1

DEVELOPING A CONTEXT-BASED PBL MODEL CATHERINE TANG, PATRICK LAI, WINNIE TANG1, HILARY DAVIES, STEVE FRANKLAND, KEITH OLDFIEL.D, MEGAN WALTERS2, NG MEI LENG, PETER TSE3, GAIL TAYLOR4, AGNES TIWARI5, MARGARET YIM; EVA YUEN6 1 Educational Development Unit The Hong Kong Polytechnic University 2 Faculty of Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University 3 Faculty of Business & Information Systems, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University 4 Faculty of Applied Science & Textile, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University 5 Faculty of Health & Social Studies, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University 6 Faculty of Communication, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Abstract Problem-based learning (PBL) is a curriculum design and a teaching / learning strategy which was developed in the West to help students develop higher order thinking and disciplinary knowledge based skills and competencies. In PBL, teaching and learning activities are centered around context-based real life problems, and opportunities are created for self-directed small group learning by students. Although PBL is sometimes claimed to be used by teachers in many different teaching and learning contexts, the understanding and actual implementation of such an approach varies considerably amongst teaching staff. Similar to the introduction of any other innovations in curriculum and instructional design, successful implementation of PBL should not involve direct transportation but rather a clear understanding of the concepts and principles of the approach, with due consideration given to the actual teaching and learning context which may necessitate appropriate modifications and adaptations. This paper explores the dimensions and processes in the development of a context-based PBL model at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Based on a database of the various

2

understandings and current practices of PBL, a model framework of PBL was developed which incorporated the principles and key elements of PBL as identified in the literature, as well as the local teaching and learning context of the various disciplines within the University. Several themes have emerged from this context-based PBL model which are consistent with the key elements of PBL described in the literature. However adaptations were also made to fit into the actual teaching and learning context. Introduction University education is not designed to produce graduates who can only work within the restricted framework of solving textbook problems. Tertiary graduates should be able to develop competence in continuous learning and problem solving in real life situations. In most disciplines, theory is only a simplified form of practice and, there is no one answer to a problem situation. It is therefore essential that university education must provide the desirable context to facilitate the development of independent life-long learning, and to equip the students with the competence in solving real-life problems. One of the most effective contexts for preparing independent life-long learners is when it is problem- based (Boud, 1985; Newble & Clarke, 1986). Problem-based learning (PBL) is regarded as one form of learning from experience in which learning is focused on problems derived from practice. The starting point of problem-based learning is always a problem situation, and students work with the problem in a manner that permits their ability to reason and apply knowledge to be challenged and evaluated (Boud, 1985). This reasoning and application of knowledge is particularly important in professional education, which requires competence in integrating and applying theory to professional practice. Given the above aim of professional education, PBL provides a desirable teaching and learning context, which overcomes the limitations of the teacher-centered and subject-centered courses, which characterize most of the university and college programmes. PBL strongly affects the curriculum by placing greater value on the perspectives and expertise of the practitioners and bringing aspects of professional practice into the courses. Being first implemented in McMaster Medical School, the PBL approach is now widely used in other professional education contexts such as agriculture, medical, paramedical, business and architecture. A typical model of PBL The original form of PBL was designed with highly practical real world problems in mind, of the type particularly prevalent in professional schools. While working on the problem, the students use a systematic working procedure to analyze the problem (Schmidt, 1983). The first session in PBL involves students discussing the case or problem as a group, clarifying terms and concepts not readily understood through collaborative learning and making use of knowledge of the group members. Based upon common consensus, the group proceeds to generate hypotheses necessary to analyze the problem. “Learning issues” are then identified which focus on what the students do not

