proposal problem based learning dan problem solving

Problem-based learning: A proposal for structuring PBL and its implications for learning among students in an undergraduate management degree program

Revista de Gestão

ISSN : 2177-8736

Article publication date: 20 April 2018

Issue publication date: 1 June 2018

The purpose of this paper is to present a proposal for structuring the use of problem-based learning (PBL) as an active teaching strategy and assess PBL’s implications for student learning in the undergraduate management degree program of a federal university in Northeastern Brazil. PBL can turn students into active subjects in their own learning and promote the development of decision-making abilities through the identification and analysis of real problems.

Design/methodology/approach

The study follows the assumptions of qualitative research and uses the action research approach. The data were collected through reflective reports (texts freely written by students describing their experiences in a course) and through interviews. The collected material formed the basis for analysis and discussion of the results using content analysis.

The results indicate that the PBL teaching strategy has positive implications for student learning in that it promotes the integration of theory and practice, which enhances the motivation to learn. The students perceived the practical aspect, teamwork and presence of an entrepreneur/manager in the PBL classes as factors facilitating learning. By contrast, teamwork and the time involved were seen as factors limiting learning.

Practical implications

The use of PBL demonstrates its potential for learning through the integration of students’ cognitive, behavioral and social dimensions, fostering closer integration with the context of professional activity. The presence of entrepreneurs/managers who present real problems to be analyzed by the students in the classroom can contribute significantly to the promotion of learning and reflection by undergraduate management students.

Originality/value

The results of this study reveals its originality and value to management education in Brazil because it defines a framework for the implementation of PBL as an active learning strategy in a management program, it indicates the potential of PBL for the development of students’ competencies, it increases the potential for integrating theory with professional practice and it can aid the process of training teachers as they assess the implications of PBL for student learning.

• Problem-based learning
• Management degree programme
• Active learning strategy

Silva, A.B.D. , Bispo, A.C.K.d.A. , Rodriguez, D.G. and Vasquez, F.I.F. (2018), "Problem-based learning: A proposal for structuring PBL and its implications for learning among students in an undergraduate management degree program", Revista de Gestão , Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 160-177. https://doi.org/10.1108/REGE-03-2018-030

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2018, Anielson Barbosa Da Silva, Ana Carolina Kruta de Araújo Bispo, Danilo Goncalves Rodriguez and Francisco Ialyson Felipe Vasquez

Published in the Revista de Gestão . Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

1. Introduction

Problem-based learning (PBL) is an active teaching strategy that allows the student to take the lead and become responsible for his or her learning process (Egido Gálvez et al. , 2007 ); it also provides learners the opportunity to work collaboratively and develop the ability to learn under their own direction ( Hmelo-Silver, 2004 ; Gwee, 2009 ) as well as, over the course of their lives ( Woods, 2006 ), solve problems through an investigative process, analyze data and propose solutions ( de Souza and Verdinelli, 2014 ). In the PBL context, the teacher acts as a facilitator of collaborative learning ( Graaff and Kolmos, 2003 ). PBL aims to encourage students to use their prior knowledge to make decisions with a focus on problem solving (Egido Gálvez et al. , 2007 ), which helps make them more reflective and responsible for their own learning ( Hmelo-Silver, 2004 ).

Silva (2016) proposes a system of learning through action for management education in Brazil and suggests five dimensions that should be considered in teaching and developing leadership: the learning environment, the experience of the teacher and students, learning styles, reflective practice and active teaching strategies.

PBL is one of the active teaching strategies proposed by Silva (2016) to make management students’ learning more meaningful, as it helps students reflect on their own needs (Egido Gálvez et al. , 2007 ) and enhances their ability to develop independence as learners ( Hmelo-Silver, 2004 ; Gwee, 2009 ).

