Student perceptions about the characteristics of an effective discussion during the reporting phase in problem-based learning

Abstract

To explore student perceptions of factors contributing to the effectiveness of discussions in the reporting phase of the problem-based learning (PBL) process, where students report and synthesise the results of self-study. Forty-eight Year 1 and 2 medical students participated in 6 focus group interviews about the characteristics of effective group discussions and possible improvements. The data were analysed qualitatively in several stages. The analysis yielded 4 main characteristics of effective discussions: asking for, giving and receiving explanations; integrating and applying knowledge; discussing differences with regard to learning content, and guiding and monitoring the content and the group process of the discussion. Integrating and applying knowledge included structuring, relating and summarising information and providing examples from practice. Discussing different opinions included discussing a variety of literature resources and disagreements. The main learning effects mentioned by the students were retention, understanding, integration and application of knowledge. Students have clear ideas about what promotes effective discussions during the reporting phase. Their PBL experience has provided them with some insights that are in line with theory and research on collaborative learning. Future research should examine differences between student and tutor perceptions of the quality of discussions. Introductions to PBL for students and tutors should include training in asking open but focused questions, supporting explanations with arguments and dealing with conflicts about learning content. Tutors should be trained in giving effective and personal feedback. Collaborative creation of external knowledge representations (i.e. concept maps) should be advocated, as should variety of literature resources.

Students’ Experiences in Interdisciplinary Problem-based Learning: A Discourse Analysis of Group Interaction

“…A small body of qualitative and discourse research on student learning in PBL identified the emergence of students' co-constructed knowledge and their highly interactive dynamics in tutorial groups (for example, Hmelo-Silver and Barrows, 2008;Koschmann et al, 1997;Visschers-Pleijers et al, 2006;Woodward-Kron and Remedios, 2007). For instance, Visschers-Pleijers et al (2006) found that in a PBL setting collaborative knowledge construction among students occurred more frequently than any one student's elaboration of knowledge.…”

“…For instance, Visschers-Pleijers et al (2006) found that in a PBL setting collaborative knowledge construction among students occurred more frequently than any one student's elaboration of knowledge. On the other hand, other studies noted several pedagogical issues of learners' participation in PBL, in particular, in non-Western cultural settings (Imafuku, 2012;Khoo, 2003;Legg, 2005; Remedios, Clarke, and Hawthorne, 2008).…”

“…In this regard, Leung (2002) emphasized the importance of obtaining a better understanding of the complex processes of students' participation in the context of student-centered learning. Hak and Maguire (2000) also pointed out that evidence from ethnographic and discourse research approaches are efficient and rational to exploring inside the PBL process.A small body of qualitative and discourse research on student learning in PBL identified the emergence of students' co-constructed knowledge and their highly interactive dynamics in tutorial groups (for example, Hmelo-Silver and Barrows, 2008;Koschmann et al, 1997;Visschers-Pleijers et al, 2006;Woodward-Kron and Remedios, 2007). For instance, Visschers-Pleijers et al (2006) found that in a PBL setting collaborative knowledge construction among students occurred more frequently than any one student's elaboration of knowledge.…”

Students’ perception of a modified form of PBL using concept mapping

“…The third mapping phase (M3) reflected how much new information was acquired during private study and applied to the problem. Students were engaged in deep learning (Rendas et al 2006;Visschers-Pleijers et al 2006) by establishing logical relationships amongst the newly acquired facts and concepts and linking them to the knowledge they had before the private study. This phase involved further re-synthesis of information, especially when previously misunderstood concepts needed to be corrected.…”

La inhibición a participar y su nexo con percibir una tutoría diferente

“…La secuencia de los problemas ofrece opciones para que la transferencia de conocimiento intra e inter bloque pueda ser ejercitada 3 . Los beneficios cognitivos del ABP como método de instrucción 4 dependen de la calidad de las interacciones verbales que tienen lugar en los grupos de tutoría 5 , al tiempo que dichas interacciones, de ser socialmente favorables, van estimulando la evolución del grupo hacia un equipo 6 . Este enfoque socio-cognitivo del aprendizaje se enriquece y complejiza si le adicionamos su dimensión cultural.…”