3

know and hence need to find out in order to solve the problem. These learning issues serve as a guide for searching and studying the literature or other reference sources, and individual students maybe assigned different responsibilities in accomplishing these learning issues. During this process, teacher and students collaborate to identify and locate necessary resources. The next session in PBL involves students informing each other about their findings, and teach the rest of the class what they have learned about their assigned issues. Attempts are made to integrate the new information, and to relate it to previous knowledge. Any new questions raised in the learning process, or issues still not well understood become new learning issues, and the cycle is repeated until a satisfactory evaluation and clarification of the problem can be made. This second meeting aims at checking whether or not a deeper understanding of the problem has been reached. All these processes focus on student activities and the teacher attempts not to inform but to guide, support and encourage the students’ initiatives. Effects of PBL on student learning Much previous research has associated PBL with optimal learning performance, particularly in the area of knowledge retention (Norman & Schmidt, 1992); integration of basic science knowledge to the solutions of clinical problems (Barrow, 1985; Norman & Schmidt, 1992); self-directed learning skills (Barrow & Tamblyn, 1980; Glaser, 1991; Blumberg & Michael, 1992), and increased intrinsic interest in subject matter (Barrow & Tamblyn, 1980; Schmidt, 1983). In most of these studies, the original pure form of PBL model was used. Seldom if ever is the PBL model being revised or modified to suit learning in a particular context. This paper is the first of its kind to report a systematic development of a PBL model, which takes into consideration a particular teaching and learning context. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Context The Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HKPo1yU) is one of the seven Universities in Hong Kong. Courses offered include programmes from diversified disciplines such as engineering, business and management, textile, hotel and tourism, social work, and health care. The majority of the students are Chinese who may have come from different backgrounds and have different experiences, but have a common exposure to the same educational experience, which has strongly shaped their general approach to learning. The education system in Hong Kong adopts a selective model and is very much examination oriented (Biggs, 1996). Public examinations function primarily to select students for progression from stage to stage, and thus become the focus for both teaching and learning at school level. The backwash of this emphasis on examination has strong negative effects on both teaching and learning (Morris, 1985), with teachers teaching to perceived model answers to examinations, and students engaging in low level cognitive strategies such as rote learning notes and model answers. This examination oriented conception of teaching and learning is operationalized in a didactic approach: teaching is

4

to transmit knowledge, and learning is to passively receive and then accurately reproduce in examinations. This educational experience has resulted in the development of a surface learning approach (Biggs & Moore, 1993) by many students when they begin their tertiary education. The motive to learn is to pass examinations, and the cognitive strategies used are mostly low level such as rote learning and reproducing. This surface learning approach has also colored students’ expectation of the type of teaching approach in the University. At tertiary level, education is concerned with a holistic development of the learner in the cognitive, personal and affective domains. University graduates are expected to be competent not only in their respective disciplines, but also as an independent life-long learner. At the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, a “preferred graduate” is defined as one who will have been professionally trained, with good communication skills, potential for personal development and adaptability for change. To prepare these “preferred graduates”, teaching needs to be concerned not only with developing professional competence, but also with facilitating self-directed and independent learning, and the adoption of a deep learning approach (Biggs & Moore, 1993) in which students are genuinely motivated by an intrinsic interest in the subject, and adopt high level cognitive strategies in their learning. There are claims that PBL is being implemented within the HK Po1y U, as it is perceived to be a more appropriate teaching and learning approach for the achievement of the goal of University education. However, many teachers encounter difficulties in their attempt to implement PBL, and many of the difficulties are contextually related to student characteristics and the nature of the subject content. The first difficulty which teachers encounter is the application of the PBL model in their own teaching. Although the “typical” model of PBL is well documented in literature, a direct importation of such a model has been found to be inappropriate. Due to the diversity of the disciplines within the University, the actual framework of PBL varies from teacher to teacher, and with different subject contents. Every discipline has its own content knowledge and philosophy, which require a particular teaching approach to achieve its teaching objectives. These differences will have a direct influence on the types of problems to be constructed for PBL. A typical problem in engineering is more of a “hard-ware” nature, involving for example, the design and operation of a piece of mechanic equipment, or the application of some construction theories to a real on-site project. These problems could be best presented by using models or on-site field visits. In the case of nursing education, problems which students need to solve would be more of a “soft-ware” nature such as effective communication with or the demonstration of a professional caring attitude to clients of different age groups, and a suitable way of structuring such problems may be the use of case studies or simulated clients. These different representations of problem, and the process of solution will involve different levels of student activities which may vary from just providing direct answers to questions, small group discussion, doing literature search, completing a group project, or writing a report on a case study The time required for a cycle of PBL may also vary from

