Problem‐Based Learning in Health and Social Care 2010
DOI: 10.1002/9781444320541.ch6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Managing Group Dynamics and Developing Team Working in Problem‐Based Learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They had mixed feelings about the value of group work, as although it enabled them to perform to their strengths and to learn from members of their own and other PBL groups; it was simultaneously open to abuse from students who lacked commitment. This is a common problem associated with PBL according to Seymour (2010), who states that Levi (2007) coined the term "social loafing" to describe individuals who shirk, either as a result of believing that their contribution is not appreciated, or more frequently because they recognise that the efforts of other group members will ensure they are not disadvantaged.…”
Section: Focus Groupmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…They had mixed feelings about the value of group work, as although it enabled them to perform to their strengths and to learn from members of their own and other PBL groups; it was simultaneously open to abuse from students who lacked commitment. This is a common problem associated with PBL according to Seymour (2010), who states that Levi (2007) coined the term "social loafing" to describe individuals who shirk, either as a result of believing that their contribution is not appreciated, or more frequently because they recognise that the efforts of other group members will ensure they are not disadvantaged.…”
Section: Focus Groupmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This was useful, as Dolmans et al (2005) states that the facilitator should sustain the learning process, review each student's knowledge, check that all students are participating in the process and oversee individual student's progress. The need for frequent evaluation and feedback on group performance is also recommended by Seymour (2010), especially if the PBL group work is not summatively assessed, to provide a means of motivating disengaged students. Notwithstanding these views, it is equally important to accommodate individual styles and approaches to facilitation but this must involve student centred facilitation not tutor inactivity (Riley & Matheson 2010).…”
Section: Focus Groupmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…PBL can be conducted in a number of ways based on different models such as the McMaster PBL model (Woods 1996), the Maastricht “seven-jump” model (Barrows 1996), the Aalborg “problem oriented project pedagogy (POPP)” model (Dirckinck-Holmfeld 2002), Seymour’s “five-stage” model (Seymour 2010), and the Salford model (McLoughlin and Davrill 2007). In order to illustrate how a PBL process is usually described informally in natural language, we take the seven-jump model description from Maurer and Neuhold (2012) as an example through this paper:To get students started on a certain topic, they are confronted with an assignment that … outlining the problem or asking for a specific task to complete.…”
Section: Characterize Pbl and Identify Technical Requirementsmentioning
confidence: 99%