students’ perceptions of problem-based learning

8/10/2019 Students perceptions of problem-based learning

1/13

This article was downloaded by: [Universiti Sains Malaysia]On: 18 March 2014, At: 02:49Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Teacher Development: An international

journal of teachers' professional

developmentPublication details, including instructions for authors and

subscription information:

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtde20

Students perceptions of

problembased learningMuthu Kumar

a& Galyna Kogut

a

aNational Institute of Education , Nanyang Technological

University , Singapore

Published online: 22 Aug 2006.

To cite this article:Muthu Kumar & Galyna Kogut (2006) Students perceptions of problembased

learning, Teacher Development: An international journal of teachers' professional development,

10:01, 105-116, DOI: 10.1080/13664530600587295

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13664530600587295

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (theContent) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions

and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13664530600587295http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtde20http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditionshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13664530600587295http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/13664530600587295http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtde20


2/13

Teacher Development

Vol. 10, No. 1, March 2006, pp. 105116

ISSN 1366-4530 (print)/ISSN 1747-5120 (online)/06/01010512

2006 Teacher Development

DOI: 10.1080/13664530600587295

Students perceptions of problem-based

learning

Muthu Kumar*and Galyna KogutNational Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

TaylorandFrancisLtdRTDE_A_158712.sgm10.1080/13664530600587295TeacherDeve lopment1366-4530(p rint)/1747-5120 (online)OriginalArti cle2006Taylor&[email protected]

Problem-based learning has in recent times aroused keen curiosity due to its pedagogical orientation

of facilitating students active construction of knowledge. As a curriculum model it is designed

based upon the solving of either simulated or real-life problems that generally tend to be ill-struc-

tured and open-ended. In such a model students are encouraged to become independent, self-

directed learners who determine their own learning outcomes. Against the backdrop of such an

instructional setting, the teachers traditional role undergoes a paradigm shift from being authorita-

tive to facilitative. The teacher now becomes situated as an active partner in the learning transac-

tions by scaffolding the learning processes of the students at appropriate junctions. In this article the

authors look at a study that the first-named author conducted to elicit feedback from a class of 25

first-year polytechnic tertiary students for the module of cognitive processes and problem solving.

These students have been exposed to problem-based learning methodologies throughout their

entire curriculum for two semesters. This study identifies both the inherent strengths and limita-

tions in implementing problem-based learning modules at institution-wide levels.

Introduction

The focus of education in general has undergone major revamps over the twentieth

century and in tandem, learning paradigms have changed course with the current

emphasis being heavily placed on constructivism. Constructivism empowers students

to become active participants in the learning interactivities and take charge of their

own intellectual development. Constructivism involves active cognitive processing

where learning is made meaningful through activities like thinking out loud, devel-

oping alternative explanations, interpreting data, participating in cognitive conflicts

(constructive arguing about phenomena under study), development of alternative

hypothesis, the design of further experiments to test alternative hypothesis, and the

selection of plausible hypotheses from among competing explanations (Saunders,

*Corresponding author. National Institute of Education, Centre for Research in Pedagogy and

Practice, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore-637616. Email: ku-

[email protected]


3/13

106 M. Kumar and G. Kogut

1992, p. 140). Through such a process of hypothesis formulation and evaluation,

negotiated meaning making and decision making, students effectively build up new

functional mental schemas and propositions of conceptual understandings by linking

up the new knowledge to existing knowledge representations. Thus, a constructivist

epistemology enables the activation of students prior knowledge gained throughearlier learning experiences and provides students with flexible cognitive scaffolds to

integrate new information within existing knowledge structures in innovative ways

(Crowther, 1997). Curriculum that is designed and organized with constructivism as

its underpinning philosophy satisfies the following desired outcomes of education

worldwide in the modern era: (1) the ability to be an independent, autonomous, life-

long learner, and (2) the development and application of higher-order thinking (Tan,

2004).

Problem-based learning (PBL) is one effective pedagogical technique that is

becoming increasingly popular in its use within educational ecologies to promote

constructivism.