This paper came out of the research agenda of a project under the Universal Call for Proposals by the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development ( Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico – CNPq). This project aims to develop and disseminate innovative teaching strategies in the management program of a federal university in Northeastern Brazil, in the context of the Center for Research and Practice in Management ( Observatório de Pesquisa e Prática em Administração – OPPA), which was established in 2014 to create a learning environment for undergraduate and graduate students through “teaching-based research” or “research-based teaching.” The OPPA has a 100 m 2 physical space that can be characterized as a hub for dynamic and innovative learning, as it fosters the creation of a learning environment that values the physical, behavioral, social and technological aspects that bring teachers and students closer together, as well as facilitates the learning process, as shown in the study by Silva and Santos (2015) .

This study is motivated by the need to assess how the adoption of an active teaching methodology enhances the learning process among management students. Thus, this paper aims to present a proposal for structuring the use of PBL as an active teaching strategy and to assess PBL’s implications for student learning in two classes of an elective course in a management degree program. The study can help instructors to use PBL as a teaching strategy in a more structured manner. It achieves this by presenting the perceptions of students who experienced PBL in classes that combined theory with practice ( Freitas, 2012 ) and reflection with action through a more experience-based approach. According to Gosling and Mintzberg (2003) , the management field needs to break with more technically oriented education approaches so that students can develop the ability to adapt under contexts marked by uncertainty ( Vasconcelos et al. , 2013 ).

In addition to this introduction, the paper is structured into five parts. S ection 2 covers the theoretical framework, presenting some specific details about PBL and indicating the elements that make up its structure. The next section addresses the methodology used to understand the phenomenon being studied. S ection 4 presents the proposal for structuring PBL in the context of the OPPA, which can aid its dissemination in other programs and institutions. S ection 5 assesses the implications of PBL for student learning and identifies the factors that facilitate and limit its adoption as a teaching strategy. The last section includes some final reflections on the study.

2. Theoretical framework

PBL is considered to be an active teaching strategy, as PBL students are encouraged to take the lead in their own professional training and education. Its use in a teaching context allows the student to move beyond a passive role, to be exposed to a problem and to develop a sense of self-direction in search of the knowledge required to solve it ( de Souza and Verdinelli, 2014 ). It is an educational strategy that takes into account the complex nature of learning ( Savin-Baden and Major, 2004 ) and values the practical experience of learning because, as noted by Hmelo-Silver (2004) , it is based on the educational approaches of William Heard Kilpatrick and John Dewey.

PBL was disseminated in the medical school of McMaster University, Canada, in 1969, under the coordination of Howard S. Barrows ( Gwee, 2009 ; Borges et al. , 2014 ), as an innovative, radical strategy that ultimately became an educational trend. Gwee (2009) emphasizes that PBL aims to improve and optimize educational outcomes because it is student centered, collaborative, contextual, integrated and self-directed, and it promotes more reflective learning. According to Savin-Baden and Major (2004) , the use of PBL can be affected by the structural and pedagogical environment in which it occurs, as it involves factors such as the subject matter, students, teachers and organizations.

In their analysis of the definitions of PBL, Graaff and Kolmos (2003) distinguish among three levels: the central theoretical principles of learning, specific models based on PBL and various practices that follow the guidelines of traditional educational models but incorporate elements of PBL in their theories, models and practices. In terms of theoretical perspectives, PBL can be associated with an educational approach that takes a problem as the starting point for the learning process, which is based on perspectives such as student-centered learning, experience-based learning, activity-based learning, interdisciplinary learning, a focus on practical examples, and collaborative group learning.

As a model, PBL includes the following components: the structure of the program curriculum, group-based learning and evaluation. Other models are based on project-based learning and whether the projects are associated with a task, a subject matter or a problem. The discussion of PBL as a practice involves the manner in which the strategy is implemented, with an emphasis on its goals, motivation, student engagement, the relationship between teaching strategy and the depth and complexity of learning, and the manner in which a student develops a more complex level of analytical understanding through a problem-based assignment. There are several paths to the practice of PBL, and teachers can empower students to develop more inductive or more deductive thought by relating their goals to a project on three levels: general structure, themes and types of problems or the formulation of proposals ( Graaff and Kolmos, 2003 ).