5

within one teaching session to over a more extended period of time as in the case of doing a large scale project. These variations have resulted in PBL models differing both from the typical model as described in literature, and also amongst each other within the University. The other difficulty which the HKPo1yU teachers have in implementing PBL is students’ reactions to this new approach. As discussed above, many of the students entering university are expecting the traditional didactic teaching and learning approach which they are used to during school education. The introduction of PBL in some subjects presents a totally new concept and practice of learning, which the majority of the students find difficult to cope. Some students are at a loss, and resist the new role and responsibilities required of them in PBL, while some may struggle and eventually enjoy and benefit in the learning. These reactions from the students have sometimes adversely affected the motivation to and the quality of learning. The implication of these difficulties is that although PBL is a desirable approach to prepare our students to be “preferred graduates”, direct importation of the typical PBL model which has been based on a Western context may not be appropriate given some of the local contextual characteristics. There is a need to develop a context-based model which would preserve the philosophy and retain the key elements of PBL on the one hand, and allowing for modification and adaptation in response to the local teaching and learning context on the other. The Project An understanding of the various different forms of PBL approach being implemented in the University will provide a basis for the development of a context-based model, which will be effective in producing our local “preferred” graduates in the various disciplines. It is thus the aim of this project to collect and analyze a data base on the current practices of PBL, with the view to develop a model which would be appropriate for enhancing student learning within the particular context of our students, to provide support to colleagues within the University who are interested in implementing such a teaching and learning approach, and also to set up networking with other local universities. To accomplish the above aim, the specific objectives of the project are to: 1. explore the extent and use of PBL within the HKPolyU; 2. build up a data base of effective implementations and criteria for successful

PBL activities; 3. develop and pilot a template model of PBL in the respective departments; 4. assess the effectiveness of PBL in term of the • cognitive processes: process (strategies), application

6

• affective aspects: motivation, enjoy, peer relationship • learning outcomes / performance 5. develop a context-based model of PBL for wider application within the HKPoIyU; 6. disseminate results via seminars and workshops, and 7. act as resource and support service and activities for PBL within the HKPoIyU. The project was a large-scale study involving thirteen colleagues from six disciplines including educational development, engineering, hospitality and tourism management, textile and clothing, health sciences, and design. The reason for this large-scale involvement was to enable a review and investigation of PBL from a more extensive and comprehensive perspective, and a wider and more effective application of the contextual-based PBL model within the HKPolyU. Method The project consists of several stages: 1. Data collection

A questionnaire was designed and distributed to all academic course leaders within the PolyU in September 1996. The aim of the questionnaire was to explore both the extent and forms of PBL used by teachers / students in their teaching and learning. The main focus of the questionnaire was to explore the characteristics of PBL in relation to course teaching sequence, purpose and format of lecture, tutorial and group discussion. Responses were received from course leaders from five large departments (Electrical Engineering, Manufacturing Engineering, Health Sciences, Institute of Textile and Clothing, and the School of Design) who claimed that they were implementing PBL in their teaching. The information obtained from the questionnaires was analyzed to provide a database on the format and strategies used in PBL within the HKPolyU. Integrity, Innovation, integration

2. Development and implementation of a pilot PBL model

Based on the current practice and experience of PBL, a template model identifying the essential features of a context-based PBL approach was developed taking into consideration the local contextual factors such as subject content, background of both teachers and students. This model was then piloted in seven departments, and the teaching sessions were videotaped.

7

3. Assessment of the effectiveness of the template PBL model

The effectiveness of the template PBL model was assessed in the following aspects: a) The learning approaches of the students were explored by using the Study

Process Questionnaire (SPQ) (Biggs, 1987). The SPQ was administered before and after the implementation of the PBL approach. Comparison of the two sets of SPQ results would be able to assess the effect of PBL on students’ learning approaches. Thirty-nine students from the seven departments were also interviewed for in-depth investigation of the cognitive processes and strategies engaged in PBL.

b) The students were also asked to complete a PBL Evaluation Questionnaire

(modified from Ramsden, 1991; Kenley & Dodd, 1995), after the implementation of the pilot model to explore students’ opinions of the PBL approach (Appendix 1).

c) The effectiveness of PBL on the quality of learning outcomes was assessed

through students’ performance in assessment. 4. Development of the final context-based PBL model

The pilot model would then be revised based on detail analysis and integration of the results from the above stages. It was expected that experience and knowledge gained from the implementation of the pilot model would be useful in developing a context-based PBL model, which would be more widely applicable to other departments and disciplines within the local context of the HKPo1yU.