Key conceptual elements

Problem-based learning is an instructional method that challenges students to learn

through working cooperatively in groups to seek solutions to real-world problems

(Duch et al., 2001). Knowledge construction through problem-based learning is

premised on the assumption that learners would experience cognitive dissonance

upon exposure to the problem scenario and attempts would be made to discover

answers to explain the dissonance (Tan, 2002). As an epistemological framework

problem-based learning essentially includes the following five key components:

1. The use of real-world or simulated problems to provide an authentic context for

students that act as motivational drivers for learners. The problems generate

patterns of deep learning, arouse learners curiosity and facilitate their explora-

tion of a myriad of issues from multiple and often conflicting perspectives.

2. Students set their own learning objectives by analyzing what they know, what

they dont know and what they need to find out to solve the given problems. This

entails the need for students to exercise metacognition in diligently planning and

monitoring their own learning progress.

3. Multiple resources are selected and provided as well as opportunities for students

to independently access other relevant resources. These resources could be

media, electronic or print based. Access to a rich variety of resources enables

students to develop deeper understanding of both content-specific knowledge

and conceptual meaning making processes related to solving the problems.

4. A suite of recursive learning activities in problem solving that involves experimen-

tation, data collection, reflection, critiquing and communications in attempts at

investigation of the problems.

5. The teachers role shifts from one of being a sage on the stage as in traditionalclassroom dynamics to one of being a facilitator or one who functionally supports


4/13

Students perceptions of problem-based learning 107

learning engagements by providing appropriate verbal cues to create a more

student-centered learning environment where there is a willingness to reflect

critically and deepen ones own thinking (Savery & Duffy, 1995; Hmelo &

Evensen, 2000).

These five key components of a problem-based learning system are buttressed by the

development of the following foundational cognitive skills amongst students:

actively seeking and locating new information from a variety of resources;

integrating the new information with what is already known;

organizing the new information in coherent ways through sound mental models;

explaining the newly understood knowledge to others to validate its relevance and

applicability (Watson, 2004).

Though not mentioned by Watson, collaboration through groupwork and peer

tutoring is another important skills construct in a problem-based learning model

which drives the successful implementation of a problem-based learning program.

Collaborative learning revolves around the central theme of collective inquiry consist-

ing of iterative cycles of reflection and action in cooperation with a group of peers to

seek answers to the problems and questions posed (Bray et al., 2000). Tan (2004)

explicates that there are four vital elements in a collaborative learning environment.

Firstly, collaborative learning promotes an active engagement with the dialogue

process, in essence affirming that learning is a social act involving discussions, shared

understandings and interpretations, verbal expressions and explanations and physical

gestures. Secondly, collaborative learning involves co-construction of knowledgewithin a group where the new knowledge is intrinsically considered as the common

property of the group. Thirdly, collaborative learning entails the shifting of the locus

of authority from the traditional teacher to the learning community and from rigid

authoritative classroom ecological structures to more dynamic and negotiated rela-

tionships between the members of the learning community, which includes facilita-

tors. Lastly, collaborative learning fosters a learning environment situated in critical

openness involving stimulation of rational thinking, self-assessment and critical

appraisal of others cognitive reasoning.

Background to the study

This small-scale study was conducted in a polytechnic tertiary institution in

Singapore where Muthu Kumar facilitates problem-based learning modules for first-

year students. As a newly formed educational organization where premium is placed

on innovative and stimulating teaching practices, this polytechnic has instituted peda-

gogical reform measures by implementing problem-based learning methodologies for

all curriculum subjects and at all academic levels of study. A curriculum design based

upon a problem-based learning model was adopted by policy-makers in line with the

overarching goal of the polytechnic of empowering students to be reflexive, self-regu-lated and autonomous learners. This design was predicated on the premise that


5/13


encouraging a pervasive learning culture of problem analysis and solving would serve

as the catalyst in provoking students to embrace new ideas, critique and question both

their own and others viewpoints, and engage in meaning making and consensus

building. Epistemologically and ontologically, problem-based learning is inherently

contextual, where assigned problems are generally anchored in real-life scenarios.Such an instructional approach being a marked departure from traditional learning

systems of information delivery and acquisition, was not unexpectedly initially met

with consternation, apprehension and varying degrees of resistance from teachers,

students and parents. However, the management of the polytechnic made concerted

efforts in reaching out to and educating its stakeholders through generative publicity

that highlighted the benefits gained through a problem-based instructional design

approach. Chiefly, such a design enables students to make organic connections

between their prior knowledge and new knowledge being constructed through dealing

with authentic problems that mirror real-life situations. In the process, students gain

deeper conceptual understandings that aid them in better transferring and applying

the new skills and knowledge learnt to workforce situations upon graduation. Such

publicity campaigns aimed at raising stakeholders awareness have yielded increas-

ingly positive results with the majority accepting the utility and relevance of a prob-

lem-based instructional approach, though some continue to raise concerns and

objections to implementing it on a large scale.

