety of obstacles. Fortunately,
multimedia appears to have the potential to alleviate many of these problems.
In this section we will further discuss the limitations of PBL and suggest how
multimedia software show promise for improving PBL in the classroom, and
how instructors may use PBL multimedia authoring systems to increase the
viability of instructor-designed PBL curriculum.
Fidelity
One of the problems described by Bridges (1992) is that written or oral
descriptions of problem situations may not resemble those practitioners (in
this case, educational administrators) encounter in “real life.” He offers the
following advice to PBL designers:
To become an expert, a great deal of perceptual learning must occur,
and this cannot happen unless the student learns to recognize the salient
visual, auditory, and nonverbal cues. When designing a PBL curriculum,
program designers should strive for a variety of modalities in presenting problems to educational administrators. If students encounter only
verbal descriptions of problems, they may be unprepared to deal with real
problems (Bridges, p. 97).
103
This principle suggests the utility of multiple media to present or represent the “salient visual, auditory, and nonverbal cues” through “a variety of
modalities” (p. 97). His own suggestions for providing a rich resource base
include “reading materials, consultants, videotapes, and audiotapes” (p. 100).
By “consultants,” Bridges seems to refer to face-to-face or, at least, one-onone or one-on-small group interactions with subject matter or other experts.
He goes on to admit the difficulty and expense involved in providing this type
of resource for PBL courses, and suggests videotaped panels of experts as a
surrogate. This advice, taken together with his recommendations to use text,
video, and audio, again suggests the utility of multimedia delivery systems
in PBL courses.
Representational Richness
The ability to provide a robust representation of the problem environment is
a key use of multimedia in PBL settings. To the extent to which the physical
environment and social context are salient to the problem situation, graphics,
animation, video, and audio can help students comprehend the situation and
see the relevance of various contextual elements. Multimedia’s demonstrated
ability to stimulate learner motivation, and the prospect that multiple representational modalities may improve transfer to real life situations, makes it
attractive.
Multimedia’s ability to increase the richness of the problem also increases
the user’s ability to interpret and understand the problem through repeated
exposures. Spiro, Feltovich, Jacobson, and Coulson (1992) describe the need
for students to repeatedly visit the “same material, at different times, in
rearranged contexts, for different purposes, and from different conceptual
perspectives” (p. 65). This repeated exposure is not simply for the traditional
purpose of strengthening cognitive associations. In ill-structured problems,
the availability of information at any given moment often exceeds the individual’s ability to process it, particularly at the outset of the problem solving
process. As the individual’s understanding of the problem and of the accompanying resources matures, each iteration provides new insights.
Spiro has defined this increased understanding as the Cognitive Flexibility
Theory (Spiro, Coulson, Feltovich, and Anderson, 1988; Spiro, Vispoel,
Schmitz, Samarapungavan, and Boerger, 1987). This theory states that for
learners to fully acquire knowledge, complex content must be processed iteratively. Complex content is characterized by high cognitive demands due to
complexity, contextually induced variability, multiple knowledge representations, and multiple interconnectedness of knowledge components. A learner
will gain some understanding from an initial pass through the information, but
will miss many of the finer points until the second, third, or later exposures.
104
Since failure in most advanced learning situations is due to oversimplification, and one serious kind of oversimplification is examining a concept or
case from only one perspective, multiple approaches should help improve
learning (Spiro et al., 1992).
How can multimedia help? Multimedia provides the ability to allow users
to process a subject domain through a variety of iterations, each allowing
for the exploration of different contexts, contents, or modalities. One way
of implementing this is to build functionality into programs to track the
user’s progress through the instructional landscape. In each iteration, the
program provides the learner with different examples, mediated material, or
sequences to increase the richness of their exposure. Hence, each pass does
more than merely reinforce existing associations – it provides the learner
with the opportunity to develop greater interconnectedness of content and
processes across the knowledge domain.
