Using Problem-Based Learning to Teach Forensic Psychiatry

Schultz-Ross, R. Andrew; Kline, Amy E.

doi:10.1007/bf03340034

Cited by 23 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results support previous research that problembased learning causes some discomfort and frustration among students as the necessary information is not readily available like traditional lecture. However, it has been suggested that the students' level of comfort increases with time and they need about six months to adapt to the PBL method (Schultz-Ross & Kline, 1999). Six months is a relatively long time to allow students to become comfortable with PBL given that a typical semester is 16 weeks long.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Problem‐based Learning: Influence on Students' Learning in an Electrical Engineering Course

Yadav

Subedi

Lundeberg

et al. 2011

J of Engineering Edu

346

224

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUNDRecently, there has been a shift from using lecture-based teaching methods in undergraduate engineering courses to using more learner-centered teaching approaches, such as problem-based learning. However, research on the impact of these approaches has mainly involved student perceptions of the teaching method and anecdotal and opinion pieces by faculty on their use of the teaching method, rather than empirically collected data on students' learning outcomes. PURPOSE (HYPOTHESIS)This paper describes an investigation of the impact of problem-based learning (PBL) on undergraduate electrical engineering students' conceptual understanding and their perceptions of learning using PBL as compared to lecture. DESIGN/METHODFifty-five students enrolled in an electrical engineering course at a Midwestern university participated in this research. The study utilized a within-subjects A-B-A-B research design with traditional lecture as the baseline phase and problem-based learning as the experimental phase of the study. Participants completed pre-and post-tests surrounding the four topics covered in the study and also completed a Student Assessment of Learning Gains (SALG) survey. RESULTSResults suggested participants' learning gains from PBL were twice their gains from traditional lecture. Even though students learned more from PBL, students thought they learned more from traditional lecture. We discuss these findings and offer implications for faculty interested in implementing PBL. CONCLUSIONSGiven the limited research on the beneficial effects of PBL on student learning, this study provides empirical support for PBL. We discuss findings from this study and provide specific implications for faculty and researchers interested in problem-based learning in engineering.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Problem‐based Learning: Influence on Students' Learning in an Electrical Engineering Course

Yadav

Subedi

Lundeberg

et al. 2011

J of Engineering Edu

346

224

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They discovered that facilitators changed from providing general to specific references because of their lack of confidence in students' abilities to conduct such a task and cover intended content in a self-directed manner. The uncertainty about sufficiency of content coverage has been documented in the past (see, for example, Dods 1997;Schultz-Ross and Kline 1999;Lieux 2001;Angeli 2002;Hung 2006Hung , 2009. It is noteworthy that this skepticism and concern is still a common belief, even among the educators who practice PBL after decades of implementation.…”

Section: Facilitators' Behaviorsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Theory to reality: a few issues in implementing problem-based learning