5. Dissemination of results and establishing networking

The final version of the PBL model and the experience gained from the project would be disseminated and shared in workshops and seminars with all colleagues within the HKPo1yU. This dissemination of results would form the first step towards setting up a resource and support center for colleagues who are interested in trying out PBL in their teaching. The project team would also liaise and network with colleagues practicing PBL in other universities.

Results and Discussion The project is still in its on-going stage. This paper only reports some of the findings to-date focusing on the data based on the current practices of PBL, the development of the pilot PBL model and part of the results of the assessment of its effectiveness.

8

Common features of the different PBL models used in the Hong Kong Polytechnic University The questionnaire results indicated that PBL approach varied from department to department. Despite the diversity of the PBL approaches used, some common features could be identified (Appendix 2). In general, lecture and group discussion were used in a parallel fashion to assist learning in a PBL classroom. Except the model from the School of Design, all the other four departments started their PBL classes with lecture(s) to clarify concepts, define problem situation, give critiques to students’ work, and discuss answers of prepared questions. Lectures were usually followed by group discussion during which students were given a problem to analyze. During group discussion, students were asked to generate learning issues, report findings, answer prepared questions from teachers, and to give critiques to each other’s work. The number of discussion sessions varied from one to three depending on individual departments. The final session was used for evaluation and summarization. These common features provided insight into the modifications, which had been implicitly made to suit the various teaching and learning contexts in the University Pilot model developed by individual departments Based on the above database, a template model of PBL was developed which captured the common features of the individual models (Appendix 3). Based on this template model, individual departments then developed their own pilot model to fit into their own teaching context. This paper presents six of these pilot PBL models (Appendix 4-9). In all these models, the teacher used a short lecture to explain the problem, outline the scenario, and answer questions from the students. This introductory lecture was usually short except in the PBL model of the Department of Building and Real Estate where an extended main lecture was used as a follow up session to provide supporting materials to the student group. The introductory lecture was followed by group discussion during which students either identify learning issues, redefining problems or ask questions. Student presentation was usually the next stage where students presented their research findings or ideas. In three out of the six PBL models, students were given a chance to do a critique of each other’s work. In the department of Electrical Engineering, this form of peer assessment was extended to letting students have a chance to compare their own assessment marks with those of the teacher’s. The development of these pilot PBL models was the first step towards the final version of the context- based model. The use of introductory session and lecture to provide some background information and set the scene of the problem was seen to be necessary given the student background. As independent self-directed learning is a totally new experience, these students may need support to start them off to self-learning. The provision of background information and an opportunity to clarify concepts can been seen as an intermediate step to build up students’ confidence to cope with the new approach. Should the typical PBL model be adopted and students asked to begin group discussion on their own immediately, many of these Hong Kong students would be at a loss: losing confidence, direction and motivation in their learning.

9

Assessment of the effectiveness of the pilot PBL model The Study Process Questionnaire At the stage of reporting, the SPQ results from one Engineering group of students (N= 110) were analyzed. The results revealed that there was a significant change (p<.O5) in the deep approach score of the students before and after the implementation of PBL, with the post-PBL score greater than the pre-PBL score. There was no significant change in the pre- and post PBL surface approach score. These results indicated that PBL does have a positive effect in promoting deep learning. However, since only one set of SPQ results was analyzed, the above effect could only be tentative, and would need to be substantiated by the rest of the data sets. PBL Evaluation Questionnaire The questionnaire results of two groups of students, (one full-time and one part-time mature) students were analyzed, and the results are presented in Table 1.