Students work in teams of five on a given PBL problem from the different modules

(from various disciplines) each day of the week. The assignment of members to each

team is left arbitrarily to the discretion of each facilitator who conducts the class.

Usually, team membership is periodically rotated so that each student will havecollaborated with every other student in the class by the time the semester ends. Each

PBL problem carries a set of learning outcomes, a context for learning activities and

exploration (articulated in the problem statement) and scope of assessment. The day

is typically structured with three meetings which facilitate interactions between facil-

itator and student groups on how best the problem can be approached and tackled.

At the third meeting students in their groups are required to present their solutions

to the entire class and have to be prepared to defend their solutions with sound argu-

ments in the face of critiquing by both the facilitator and fellow students. At the end

of the daily class, a number of activities are carried outa quiz, a reflection journal(Learning Log) entry, self and peer evaluation. All of these are done individually and

together with the team presentations are assessed for the cumulative grades to be

awarded for the days work. Particularly of interest to this study is the reflection jour-

nal, in which a log is kept of students personal opinions on their learning experiences

for the day, in response to the prompt (often in the form of a question) posed by the

facilitator. Students submit their written entries as part of the reflection journal and

get feedback from the facilitator. This studentfacilitator interaction is carried out via

the platform of the institutions electronic learning management system.

For the purpose of this study, the sample population of students came from a class

of 25 students for the module of cognitive processes and problem solving. Thestudents in the class ranged in ages from 17 to 19 and they were an even mix in terms


6/13


of gender distribution. Though coming from different schools of disciplinary special-

ization such as applied sciences, engineering, and information and communications

technology, this module of cognitive processes and problem solving is a common

subject for all first-year students and thus brought the students under study together

within the same class. At the closure of the class for the day, the prompt question ofWhat is your understanding of problem-based learning and what do you feel about

your learning through this approach? Why? was posed to the students and they were

instructed to ponder over the many learning issues embedded in this question before

articulating their views in their reflection journals. Thereafter, Muthu Kumar gath-

ered students electronic postings corresponding to their names and examined them

individually based upon patterns of logical reasoning and scientific thinking.

One fundamental ethical question that was involved in this study was the issue of

informed consent. Being both the facilitator for the class and the researcher for the

study, Muthu Kumar had easy access to students electronic reflection journal

entries. Ethical requirements called for voluntary participation. At the onset of the

class he explained the nature and purpose of his research study and explicitly

disclosed to the students that their reflection journal inputs for the day would be

analyzed as part of the data for the study.

Methodology of data analysis

Students personal feedback and opinions in the reflection journals were the prime

source of data that were qualitatively examined through content analysis in this study.

Engaging students in reflective learning practices and allowing them to make theirown evaluations of problem-based learning experiences align well with Williamss

(2000) participant-oriented model and Pattons (1997) user-focused approach. In

this way, participants and users (in this context students) are encouraged to express

their values and rationale for their evaluation decisions in cooperation with others.

Employing an approach of descriptive research analysis allowed Muthu Kumar as

the researcher to gain an in-depth insight into students interpretations and under-

standings of the principles encompassing problem-based learning. The analysis also

provided him with the bigger picture of students personal filtered version of problem

solving learning experiences. Reflection journal inputs were first scanned analyticallyand then different thematic categories were jotted down on paper according to the

different strands of ideas expressed by students on how they perceived their problem

solving experiences. Codes were next created in Atlas-ti, a software for qualitative

data analysis to represent these different categories and the textual data documenting

students feedback in the reflection journal were then run through and tagged with

the appropriate labels of these codes. The body of textual data was eventually filtered

and segmented according to these various codes of thematic categories. Findings are

presented in the following sections and these have been organized and arranged

according to the defined categories. For purposes of clarity of expression and ease of

reading, comments on issues raised by student participants within each category havebeen paraphrased. A few sample direct, representative quotations taken from


7/13


students reflections have also been included for each of these issues to forge a better

understanding of the thoughts generated by students. Interspersed are Muthu

Kumars own perspectives of the epistemological elements involved in a problem-

based learning design vis--vis students standpoints.