Time and timeliness
The random access capability of multimedia lends itself to students’ need
for “just-in-time” information in PBL. One characteristic of real experts is
that they are usually not available when needed. While free access to a real
expert is no doubt preferable to a pre-recorded expert, the latter recommends
itself for economy and convenience. Learning from erratic exposures to the
problem or resources may more closely parallel real life, but is not very
efficient for classroom instruction (Spiro et al., 1992).
Another aspect of timeliness that multimedia fosters is the manipulation
of time-based phenomena (Hooper, 1990). The ability to speed up, slow
down, or freeze physical occurrences allows people the ability to see and
measure actions not normally available to human experience. Although this
may remove the person from real-life activities, the understanding gained
through increasing the speed of moving glaciers or decomposition of a dead
animal, the slowing of a drop of water or breaking glass, or the freeze frame
of an explosion, all provide increased understanding of processes beyond
initial experiences. An example of this type of multimedia software tool is
Measurement in Motion (Learning in Motion, 1995).
Individualization
A related challenge with problem based learning as practiced in conventional
settings is the inefficiency entailed in its individualized character. PBL works
best when learners take responsibility for setting objectives and specifying
learning activities and assessment methods. Different individuals and different problem solving teams may have very different schedules and agendas.
105
Multimedia holds some promise for individualizing these elements of PBL
to suit learner differences. Multimedia products can be constructed to offer
students the ability to modify problem situations. For example, medical
students heading for different specialties or different patient populations might
select variants on a basic diagnostic problem that involve somewhat altered
symptoms or more germane family medical histories. Journalism students
might choose to deal with domestic or foreign assignments, depending on
their career aspirations.
Problem situations might also vary according to learner background and
entry skills. Fourth grade students with low reading ability might engage
a problem that is relevant and interesting, and features customized representations that structure a zone of proximal development and appropriate
scaffolding to help them enlarge problem solving and reading skills and their
grasp of specific content. For example, multimedia problem representations
might permit variation in type size, reading level, and audio-visual cues to
suit different learners.
Assessment
In addition to helping define and populate the problem space, multimedia may
be used to assess the quality and quantity of learners’ growth. This is most
often effected by monitoring and evaluating the choices learners make as
they interact with a simulated environment, or by allowing learners to create
more contextualized solutions or models of their understanding. Farnsworth
describes how computers and, by extension, computer based multimedia,
might play a role in assessing PBL courses.
As the various groups work through the problem, their progress may
be monitored at any time by the instructor via a local area network or
collected and evaluated at a later date. : : : After the students have completed a unit of instruction, individual students will use the computer
to practice problems analogous to the problems presented in the unit.
As the students attempt to solve the analogous problems, the computer
will again track the method by which the attempts are made and record
this information in a database record for the student. The computer will
compare the student’s problem-solving methodology to a standardized
assessment form and record the differences. : : : Finally, at the end of
each unit of instruction, the students will be evaluated on the basis of
their performance on a standardized simulation administered by computer
(p. 139).
In such a system, the computer can be used to track both basic domain
knowledge and transferable problem solving skills.
106
A basic tenet of problem based learning is that it helps make learning more
relevant, and in turn more transferable, by engaging learners in activities that
reflect life beyond the classroom. The best method to assess whether skills and
knowledge are actually being transferred to activities outside the classroom is
to conduct extended, unobtrusive observations in the actual setting in which
the desired skills or knowledge are to be used. Because this is not normally
possible, giving students opportunities to interact in a rich, contextualized
environment, and observing their behaviors and thought processes, provides
a viable substitute.
Simulations that provide relevant experiences have progressed beyond text
based models to highly automated environmental re-creations. Within the
realm of computer simulations there is wide diversity in content, context, and
purpose. Not all simulations are of the flight deck genre. At Dayton Hudson’s
Target Stores, for instance, newly hired cashiers have the opportunity to practice their skills with simulated checkout lines full of noisy, cranky customers
through interactions with CD-ROM programs (Murphy, 1996). Responding
to learners’ choices, pre-programmed feedback suggests alternative behaviors. Coaches or tutors can also offer suggestions with regard to decisions
made by the user.