By understanding these levels of distinction within PBL, one perceives that they are integrated rather than unrelated, and therefore, teachers must understand the theoretical bases of PBL and how the strategy can be implemented in the context of teaching, as well as be clear about the roles of the participants. Some of these points are highlighted in Section 2.1.

PBL’s essential characteristics include the organization of integrated curricula and classes around problems, in addition to an emphasis on cognitive skills;

certain conditions facilitate PBL, such as small groups, tutorial instruction and active learning; and

PBL emphasizes results, such as the development of skills and the motivation to continue being a life-long learner.

PBL requires the student to integrate various areas of knowledge, and it seeks to present real problems ( Araújo and Sastre, 2009 ) to promote the development of skills for self-directed learning ( de Souza and Verdinelli, 2014 ). According to Egido Gálvez et al. (2007) , the method allows the student to be the center of learning, facilitates the development of self-awareness, makes use of motivation, requires the curriculum to be organized around holistic problems, promotes professional training in small group relationships and encourages learning skills.

The use of PBL in management education is a way to allow the student to experience the context of professional life by solving problems related to the issues that arise in the course of a manager’s professional activity. Hmelo-Silver (2004) believes that educators are interested in PBL because of its potential to motivate students, as well as its emphasis on active and collaborative learning ( Escrivão Filho and Ribeiro, 2008 ) and the development of lifelong learning skills, management changes, teamwork, conflict resolution and problem solving ( Woods, 2006 ). Identifying which skills or competencies are to be developed must be part of planning PBL activities, that is, the teacher should explain to the students what they can learn by using the PBL strategy. Thus, it is important to discuss the elements involved in the use of PBL.

2.1 The elements that constitute the use of PBL

There are several ways to use PBL in teaching, and this paper will describe the implementation of one way that can be employed in undergraduate and graduate programs in management. Table I shows various types of PBL based on Woods (2006) , emphasizing that although it is an extremely effective environment for learning specific knowledge, it is not well known, which affects decisions about which PBL type best fits a learning objective.

Although they indicate different paths for teachers to plan for their use, these variations of PBL describe the strategy’s basic elements in terms of guidelines for learning. In this paper, we develop a structured PBL approach drawing on prior knowledge as a point of reference, but focusing on the creation of an action-oriented learning environment that encourages the development of collective learning. The following are some aspects considered central to the PBL strategy and that facilitate the understanding of its use in management education, given the specific needs of that field.

2.1.1 The studied problem

Discussing a problem is the central focus of PBL, given that the search for possible solutions to a problem can contribute to the development of students’ skills. Macdonald and Savin-Baden (2004) reflect on the use of the term “problem” because, in addition to its meaning being associated with the search for a solution, the word can also have a negative connotation; for this reason, many use alternative terms such as “concept-based,” “investigation-based,” “topic-based” or “context-based” learning; however, they recognize that a problem is at the center of the curriculum and offers the student a sharper focus and stimulus to learn.

In the context of management education, problems consist of a description of a real situation (or a close approximation of reality) that requires a solution. According to Egido Gálvez et al. (2007) , the student takes an inventory of his or her knowledge about the subject, analyzes it, reflects upon it and exchanges information with classmates, teachers and tutors to brainstorm ideas, form hypotheses and obtain solutions.

The main goal is to generate productive discussions ( de Souza and Verdinelli, 2014 ). To this end, the studied problem should have the following characteristics ( Hotchkiss, 2002 ; Sakai and Lima, 1996 ): it should be simple and objective to avoid confusion in identifying the main goal; it should be motivational for the student; it should include a neutral description of the case; it should be capable of elucidating the information required for its resolution; it should not include procedures for its resolution; it should allow students to make unique decisions; it should focus on a few learning items; it should contain elements about which the students have prior knowledge; and it should set a limit of approximately 16 hours for independent study.

2.1.2 Curriculum

The curriculum for PBL can be structured in a way that integrates with other disciplines, grouped by thematic blocks ( Mamede, 2001 ). Graaff and Kolmos (2003) underscore that such thematic blocks involve a semester of approximately six weeks that focuses on a specific topic. Planning the cases is crucial to a learning process geared toward professional practice.