Findings and discussions

Strengths of problem-based learning

Self-regulated, independent learning. A majority of the students expressed the opinion

that problem-based learning is an approach that is a marked departure from tradi-

tional classroom teaching practices, which tend to be didactic in nature with massive

amounts of information being spoon-fed by teachers to students through the

medium of textbooks. They felt that being active participants in the problem solving

activities by formulating their own strategies to seek potential solutions to the prob-lem, exploring alternative hypotheses and weighing the merits of each hypothesis

before deciding on the best solutions, empowered them to become independent,

self-directed learners. Students need to generate questions to trigger intellectual

discussions in class and invite critical responses from facilitators to stimulate cogni-

tive development. One student aptly described the problem solving attempts with

the analogy of being thrown into the deep sea and being asked to swim back to the

shore on his own.

Learning through this approach allows us to be more independent as we learn to think, ask

questions and look for answers before getting the right information rather than beingspoon fed straight away.

One interesting thing about the PBL system is that we are required to find all the solutions

on our own. The facilitators are there to only guide us. We, on the other hand, have to find

everything from the scratch unlike back in our secondary school days where we were liter-

ally spoon fed with all the answers.

Deep thinking and making meaning through knowledge construction. Though cogni-

tively more demanding, the majority of students felt that in the course of learning, the

given problem solving tasks made them ponder over issues more deeply, analytically

and from various angles of reasoning in trying to tackle problems and make decisions.

This echoes research developments that have shown that unlike behaviourist models

that consider thinking and action in learning to be separate and divisible, student-

centered constructivist perspectives on learning emphasize that the two constructs

are integral in student engagement (Wu & Forrester, 2004). Not having to sit

through a battery of examinations, which are usually modeled to test rote learning,

was repeatedly mentioned by a number of these students as an added relief in

experiencing problem-based learning.

I feel that this is a better approach for students to learn rather than the traditional method

because the traditional way requires us to memorize and sit for 2 hour long exams but PBL

is a method that allows us to make our own inferences. Since we do the learning on our


8/13


own, we will know and get it into our brain (not forcing like in traditional methods). This

approach also makes learning more interesting. It also helps us to be more aware about

how to learn so that we can be successful life long learners. These few advantages already

make me feel that I am in Heaven school!

I understand that problem-based learning is a method of gaining knowledge withoutactively receiving information from teachers and textbooks. This learning system requires

us to do our own research to solve a problem. We have to really put in our own efforts by

searching the resources and using our own creativity and thinking skills on how to solve

the problem. It is really a fresh and innovative learning approach where we, students are

given real-world problems to solve. I think learning this way helps me to really understand

the processes, rather than just memorize the facts.

Tapping the affective domain of learning. Three students highlighted the benefits

gained from an affective perspective on learning. The autonomy in controlling their

own learning progress spurred many students to conceptualize and plan moremeticulously in bridging the gap on what they already knew and what they needed

to learn to achieve their predetermined learning goals. This intrinsically motivated

them to be aware of cognitive processes and be engaged in metacognition in order

to cultivate pivotal lifelong skills. This is in line with the findings of other research-

ers who found that the goal of learning is to encourage students to be reflective

critical thinkers who demonstrate a consistent motivation to be aware, inquisitive,

confident, tolerant and judicious when weighing options and intellectually honest

when evaluating others perspectives (Facione et al., 1996; McCombs & Whisler,

1997).

Problem-based learning enhances my understanding through more relevant, connected

learning and taps my natural curiosity about the world around me to ignite my motivation

for learning.

At the end of the day, I feel so glad and satisfied as we have gained knowledge without the

aid of teachers and textbooks and that makes me feel that I am no longer dependent and

I believe that the quality of my understanding on that particular modules have improved

due to PBL system.