The use of multimedia environments to engage learners provides simulated
variable testing which may not be afforded in traditional environments. For
instance, chemistry students can experiment with volatile chemicals, airline
pilots can practice landing procedures at airports where they will need to
land, and teachers can interact with unruly students without the fear of failure
that would accompany interactions in the real world. In these cases, the
learner experiences increased powers of agency in dealing with potentially
consequential situations.
A frequent measure of learner achievement in problem based learning is
the evaluation of a created product or artifact (Bridges, 1992). The product
may take a number of forms, but ideally reflects or parallels “real world”
outcomes or deliverables. These products often take the form of a written
or oral report, plan, diagnosis, or any other type of artifact normally created
by those already employed in similar positions. Whenever students create
products that reflect the skills or knowledge required by the real world, their
ability to transfer their learning to life beyond the classroom should increase.
Multimedia is also useful as a means by which learners may represent their
mental models or how they envision a problem space or solution. Software
programs which afford the construction of concept maps, graphic organizers,
causal interaction maps, or structural maps (Jonassen, Beissner, and Yacci,
1993) are useful for representing the relationships among concepts. Concept maps are particularly beneficial for identifying how closely a learner’s
107
structural knowledge matches an expert’s structural knowledge, or how extensively a learner’s knowledge develops over time. In addition to facilitating
learners in the creation of maps depicting their conceptual understanding,
some programs allow users to attach generated or captured graphics, animation, sound, or video to their creations. Such multimedia components serve
to enrich knowledge representations beyond text-based representations.
Efficiency
The time requirement involved in implementing problem based learning is
a major detractor to more widespread adoption. Time constrains instructors
during problem creation, assessment of learner’s growth, and student contact
during problem analysis and solution. Increased time loads particularly burden
students as they follow blind alleys during self directed learning. Multimedia
can help alleviate some time constraints for both instructors and students.
For instructors the time required to design, develop and refine a problem
may be shortened through the use of multimedia. Although we found no
commercial electronic templates to facilitate the creation of PBL courses, at
least one attempt has been made to create a tool to help instructors gather
resources in an electronic format that provides a study room metaphor to
access the problem and accompanying resources, an algorithm to prompt
students in the problem solving process, and a template that facilitates
students formatting text, video, and graphic materials for classroom presentation (Ritchie, Norris, and Chestnutt, 1995).
Another time constraint that may be alleviated through the use of multimedia is the need for instructor interactions with students. In PBL, the
instructor sheds the role of information disseminator and takes on the role of a
tutor who tests, or pushes against student knowledge to identify weaknesses.
Savery and Duffy (1995) note the important role of the instructor/facilitator:
Throughout a session the facilitator models higher order thinking by asking questions which probe students’ knowledge deeply. To do this, the
facilitator constantly asks “Why?” “What do you mean?” “How do you
know that’s true?”: : :
A second tutor role is to challenge the learner’s thinking. The facilitator
(and hopefully the other students in this collaborative environment) will
constantly ask: “Do you know what that means? What are the implications
of that? Is there anything else?” Superficial thinking and vague notions
do not go unchallenged (p. 37).
While not approaching the sophistication of a human tutor, templates
designed to walk students through the process of identifying what they know
108
and what they have yet to discover, generating hypotheses, identifying advantages and disadvantages of potential solutions, and reflecting on their answers
exist in primitive form (Ritchie et al., 1995). Prompting students to reflect
and formulate answers to these steps helps off-load some of the instructor’s
work, freeing up time to respond to individual student’s needs.
Student time requirements during problem based learning also can exceed
those of their counterparts in traditional courses. Much of this time loss
occurs at the beginning of a problem when learners flounder as they try to
establish valid directions for their problem solution, and other losses occur
when they become mired in “blind alleys.” Although much of the value in
problem based learning occurs as students gain insights as they work through
their initial confusion to structure solutions, too much time wasted in dead
ends can be counterproductive. To remedy this problem, electronic “advisors”
programmed into software could provide not only “just in time” advice, but
also hints and suggestions for the novice. Reducing the time involved in
avenues that provide limited results frees more time for productive efforts.