In the context of management programs, PBL can be implemented in an interdisciplinary manner in various courses during the same period or semester; however, it can also be used in a specific course, as is the case with the proposal presented in this paper.

The professor or instructor of a certain course that employs the PBL strategy can collaborate with teachers from other courses to enrich the problem with information drawn from true-to-life professional situations ( Borochovicius and Tortella, 2014 ).

2.1.3 Students and teachers

Unlike conventional teaching strategies, in which the student is a passive recipient of information that emanates from the teacher, PBL involves a change in these roles. The strategy requires the student to take an active role in his or her education. The teacher assumes the role of tutor and moderator, facilitating the group’s work and communication among its members ( Graaff and Kolmos, 2003 ).

de Souza and Verdinelli (2014) believe that the tutor should take an active role in stimulating students, encouraging them to reflect on the problem and to connect their prior knowledge to new concepts. In addition, the teacher should help students develop their communication skills, critical thinking, professional behavior and ability to assess themselves and their colleagues ( Mennin et al. , 2003 ; Woods, 2006 ).

With regard to the students, creativity and reflection outside the classroom, as well as critical thinking, are crucial to solving the studied problems ( de Souza and Verdinelli, 2014 ; San Tan and Frank Ng, 2006 ). Within the student groups, there are two main roles ( Iochida, 2001 ): the discussion leader and the secretary who records the discussions and prepares the report. These group members should work cooperatively so that no single person monopolizes the assignments and discussion.

A third role can be integrated into the process – the ambassador, a tutor who is active in the business world and involved in the studied activity. Such tutors are generally employees who work directly in areas related to the proposed problem and can provide useful information about the topic ( Pinto et al. , 2015 ).

2.1.4 Process

describing the problem and its terms, considering the steps discussed above;

forming groups of students with, on average, six members;

researching the problem, proposing hypotheses, creating questions to guide the learning and laying out the goals expected from this case-study;

perceiving gaps in the existing knowledge, which are noticeable as the difference between the students’ current knowledge and potential future knowledge that may be needed;

identifying the sources that contain the theoretical or practical information needed;

setting goals and allocating resources within each group;

describing each team member’s duties and role within the group;

sharing knowledge to facilitate the development of the learning process and the resolution of the problem;

applying new knowledge to the problem in an attempt to solve it; and

presentation, assessment and reflection on the process and solution.

2.1.5 Assessment

For a program that uses PBL to train students or in specific courses that employ PBL as an active learning strategy, assessment should be planned as part of the curriculum structure, and the assessment process should reflect the goals and skills to be developed, as suggested by Silva (2016) .

In PBL, assessment “gives students a responsible role in analyzing their own progress and that of classmates in their group, rather than focusing only on the teacher’s assessment” ( Pinto et al. , 2015 , p. 15). Moreover, it is crucial to tailor the assessment process to the type of learning desired, which requires great care and attention to the relationship between teaching and learning ( Macdonald, 2005 ). When using this strategy, the teacher should define a system of teaching focused on professional practice, considering broader principles, based on student performance according to well-defined criteria and relevant evidence ( Macdonald and Savin-Baden, 2004 ; Macdonald, 2005 ; Woods, 2006 ).

According to Macdonald and Savin-Baden (2004) , the purpose of assessment is to support students in their learning by engaging them in activities through feedback, to measure learning progress and to set the standards by which those who are being assessed can be distinguished. PBL aims to help students develop skills that are applicable in the workplace and identify their own learning needs for the acquisition of knowledge and skills, with the understanding that learning is a holistic process.

These reflections reveal the complexity of the PBL assessment process, which is closely connected to its potential for competency development. To minimize ambiguity in the assessment process, Woods (2006) suggests that clear definitions be established for the following aspects: goals (what will be assessed?); criteria (what are they, and how will they be assessed?); types of evidence (is the evidence supported by the assessment criteria?); resources (how are the goals and evidence observed over time using available resources?); assessment process (how are students assessed? what is the purpose of the assessment? how will feedback be given to the students, and who is responsible for such consideration?); and training for assessment (has any prior training been given in how to conduct the assessment process?).