Contextual learning. A significant number of students stressed the fact that the prob-lem solving skills they acquired in the course of deconstructing problems and explor-

ing relevant solutions would put them in good stead in preparing for the workforce of

the future that they will be entering into when they graduate. Since real-world or

simulated complex, unstructured problems are given to students, learning becomes

embedded in meaningful contexts:

My understanding of problem-based learning is that we are given problems that we might

face in our working environment or problems that are related to the module and we learn

through solving these problems. I think learning through this approach is good as we will

remember better what weve learnt and we also learn to work in groups which is what we

might be doing when we go out into the workforce. Also learning this way makes us more

active in thinking rather than being passive.


9/13


The demands of the knowledge economy require us to be highly flexible and responsive to

a fast changing society. PBL learning method is able to achieve a qualitative change in a

persons way of seeing and experiencing. Learning is about what and how we learn,

rather than how much we remember.

Collaborative/cooperative learning. Understandably, seven students also highlighted

the advantages of the social/collaborative aspects of learning brought about by prob-

lem-based learning. Since, in the case of the participant students, their lessons were

conducted in groups of five this unleashed high levels of cooperative intellectual and

interactive synergies. The learning experiences helped students to collectively

analyze multiple perspectives on various issues through the lens of critical openness

and identify the strengths and pitfalls of each of these viewpoints. Students also

learnt to engage in collaborative interpretations, dialogues, negotiated meaning

making and ultimately, forge shared understandings as members of a cohesive learn-

ing community:

PBL encourages me to identify learning needs and determine the resources that I will need

to use to accomplish solutions for problems. With independent learning comes consider-

able teamwork with other students and faculty. Collaboration is an essential skill for me to

gain as I will most likely be working as a member of teams in my respective workplaces in

the future. This improves ones communication skills.

Since the strong emphasis on PBL allows me to interact with people of different back-

grounds and personalities, Ive picked up practical communication, teamwork and prob-

lem solving skills which I believe, are extremely useful for the future both in job and career

prospects.Teammates have different prior knowledge and opinions when we are discussing and so

we learn from one another. I feel that working with different people is a good practice

because when we are working we cannot choose who to work with. We have to work with

those we dislike and this is a good time for me to learn how to get along with people and

also work in teams. Other than this, everyday we have to present our work which I feel is

a good practice for us because during secondary school life most of us did not get a chance

to present or were afraid to present. This allows me to improve on my presentation skills.

Limitations of problem-based learsning faced by students

The strengths of problem-based learning are evidently clear from the descriptions

and insights of participant students in this study and this has also been corroborated

by similar findings of other researchers. However, no one learning system is

completely perfect without any drawbacks. Most of the current literature on prob-

lem-based learning documents the pedagogical and psychological advantages of

employing a problem-based instructional methodology in curriculum design.

However, few research studies have been undertaken to study the limitations of

using a problem-based instructional approach. This study surfaced some of the

following pertinent learning obstacles students faced in engaging in problem solving

which we hope would be helpful in improving the quality of problem-based learningdesign.


10/13


Structural/operational problems. Opportunities for collaborative efforts at solving the

problems in teams at times resulted in misunderstandings and lack of interactional

cohesion when some of the team members failed to resolve conflicting perspectives

patiently through dialogue and negotiations. This problem especially plagued groups

where students were unaware of or didnt put into practice effective communicationskills. Other impediments experienced by students undergoing problem-based learn-

ing included encountering problems that were not well crafted, working with instruc-

tors with poor facilitation skills. Yet another major obstacle faced by students was

coming to terms with a different set of expectations brought about by the rather

abrupt transition from secondary school classroom instructional milieu that is tradi-

tionally teacher centered and didactic to the current one that is essentially student

centered and dialogic in texture:

Im rather satisfied and I think Im improving on my understanding on how to go about

learning and solving questions, though the resources can be quite lengthy and some of thework is tedious. This will eventually take a toll on my concentration, I have to admit.

However, this new method of learning is very tedious as we are given very little help and

mostly required to do it ourselves.

It is rather frustrating because when we need the help of the facilitators, we are unable to

directly get any answers from them. Instead, they would question us again on what is our

motive or objective in asking them the question. It can also be irritating when some of the

group members fail to contribute anything to the presentation.