A related feature of an electronic coach is to make additional resources
available to learners as they progress through a problem. Barrows (1985)
advises that ill-structured problems used in PBL require more information
than is available to initially understand the situation or problem. Allowing
progressive disclosure of information not as yet identified by learners may
also help keep students close to the best path. Computer systems that monitor
students’ progress and make available additional resources would not only
add to the richness of the contextualized problem, but also assist in the
facilitator’s management of the problem space, and help pace learners through
the problem.
Increased power of agency
One clear advantage that multimedia affords PBL is the ability to break out of
the time, place, and physical limitations that real life often entails. Programs
such as SimCity (Maxis, 1989), which features the compression of time,
The Great Solar System Rescue (Tom Snyder, 1992) in which users explore
the solar system, and the various flight simulator programs, which place
the learner in a high technology control environment, all provide enhanced
opportunities for the user to experience and work through situations and
events not available in a classroom.
Multimedia programs also provide users with demonstrations or guidance in
how to proceed through difficult stages of problem solution or what to expect
during particular interactions. This foreknowledge can serve as scaffolding
for the learner and support development of metacognitive skills.
109
By providing increased capabilities in the problem solving environment
and guiding students as they reach critical junctures, multimedia increases
learners’ power of agency. These programs help transcend traditional
constraints. This enhanced ability reduces both physical and cognitive limitations thereby reducing risk aversion when users face similar problems in real
life.
Challenges for multimedia designers
With the continual improvement in computer memory, storage, and processing speed, combined with our continually evolving understanding of variables
that contribute to appropriate problem based learning environments, we find
ourselves on the verge of significant improvements in multimedia based
problem based learning scenarios. With this in mind, we offer some ideas of
areas in which multimedia designers may wish to focus in order to enhance
PBL. These ideas include instructor authoring systems, enhanced computerized assessment capabilities, intelligent guidance and support, and additional
examples of multimedia PBL.
Authoring systems
Few faculty have the time or support to expend the 120-plus hours needed to
establish a PBL environment that will provide curriculum for only two weeks.
While sharing and purchasing PBL curriculum units may be possible and
desirable, there will doubtless still be specific subject domains and approaches
for which few scenarios exist. An answer to this shortage is the creation of a
PBL multimedia authoring system with templates that guide faculty through
the steps required for creation of valid, effective problem situations.
Savery and Duffy (1995) identified eight characteristics valid PBL environments should contain. Although suggested for all PBL environments, these
characteristics hold true for multimedia environments as well. Their suggestions (with our notes as to how multimedia applications assist in these efforts
– shown in brackets) are to:
1. Anchor all learning activities to a larger task or problem. [Multimedia
helps represent that task or problem with greater richness and fidelity.]
2. Support the learner in developing ownership for the overall problem or
task. [Multimedia can help customize the task to motivate ownership.]
3. Design an authentic task. [Multimedia can provide simulated stimuli,
equipment, and outcomes to increase authenticity.]
110
4. Design the task and the learning environment to reflect the complexity of
the environment they should be able to function in at the end of learning.
[Multimedia makes problem complexity more cost-effective.]
5. Give the learner ownership of the process used to develop a solution.
[Multimedia affords individualization of problem strategies.]
6. Design the learning environment to support and challenge the learner’s
thinking. [Multimedia can prompt users to rethink, research, and
redesign.]
7. Encourage testing ideas against alternative views and alternative contexts.
[Multimedia can afford exposure to alternative views and contexts.]
8. Provide opportunity for and support reflection on both the content learned
and the learning process. [Multimedia can prompt reflection on both
process and content.]
