A Problem Based Learning Meta Analysis: Differences Across Problem Types, Implementation Types, Disciplines, and Assessment Levels

Exploring the Relationships Between Tutor Background, Tutor Training, and Student Learning: A Problem-based Learning Meta-Analysis

“…The literature is uniform, for instance, on the notion that effect size differences are impacted by the nature of the student assessment. That is, PBL students generally perform better as the focus of assessment moves from knowledge and facts to more complex forms of reasoning (Dochy et al, 2003;Walker & Leary, 2009). PBL also appears to result in better retention over time of what is learned (Barneveld & Strobel, 2009).…”

“…PBL also appears to result in better retention over time of what is learned (Barneveld & Strobel, 2009). While these findings are important, there may be methodological flaws in the analyses previously summarized (Barneveld & Strobel, 2009) even within recent publications (Walker & Leary, 2009). That is, many of the existing meta-analyses report sign tests from which misleading conclusions could be formed (Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein, 2009).…”

“…Much like previous contributions to the literature on different levels of assessment (Gjibels et al, 2005) or differences between disciplines (Walker & Leary, 2009) there is a need to investigate the claims regarding PBL tutors. The primary purpose of this research is to expand on existing review efforts by investigating the relationships between tutor training, tutor background, and student learning outcomes.…”

“…Since then, several meta-analyses have been published (Albanese & Mitchell, 1993;Dochy, Segers, Van den Bossche, & Gijbels, 2003;Gijbels, Dochy, Van den Bossche, & Segers, 2005;Kalaian, Mullan, & Kasim, 1999;Vernon & Blake, 1993;Walker & Leary, 2009) the most recent of which incorporates findings across several subject areas and educational levels (Savery, 2006;Savery & Duffy, 1995). According to these reviews, effect sizes that favor PBL depend in part on the kind of assessment used (Gijbels et al, 2005;Walker & Leary, 2009), but unexplained variance persists. One potential source for the variance is the facilitator, or tutor.…”

The Future of Social Learning: A Novel Approach to Connectivism

“…Increased engagement through PBL strategies has been shown to improve achievement and selfefficacy among middle school students [24], as well as boost their intrinsic goal orientation, task value, use of elaboration learning strategies, critical thinking, and peer learning, when compared to non-PBL instruction [44]. Walker and Leary's [46] meta-analysis of 82 PBL studies and Springer et al's [43] meta-analytical study showed PBL in small groups supported high-need students' success in STEM fields. Gallagher and Gallagher [16] also reported that PBL instruction could surface students who had previously unseen academic potential, meaning the learning strategy not only…”