The con about PBL system is that, sometimes at the end of the day, we realize that we do

not fully understand the objective and motive of the problem.

Assessment problems. Twelve students raised concerns about the nature of the

assessment structure used to evaluate daily learning performance. Though holistic

in its outlook with its various evaluation components of team presentations, reflec-

tion journal inputs, quiz scores and self and peer assessment, the overall assess-

ment format was deemed by these students to have a high degree of subjectivity,

thus resulting in bias. These students were unanimously emphatic in pointing out

that the assessment system allowed some students to be free-riders or those who

fail to actively participate in group meetings or contribute constructive ideas butare awarded better grades by non-discerning facilitators due to their better and

often outspoken communication abilities. Thus, facilitators at times mistakenly

evaluate these lackadaisical students to have played a key role in leading and shap-

ing group dynamics towards attaining the shared goal of framing an acceptable

solution. As one student aptly put it: Facilitators ought to closely observe more on

actual learning behaviors and educational achievements rather than on what it

seems to be. A few other students highlighted that a few unprincipled students

tended to plagiarize others reflection journal entries and submit them as their own

work. Thus, facilitators need to be cautious in sieving out these students and

assigning them appropriate grades. The following are the reflections of some ofthese students:


11/13


We have seen how teams have had to put up with members who did not do anything,

leaving either 1 or 2 to work out the problem on their own. These people in the end will

eventually get credits since they are able to talk their way out during presentations.

I personally think that there is a bit of injustice in the system of assessment. This is so

because from my own experience, some pupils who do not fully play their part andresponsibilities were given credits for their daily grade and worse still these pupils got

better grades than those who deserve them. Referring to the team presentation itself is

not enough, based upon my experiences since there are a number of my classmates who

do not even participate in the team discussions. Neither do they contribute voluntarily

nor do they try to cooperate with us. It is only during the presentation time, that these

people will tend to speak more especially when they are better speakers of the team, leav-

ing an impression to the facilitator that they have done their job well when actually they

didnt.

Based upon some of the difficulties highlighted by students and Muthu Kumars own

prior experiences of facilitating problem-based learning sessions, he has expoundedon the following four areas of concern that educators working in problem-based

learning environments need to bear in mind:

1. Though problem scenarios themselves tend to be ill-structured and complex in

nature in terms of allowing for multiple solving strategies and outcomes, problem

triggers need to be crafted definitively and focused in context and scope.

2. Strategies that teachers adopt in facilitating problem solving learning activities

need to strike an even balance between giving away too much information by

providing outright correct answers, against being too guarded, elusive and

vague in responding to students questions. A preferred approach would involveproviding appropriate mediation, scaffolds and verbal cues in the form of probing

and meaningful questions that dont frustrate the students but rather provoke

cognitive discordance in their minds and fuel their thinking powers to explore an

array of possible solutions.

3. The amounts and types of resources provided if lengthy might impose unneces-

sary cognitive overloads due to limited curriculum time. This could result in shal-

low, superficial learning with students not having sufficient time to thoroughly

examine the content of a large number of resources.

4. Keen observation from facilitators during classroom interaction times in being

aware of the dynamics of learner behaviors to be able to assess students more

rigorously.

Learner characteristics and dispositions towards problem-based learning

Students who were more developed in their self-directed, self-regulated learning skills

and who focused on mastery learning and achievement strongly favored the problem-

based learning curricular model. These students having a keener sense of metacogni-

tion were aware of ways towards achieving their goals. Thus, these students found

goal setting and sub-task monitoringtwo important facets of problem-based learn-ingeasier to manage.


12/13


On the other hand students with low self-reliance and awareness and a high depen-

dence on external factors such as constant facilitator guidance and extrinsic motiva-

tional rewards found the problem-based learning methodology more challenging.

Due to a lack of skills in managing autonomous learning, these students found it

initially difficult to cope with the demands of the system. However, after a sustainedperiod of exposure and practice they are now better able to adapt to the system.