Student Group Number of Students Mean Score Range

Full-time 14 2.9 3.8 - 4.2

Part-time 11 3.8 2.9-3.9

Table 1: PBL Evaluation Questionnaire Scores The results of the questionnaire (on a 5-point Liekert scale) was lower for the full-time than the part-time group. This indicated that the part-time (PT) students felt more positively towards PBL than the full-time (FT) students. Some of the possible reasons for this finding may be inferred from the interview data. The student interviews Seven students, four part-time and 3 full-time were interviewed to find out their opinions on PBL. On the whole the part-time (PT) students preferred PBL for this approach allowed them to share experience with their peers and the lecturer. These students explained that the processes involved in PBL were familiar to them as they were also expected to solve problems, formulate solution and make decision in their workplace as one of the students said. PT: It (PBL) is a good method. As it is new to me, this can stimulate me to

think of many ideas. Of course, when I encounter a problem, I will have a solution, like that in my workplace, but that may not be the best one. By

10

now, I try to find the best way to solve problems. We discuss the problem among ourselves and I found the relationship quite harmonized. We all involve ourselves in the discussion since there are only a few students in the group. We may consult and discuss the problem with the lecturer in order to make everything refined during our group discussion. The lecturer gives us some suggestions and leaves the decision to us.

A different picture emerged for the full-time (VP) undergraduate group. They disliked PBL as one of the students explained. FT: (In PBL) We cannot predict or guess what will turn out in the examination.

For theory type question, I can recall the lecture notes and would have no problem no matter what the question is. This is not the same for case problem, which requires application. It is also difficult to guess what is the marking scheme of the lecturer. The other thing is the rationale behind the case. If you do not understand the case after reading it, you won’t be able to solve the problem.

The full-time students found examinations using case problems very intimidating. This finding is related to the students’ previous educational experience as explained earlier. Hong Kong secondary school students are used to a didactic teaching approach whereby teaching is concerned with transmission of knowledge, learning with passive receiving, and assessment with regurgitation of notes. These students bring with them this conception and learning approach to tertiary education, and many of them expect a similar approach of teaching and assessment. That is why they find theory type of questions asking for straightforward reproduction of declarative knowledge easy to answer, and are at a loss with case problems requiring high level cognitive processing. Again, since only two groups of questionnaire results were analyzed, students’ opinions on PBL would need to be supported by the rest of the questionnaire and interview data. Assessment of problem-solving approaches During the interview the thirty-nine students were given a problem and asked to think aloud their ways in approaching the problem. Analysis of the interview data revealed four types of problem-solving approaches. In decreasing order of complexity, they are the direct success, hypothesis-formulation and refraining, hypothesis-formulation and rejecting, and the partial recognition and forced-fit approaches. Comparison of the approaches adopted by these students before and after the implementation of PBL showed that positive changes in approaches occurred in students who initially adopted more primitive problem-solving approaches, whilst there was no significant change recorded in students who initially used a more advanced approach. Details of the findings were reported in another paper by Lai, Tiwari and Tse (1997).

11

Conclusions The local teaching and learning context and the educational experience of the Hong Kong tertiary students have raised the need to develop a context-based model if PBL were to effectively facilitate desirable learning. This study attempts to develop such a model, which will preserve the philosophy and essential elements of the typical PBL approach, and yet be flexible enough to accommodate the needs of the individual teaching and learning contexts. The progress of the project so far has been the development of a template pilot model identifying the main features of this context-based model. Based on this template, modifications were made by individual teachers to design a pilot PBL model, which would fit their respective subject content and student groups. Apart from retaining the essential elements of PBL which include real life problem~, student independent learning, group discussion and sharing, and peer teaching, the pilot models developed by the individual departments incorporated an additional introductory lecture session. This additional feature was an essential context-based element bridging the gap between traditional dependent didactic learning and total self-directed independent learning. At the beginning of tertiary education, many undergraduate students are strongly influenced by their previous learning experience, expecting a didactic approach from their teachers, and adopting a passive learning approach themselves. If PBL were to be implemented in its “extreme” form, that is, with no lecture and guidance in handling case problems, students will feel completely loss in their process of learning and in handling assessment. These pilot models were implemented in the respective departments, and their effectiveness on student learning was assessed. Results analyzed so far indicated that a context-based model had positive effect on deep learning as demonstrated by the SPQ results. Also, students who initially adopted a primitive problem-solving approach managed to use a more advanced approach to problem solving after exposure to PBL. At the stage of this report, only part of the results have been analyzed. What remains to be accomplished by the project is to finish analyzing and triangulating data from the various sources. The implications would then be used to refine and substantiate the pilot model, so that a final version of a context-based PBL model could be developed for a wider application within the University. References Barrows, H.S. (1985). How to design a problem-based curriculum for the pre-clinical years. New York: Springer. Barrows, H.S. & Tamblyn, R.M. (1980). Problem-based learning. An approach to medical education. New York: Springer.