Hung

2011

Education Tech Research Dev

277

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The success of an intervention depends not only upon its theoretical soundness, but also on proper implementation that reflects the guidelines derived from its theoretical conception. Debates surrounding the effectiveness of problem-based learning (PBL) have focused on its theoretical conception and students' learning outcomes, but implementation is seemingly absent from the picture. This paper attempts to describe what research evidence is needed to fill in this missing information and provide a clearer picture of PBL. The author examines current PBL implementation practices and identifies potentially confounding variables that may play a role in inconsistent or conflicting research results in PBL. For example, various models of PBL have been developed and implemented to afford the specific instructional needs of the institution or learner population. These PBL models are in fact quite different in terms of the nature of problem solving and the degrees of selfdirected learning, which theoretically, should result in different types of learning outcomes. Without distinguishing the models used, the results of comparative PBL research could have been confounded. Furthermore, human factors are another set of confounding variables that could influence the students' learning processes and consequently affect PBL implementations and research results. To remedy these problems and reach PBL's full potential, as well as obtain a more accurate picture of PBL as an instructional method and its effects on students' learning, some fundamental changes are needed.Keywords Problem-based learning Á Implementation Á Problem solving Á Self-directed learning Á Student learning Despite its popularity in educational settings, problem-based learning (PBL) generates a great deal of skepticism and speculation among theorists. More than half a dozen metaanalyses and systematic reviews of PBL studies have been conducted to answer the question, These meta-analyses examined the effect of PBL on various aspects of students' learning outcomes, such as domain knowledge acquisition, problem solving skills, self-directed learning, group processing, and social and psychological soft skills. However, the results from the meta-analyses were not conclusive, even yet, conflicting.More recently, Kirschner et al. (2006) brought this issue back to the surface by openly criticizing PBL as an ineffective instructional method because it ignores or contradicts human cognitive architecture and cognitive load principles. Hmelo-Silver et al. (2007) and Schmidt et al. (2007) countered the argument by presenting the related cognitive science principles and empirical evidence that support the soundness of PBLs theoretical foundation. Specifically, some researchers suggested that PBL may not be effective in all aspects of student learning, but is especially effective in certain aspects of student learning because of its instructional emphases and characteristics. For example, there has been a general agreement that PBL is effective in promoting students' problem sol...

show abstract

“…Among these dilemmas, they found that educators and students were most concerned with the issues of depth versus breadth and factual knowledge versus higher-order thinking skills. These issues arose from PBL students' slightly less than desirable performances on content tests compared to traditional students (Albanese & Mitchell, 1993;Friedman et al, 1992;Levesque, 1999;Vernon & Blake, 1993), as well as teachers' (Angeli, 2002) and students' (Dods, 1997;Lieux, 2001;Schultz-Ross & Kline, 1999) concerns with respect to sufficient content coverage in a PBL curriculum. Although some studies indicated that sufficient breadth of content acquisition was not sacrificed for depth of content learning (Gallagher & Stepien, 1996), others suggested that more balance was necessary (Dods, 1997).…”

Section: Contentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, processing components function as a calibration system to (1) guide students' learning toward the intended learning goal(s), (2) adjust the level of cognitive processing required during the course of PBL in accordance with the cognitive readiness of the learners, and (3) alleviate the issue of students' initial unfamiliarity and/or discomfort with PBL (Dabbagh, Jonassen, Yueh, & Samouilova, 2000;Fiddler & Knoll, 1995;Hoffman & Ritchie, • volume 1, no. 1 (Spring 2006) 1997; Jost, Harvard, & Smith, 1997;Schultz-Ross & Kline, 1999). Hence, the general purpose of the 3Rs is to facilitate meaningful engagement in scientific inquiry and problem-solving processes and to cultivate effective and efficient learners and problem solvers.…”

Section: Processing Components Of the 3c3r Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 3C3R Model: A Conceptual Framework for Designing Problems in PBL

Hung¹

2006

Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning

175

150

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Well-designed problems are crucial for the success of problem-based learning (PBL). Previous discussions about designing problems for PBL have been rather general and inadequate in guiding educators and practitioners to design effective PBL problems. This paper introduces the 3C3R PBL problem design model as a conceptual framework for systematically designing optimal PBL problems. The 3C3R model comprises two classes of components: core components and processing components. Core components-including content, context, and connection-support content and conceptual learning, while processing components-consisting of researching, reasoning, and reflecting-concern students' cognitive processes and problem-solving skills. This paper discusses the model in terms of its theoretical basis, component functions, and the techniques used in designing PBL problems.

show abstract

Using Problem-Based Learning to Teach Forensic Psychiatry

Cited by 23 publications

References 15 publications

Problem‐based Learning: Influence on Students' Learning in an Electrical Engineering Course

Problem‐based Learning: Influence on Students' Learning in an Electrical Engineering Course

Theory to reality: a few issues in implementing problem-based learning

The 3C3R Model: A Conceptual Framework for Designing Problems in PBL

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About