Conclusion

The most difficult instructional development moment for a student is at the transition

from knowledge as a discrete entity to a conception of knowledge specific to contex-

tual relationships (Perry, 1970). In this article, the authors have documented the

movements of the learning trajectories of students who, having exited from traditional

secondary school classroom instructional environments, now have to manage thechallenges of problem-based learning environments in their polytechnic. Problem-

based learning as an educational process involves the active participation of students

in interactive dialogues and discussions which are sustained by probing questions

posed by teachers to invoke purposeful thinking in students to guide them in solving

problems. These problems could either be simulated or real-life to stimulate students

cognitive and intellectual development. In the process, students are encouraged to

think both reflectively and reflexively, which in turn fosters effective communication

and social skills in students to help them make their thinking more visible. The find-

ings of this study, based upon student feedback and comments in the reflection jour-

nals, have been consistent with the work of other researchers such as Tan (2004) andWeissinger (2004), who evaluated the effectiveness of problem-based learning strat-

egies. These strategies were identified as providing numerous benefits such as

promoting a student-centered learning ethos and empowering students to become

autonomous learners who are responsible for their own learning. However, this study

has surfaced a number of significant difficulties faced by students in adjusting to the

learning mechanisms embedded within problem-based learning. These difficulties

need to be taken into account by educators and instructional designers who desire to

implement PBL in order to optimize learning outcomes and improve the quality of

problem-based learning instruction.

References

Bray, J. N., Lee, J., Smith, L. L. & Yorks, L. (2000)Collaborative inquiry in practice: action, reflection

and making meaning(Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage).

Crowther, D. T. (1997) The constructivist zone, Electronic Journal of Science Education, 2(2).

Available online at http://unr.edu/homepage/jcannon/ejsev2n2ed.html (accessed 5 November

2005).

Duch, B. J., Groh, S. E. & Allen, D. E. (2001)The power of problem-based learning(Sterling, VA,

Stylus).

Facione, P. A., Facione, N. C. & Giancarlo, C. A. F. (1996) The motivation to think in working

and learning, in: E. A. Jones (Ed.)Preparing competent college graduates: setting new and higher


13/13


expectations for student learning.New directions for higher education No. 6 (San Francisco,

CA, Jossey-Bass), 6779.

Hmelo, C. E. & Evensen, D. H. (2000) Problem-based learning: gaining insights on learning

interactions through multiple methods of inquiry, in: D. H. Evensen & C. E. Hmelo (Eds)

Problem-based learning: a research perspective on learning interactions(Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum).

McCombs, B. L. & Whisler, J. S. (1997)The learner-centered classroom and school(San Francisco,CA, Jossey-Bass).

Patton, M. Q. (1997)Utilization-focused evaluation(3rd edn) (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage).

Perry, W. G. (1970)Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years(New York, Holt,

Rinehart and Winston).

Saunders, W. (1992) The constructivist perspective: implications and teaching strategies for

science,School Science and Mathematics,92(3), 136141.

Savery, J. R. & Duffy, T. M. (1995) Problem-based learning: an instructional model and its

constructivist framework,Educational Technology,35, 3138.

Tan, O. S. (2002) Lifelong learning through a problem-based learning approach, in: A. S. C.

Chang & C. C. M. Goh (Eds)Teachers handbook on teaching generic thinking skills(Singapore,

Prentice Hall).Tan, O. S. (2004) Looking ahead: the best way forward for problem-based learning approaches,

in: O. S. Tan (Ed.)Enhancing thinking through problem-based learning approaches(Singapore,

Thomson Learning).

Watson, G. (2004) Integrating problem-based learning and technology in education, in: O. S. Tan

(Ed.) Enhancing thinking through problem-based learning approaches (Singapore, Thomson

Learning).

Weissinger, P. A. (2004) Critical thinking, metacognition and problem-based learning, in: O. S.

Tan (Ed.)Enhancing thinking through problem-based learning approaches(Singapore, Thomson

Learning).

Williams, D. D. (2000) Evaluation of learning objects and instruction using learning objects, in:

D. A. Wiley (Ed.)The instructional use of learning objects.Available online at: http://rclt.usu.edu/whitepapers/paradox.html (accessed 30 November 2003).

Wu, W. Y. & Forrester, V. (2004) Exploring the cognitive processes of problem-based learning

and their relationship to talent development, in: O. S. Tan (Ed.)Enhancing thinking through

problem-based learning approaches(Singapore, Thomson Learning).

students’ perceptions of problem-based learning

Documents