12

Bigg, J.B. (1987). The Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ): manual Hawthorn, Vic.: Australian Council for Educational Research. Biggs, J. (ed) (1996). Testing: To educate or to select? Hong Kong Educational Publishing Co. Biggs, J.B. & Moore, P. (1993). The process of learning. Sydney: Prentic hall of Australia. Blumberg, P. & Michael, J.A. (1992). Development of self-directed learning behaviors in a partially teacher-directed problem-based learning curriculum. Teaching and learning in Medicine 4,1, 3-8. Boud, D. (1985). Problem-based learning in education for the professions. Higher Education and Development Society of Australasia- Australia. Glaser, R. (1991). The maturing of the relationship between the science of learning and cognition and educational practice. Learning and Instruction, 1,129-144. Kenley, R. & Dodds, A. (1995). Evaluation of PBL certain methods of teaching & evaluation. In P. Little et al (Eds). Research & Development in PBL. PR0BLARC, Sydney, Australia. Lai, P., Tiwari, A. & Tse, P. (1997). Problem-based learning (PBL): boosting the problem-solving performance of all or some? Paper presented at the PBL Conference, Brisbane, Australia, December 3-6. Morris, P. (1985) Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to the implementation of a pedagogic innovation: A South East Asian case study. International Review of Education. 31, 3-18. Newble, D. & Clarke, R.M. (1986). The approaches to learning of students in a traditional and in an innovative problem- based medical school. Medical Education, 20, 267-273. Norman, G.R. & Schmidt, H.G. (1992). The psychology basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 67, 557-565. Ramsden, P. (1991). A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education: The Course Experience Questionnaire. Studies in Higher Education, 16,129-150. Schmidt, H.G. (1983). Intrinsieke motivatie en studieprestaties: Enkele verkennende onderrzoekingen. [Intrinsic motivation and achievement: Some investigations]. Pedagogische Studieen, 60, 385-39 5.

13

Appendix 1 PBL Evaluation Questionnaire Dear Student, Recently, you were given a case study. This case was called MAK THE KNIFE Company and was part of “manufacturing management I”. The way in which this was treated is often called Problem-based learning (PBL for short), and is somewhat different to the way of teaching and learning that you are probably associated with. It means rather than giving students theoretical knowledge and then giving them some practice to apply the theory afterwards (such as a tutorials, laboratory exercise etc.), it gives students a problem to examine first and then goes through a solution later, but only after they have had time to digest the problem and discuss it amongst themselves. We are interested to know your views as to this learning approach. Please therefore, take a few minutes to answer the following questions. PBL means: Give the problem to the student and then use the answer to explain the theory. Traditional approach: Explain the theory to the student by lecturing.

1) Have you found the course interesting? very 5 4 3 2 1 not at all 2) Have you enjoyed the course? very 5 4 3 2 1 not at all much 3) Did you find that focusing the course on real very 5 4 3 2 1 not at all

engineering problems made the course seem much more relevant to your interests?

4) Did working in groups mean that you learned very 5 4 3 2 1 not at all

from one another? much 5) Have you had understood the technical very 5 4 3 2 1 not at all

material if the course better than if it had been much lectured in the conventional way?

6) Do you think you have learned as much very 5 4 3 2 1 not at all technical material as you would on a much conventional lecture course?

14

Appendix 2 Common Features of the PBL Models in HK Poly U

7) Considering the material you have learned, do you think you have learned it more very 5 4 3 2 1 not at all thoroughly than you would on a conventional much course?

8) Has this course taken more or less time than other conventional lecture courses? (In your very 5 4 3 2 1 not at all assessment of the time taken by other courses, much you should include the time you will spend on revising for the exams)

Problem Lecture

Group Discussion

Student Presentation

Answer prepared questions

get by lectures

Generate

issues

List

Suggestion

Report finding

15

Appendix 3 Template pilot PBL Model

Follow- up session (s)

Repeat

Initial session -setting the scene

Group Discussion

Presentation

Concluding session –solution

16

Appendix 4 PBL Model of the Department of Electrical Engineering

Set Scene (All verbal, no written task)