Enhanced computerized assessment capabilities
Assessment of PBL curricula has been a hotly debated topic. Swanson, Case,
and van der Vleuten (1991) state “Despite recognition of the importance of
assessment among problem-based-learning advocates, there is little agreement on methodologies for assessment” (p. 260). One area of agreement that
stands out in the literature, however, is that assessment should mirror the
realities of the workplace (Bridges and Hallinger, 1995).
Most jobs require participants to complete a project or performance, then
share their results with peers, employers, employees, or constituents. These
results may be anything from hosting a workshop to completing an article
or diagnosing engine trouble. In most PBL courses, the instructor, peers, and
the individual student provide input during the assessment of the product or
project. The focus of the evaluation will often consist of measuring the extent
to which the individual is familiar with problems inherent in the profession,
possesses the knowledge relevant to these problems, is competent in applying
this knowledge, is proficient in problem solving, can implement solutions to
the problem, is able to lead and facilitate collaboration, has the ability to
manage emotional aspects of leadership, and is proficient in self-directed
learning (Bridges and Hallinger, 1995). Not all of these assessment variables
can be addressed using computers, and, in fact, some have questioned just
how well computers can assess constructivist forms of learning at all (Perkins,
1995). Of the eight assessment variables listed above, applying knowledge
and implementing solutions appear to best lend themselves to multimedia
assessment.
First, multimedia systems can be configured to critique how well learners
are able to apply their knowledge in specific situations. If programs are
configured to present text, animation, sound, video, or graphical variables
111
that are based on the knowledge the user is to gain, then check to verify
understanding, the programs can be used to provide assessment data to both
the instructor and learner. For instance, a program could be set up to ensure
that users have the knowledge to apply rules for mathematics. Rather than
having students simply memorize how to calculate percent, for example, the
program may be able to provide life-like scenarios in which the student would
need to apply the rule in a variety of contexts.
Second, because multimedia programs can, in some cases, be created to
mimic the physical characteristics of the workplace, it may be possible to
judge how well a learner can implement solutions to their problem. If students
are learning how to backwash a filter, chose a color scheme, or design a landscape, it may be possible to present the learner with a simulated, computerized
environment that affords the ability to manipulate variables that mimic the
real world. Tracking and recording systems could be built into the system
(Williams and Dodge, 1993) that are able not only to report the level of
competence to the instructor, but also provide feedback and reflective practice to the user.
Learner support
Savery and Duffy (1995) state that with regard to the teacher’s role in PBL
courses, “The most critical teaching activity is in the questions the teacher
asks the learner” (p. 33). These questions are used to challenge the learner’s
thinking and support their intellectual development through scaffolding and
extending their zone of proximal development as described by Vygotsky
(1978).
To some extent, multimedia designers could also support PBL environments by creating enhanced learner support systems through two techniques;
“just in time” support and scaffolding. Just in time support is that which comes
precisely at the time it is needed by the user. In traditional PBL, this support
would come by way of peers or the instructor as the student encounters cognitive or performance dead ends. In most classrooms, however, students may
have difficulty reaching this help when needed because of other demands on
the instructor. In multimedia PBL, the system could be configured to present
various hints, clues, concepts to reflect upon, or contextualized support to
help learners as they progress through to their problem solution. For instance,
if students are designing a budget for a large project, a help screen may
discuss the use of spreadsheets; but guidance on how to build formulae in
the spreadsheet would not appear until the learner becomes aware of the
specific need to do so. Another form of this support could be provided within
a multimedia environment by monitoring the students’ work and providing
hints as to more appropriate methods to arrive at a viable solution. These help
112
techniques provide a basis, or scaffolding, upon which the learner is able to
create their own conceptual understanding of the problem area.
Although support could be provided, the impetus for developing cognitive
skills will still be on the learner.
To be successful, students must develop the self directed learning skills.
They must be able to develop strategies for identifying learning issues
and locating, evaluating, and learning from resources relevant to that
issue. The entire problem solving process is designed to aid the students
in developing the hypothetico-deductive problem solving model which
centers around hypothesis generation and evaluation (Savery and Duffy,
1995, p. 35).
:::
A promising instance of such an approach is Feifer’s (1995, personal
communication) CaBLE (Case Based Learning Environment) Tutor, as exemplified in the Human Resource Manager (Institute for the Learning Sciences,
1996) system, a simulation designed for learning important human resource
management strategies and skills. The Human Resource Manager sets up
the complex problem of effectively managing three employees of a printing
company with a variety of data and continually changing circumstances.
Rather than by direct hints, tutoring is supplied either on demand or at
moments of failure in the form of stories told by real subject matter experts
about analogous situations they faced and how they dealt with them, presented in short digital video clips. Learners must reflect on the relationships
between the expert’s stories and their own situation, then apply the principle
in the simulation.
Conclusions
While PBL designers do not currently fully exploit multimedia as a tool
for problem based learning activities, it holds the potential to help practitioners overcome numerous weaknesses and pitfalls. By providing richer
contexts; individualizing practice, feedback, and reflection; and facilitating
more authentic assessment, multimedia promises to strengthen conventional
PBL.
By definition, multimedia provides multiple modalities for representing
the real world problems on which PBL is based. Providing video, sound, and
still images associated with events instead of relying solely on text offers the
potential to enhance the fidelity of problem scenarios associated with those
events.
While not uniquely a capability of multimedia, emerging digital storage
and display systems are well-suited to providing representational richness,
113
or multiple paths through a domain landscape. Moreover, computer-based
programs’ ability to track past movements and anticipate learners’ needs
for appropriate tools, information, and other resources, may help learners
take advantage of scaffolding that particularly fosters their development of a
problem solution.
Accessibility – the capability of providing adequate information and advice
when and where needed – is a particular strength of multimedia based PBL.
Off-loading some of the more routine or predictable resource gathering
or tutoring functions of PBL saves time for both instructors and learners.
Providing it on an “as-needed basis” helps refine the “on-time” learning so
characteristic of good PBL.
Multimedia’s ability to individualize instruction has direct implications
for PBL, which ideally progresses at an individual or small group’s own
pace, by providing a flexible environment for accommodating individualized
objectives and formation of solutions. Learners with related but different
interests can customize multimedia PBL environments to structure problems
and problem spaces that meet their needs.
Most schemes for assessing learning in PBL center around the same
authentic conditions and performances that characterize the learning process
itself. Multimedia facilitates PBL assessment to the extent to which computer
programs can present new or variant problems in rich representations,
evaluate learner performances, and provide appropriate feedback.
Electronic performance support systems (EPSS) are increasingly used in a
wide variety of disciplines in which structural and information support can
help guide less experienced practitioners as they emulate experts’ performances. The task of creating and using a problem based learning curriculum
lends itself to the use of authoring and guidance templates.
Multimedia, through its ability to provide inexpensive simulations of rich,
complex tools and resources, and by telescoping time and space for greater
convenience or enhanced insight, increases the power of agency experienced
by PBL participants.
We think multimedia PBL developers have the most to gain by focusing
on improving the efficiency and power of PBL authoring systems, exploiting
the growing capabilities of computerized assessment, and devising improved
methods for supporting learners’ problem solving efforts and cognitive development.
References
Barrows, H. (1985). How to Design a Problem-Based Learning Curriculum in the Pre-Clinical
Years. New York: Springer-Verlag.
114
Bransford, J., Franks, J., Vye, N. and Sherwood, R. (1989). New approaches to instruction:
Because wisdom can’t be told, in S. Vosniadou and A. Ortony, eds., Similarity and Analogical Reasonings (pp. 470–497). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bridges, E.M. (1992). Problem-Based Learning for Administrators (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EA 023 722).
Bridges, E.M. and Hallinger, P. (1995). Implementing Problem Based Learning in Leadership
Development. Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management.
Farnsworth, C. (1994). Using computer simulations in problem-based learning, in M. Orey,
ed., Proceedings of the Thirty-Fifth ADCIS Conference (pp. 137–140). Nashville, TN:
Omni Press.