Lecturer Students - outlines scenario & student task - in groups (listen to the outline) - observes & sits in groups - prepare questions - makes notes - hand in (2 sessions with group discussion between)

Role Play

Lecturer Students - takes role of layman seeking advice -each group in turn (acting as consultants) from consultants ask a question until bank of questions is - answers prepared questions exhausted (& supplementaries if appropriate) - listen to others’ groups’ questions - makes notes - make notes

Report preparation (Outside classroom)

Students - prepare consultant’s report - prepare class presentation

Presentation Lecturer Students - makes notes - give presentation - asks questions - make notes - makes assessment - ask questions - make assessment

Assessment Lecturer Students - gives list of assessments to students - compare own assessments with Lecturer’s - combines assessment of presentation - assess their own assessment ability and report - assess members’ contribution in group

17

Appendix 5 PBL Model of the School of Design Teacher Activity Student Activity Initial Session - Issue of project brief

- Expansion of the brief, at times by lecture

- Expansion of the brief by group discussion, to identify areas requiring further study, i.e., individual research.

Follow-up sessions -Tutorial guidance on Research, Analysis, & Concepts.

- Research - Analysis of research - Conclusion i.e. Preliminary Design Concept

Group Discussion - Interim Critique i.e., questions & comments re. presentations & concepts

- Presenting concepts to group - Evaluating each other’s concepts

Follow-up sessions -Tutorial guidance on design development

- Revising and/or developing design

Presentation - Critique of final design proposals

- Presenting final design

Concluding sessions session - Summary of Project - Written self-assessment of: 1) Strengths & weaknesses

of design proposal 2) Management of project 3) Personal Development

achieved through project

18

Appendix 6 PBL Model of the School of Design Week 1 Teaching Activity Student Activity

Joint work (2 students/unit) Tutorial 1 (Project Briefing)

- Give problem - Mini lecture of project issue

- Students paired for small group discussion, to plan for working procedure; and brainstorming.

Tutorial 2 (Student presentations)

- Tutorial guidance - Report findings - Generate issues

- Report finds - Generate issues

Tutorial 3 (Final Critique)

- Presentation of final result - Critiques given by both students and tutor

- Presenting design concept and solution to group - Evaluating performance

Week 2, 3 & 4 Individual work

Repeat above sequences

19

Appendix 7 PBL Model of the Department of Health Sciences

Introduction

- Setting the scene (e.g. introduce the topic & state objectives)

Introduce the problem to the class

(Case in the form of paper exercise)

Small group discussion

-problem solving

Plenary Session

- Applying solutions to the problem

- Evaluate effectiveness of the solutions - 7- identify learning deficits

Mini- lecture format

- provide information in response to the learning deficits identified

- applying newly learned knowledge to real-life situations

(e.g. management problems in own workplace)

20

Appendix 8 PBL Model of the Department of Building & Real Estate

Initial Session (Setting the scene) Activity: Issue project brief Give background to project Answer initial questions

Group Discussion Activity: Student re-define brief, identify issues. Seek clarification from supporting staff members

Follow-up Session(s) Supporting material from main LECTURE programmes. Students should be using material from these (and previous years) to assist their project work

Presentation Could be in report form or oral presentation Session could be an interim “CRIT Session”

Follow-up Session(s) These could be tutorials where students discuss their progress. Input + suggestions/ Guidance from Staff

Task not completed Task completed Feedback/Question sessions from panel of staff

21

Appendix 9 PBL Model of the Department of Hotel & Tourism Management Task Completed Task Not Completed Reprinted with permission from Australian Problem Based Learning Network(PROBLARCC) TEHE Ref.: R79 Tang, C., Lai, P., Tang, W., Davies, H., Frankland, S., Oldfield, K., Walters, M., Ng, M.L., Tse, P., Taylor, G., Tiwari, A., Yim, M. & Yuen, E. (1997) Developing a context-based PBL model. In J. Conway, R. Fisher, L. Sheridan-Burns and G. Ryan (Eds.) Research and Development in Problem Based Learning: Integrity, innovation, integration Vol. 4 (pp. 579-595). Australia: Australian Problem Based Learning Network (PROBLARC).

Initial Session (Introduce the topic & clarify concepts)

Group Discussion

Presentation

Concluding session -Solution

Repeat