Friedman, C.P., de Blick, R., Sheps, C.G., Greer, D.S., Mennin, S.P., Norman, G.R., Woodward,
C.A. and Swanson, D.B. (1992). Charting the winds of change: Evaluating innovative
medical curricula. Annals of Community-Oriented Education 5: 167–179.
Gallagher, S.A., Stepien, W.J. and Rosenthal, H. (1992). The effects of problem-based learning
on problem solving. Gifted Child Quarterly 36(4): 195–200.
Hooper, K. (1990). HyperCard: A key to educational computing, in S. Ambron and K. Hooper,
eds., Learning with Interactive Multimedia (pp. 5–25). Redmonds, WA: Microsoft Press.
Institute for the Learning Sciences (1996). Human Resource Manager [computer program].
Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing.
Jonassen, D.H., Beissner, K. and Yacci, M. (1993). Structural Knowledge: Techniques for
Representing, Conveying, and Acquiring Structural Knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Kaufman, A. (1989). The New Mexico experiment: Educational innovation and institutional
change. Academic Medicine 64: 185–204.
Learning In Motion (1995). Measurement in Motion [computer software]. Santa Cruz, CA:
Learning In Motion.
Maxis (1989). SimCity [Computer software]. Walnut Creek, CA: Maxis.
Murphy, K. (1996, May 6). Pitfalls vs. promise in training by CD-ROM. New York Times, page
D3.
Ostwald, M.J., Chen, S.E., Varnam, B. and McGeorge, W.D. (1991). The Application of
Problem Based Learning to Distance Education (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. 359 398).
Perkins, D.N. (1995). Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage? in T.M.
Duffy and D.H. Jonassen, eds., Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A
Conversation (pp. 45–56). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ritchie, D.C., Norris, P. and Chestnutt, G. (1995). Incorporating technology into problembased learning. In D.A. Willis, B. Robin and J. Willis, eds., Technology and Teacher
Education Annual (pp. 429–433). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement
of Computing in Education.
Savery, J. (1994, May). What is Problem-Based Learning? Paper presented at the meeting of the
Professors of Instructional Design and Technology, Indiana State University, Bloomington,
IN.
Savery, J.R. and Duffy, T.M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its
constructivist framework. Educational Technology 35(5): 31–38.
Schmidt H.G., Henny, Boshuizen, P.A. and de Vries, M. (1992). Comparing problem-based
with conventional education: A review of the University of Limburg medical school
experiment. Annals of Community-Oriented Education 5: 193–198.
Spiro, R.J., Coulson, R.L., Feltovich, P.J. and Anderson, D.K. (1988). Cognitive flexibility
theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains, in The Tenth Annual
Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Jacobson, M.J. and Coulson, R.L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility,
constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains, in T.M. Duffy and D.H. Jonassen, eds., Constructivism
115
and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation (pp. 57–75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Spiro, R.J., Vispoel, W., Schmitz, J., Samarapungavan, A. and Boerger, A. (1987). Knowledge
acquisition for application: Cognitive flexibility and transfer in complex content domains,
in B.C. Britton, ed., Executive Control Processes (pp. 177–200). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Stepien, W.J., Gallagher, S.A. and Workman, D. (1993). Problem-based learning for traditional
and interdisciplinary classrooms. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 16(4): 338–357.
Swanson, D., Case, S. and van der Vleuten, C. (1991). In D. Boud and G. Feletti, eds., The
Challenge of Problem-Based Learning (pp. 260–273). New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Tom Snyder, Inc. (1992). The Great Solar System Rescue [videodisc]. Santa Monica, CA: Tom
Snyder, Inc.
U.S. Department of Labor (1992). SCANS: Learning a Living: A Blueprint for High Performance. Washington, DC.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Williams, M.D. and Dodge, B.J. (1993, January). Tracking and Analyzing Learner-Computer
Interaction. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 362212).