There are several assessment methods in PBL, including group or individual presentations, multiple assessments among group members and the group, an individual report on the case being studied, the resolution of a real-life situation, development of a portfolio, triple-jump exercise (presenting the issue, gathering information and posing hypotheses, and writing a report on one’s findings), self-assessment, peer assessment, open group assessment, online reflections written weekly and assessed at the end of the semester, assessment by the tutor/facilitator, written assessments and patchwork assessment in which group members work together to submit a shared written report containing their observations and remarks.

More specifically, Woods (2006) highlights certain forms or resources for assessment, including a student-written synthesis of the quality of the knowledge acquired; the group’s solution to the problem; concept maps of the knowledge acquired; individual tests or examinations about the knowledge, which may be developed by the teacher, peers, groups, people or the students themselves; individual teaching grades and learning contract; and peer evaluations of the quality of knowledge acquired during the teaching activity.

One can see a close relationship between the methods proposed by Macdonald and Savin-Baden (2004) and the forms and resources proposed by Woods (2006) , which show that the assessment process in the PBL strategy has several alternatives, and it is up to the teacher to define the most appropriate one for the nature of the program and the course. The next section describes the methods used in the study.

This study’s methodology was guided by the assumptions of qualitative research ( Merriam, 2009 ) and used the strategy of action research proposed by Cousin (2009) that is associated with the teacher-as-researcher movement. Action research can be used to investigate changes in daily routine in natural settings as well as in controlled environments such as the Center for Research and Practice in Management (OPPA), where the study was conducted and which promotes the practice of “teaching with research” or “research with teaching.”

The processes of action research proposed by Cousin (2009) involve the following steps: recognition of the problem, planning, action, observation and reflection. Section 4 describes the teaching strategy institutionalized in the management program in an elective course for students in their final year of study at a federal university in Northeastern Brazil in morning and evening classes. The participants included 90 regularly enrolled students in the decision making and managerial development course (35 in the morning section and 55 in the evening section), in which a PBL format is being introduced with the presence of a business leader or manager who describes a problem to the students and later returns to the Center to review the proposed solutions that the students have developed under the guidance of their teachers, which fosters a process of reflection about the applicability of the proposed solutions.

Two teachers, a master’s degree student and a research assistant were involved in the implementation of the strategy, and they are also considered subjects of this action research, in addition to the 90 students involved. The teachers planned the implementation of the strategy and assumed the role of moderators throughout the process. The graduate student and the research assistant supported the implementation of the PBL strategy through direct observations of the entire process and by assisting and guiding the students with the preparation of their reports.

After the activity concluded, the students were invited to participate in individual interviews to assess the implications of the PBL teaching strategy for their learning. As participation was voluntary, only six students from the two classes volunteered to participate in the interview, which was conducted in a suitable setting, and the interviews were recorded with the students’ consent. The interviews followed a semi-structured script with 13 questions. The questions ranged from the understanding of the PBL implementation process and its implications for student learning to perceptions of how the strategy contributes to the integration of theory and practice and the ways in which PBL facilitated and limited students’ learning. The interviews were transcribed in their entirety for analysis.

As a complement to the data analysis, some of the reflective reports written by the 90 students at the end of the course were considered. The purpose for using these reports was to study PBL’s effects on the students’ learning.

The reflective report is an activity that was developed based on Jennifer Moon’s (2004) reflections in a book about the development of reflection. Based on a reading of the book and the proposed activities, a framework was developed to encourage students to assess the implications of using active teaching strategies incorporated into a course for learning through a process of reflection. Writing is understood as a mental process of reflection that involves a systematic first-person account of an experience involving ideas and feelings, going beyond a description of facts and points of view to promote a deeper and more critical examination of the writer’s ideas. As this activity was new to the students, a description was developed that entailed a brief presentation about the report’s purpose and broader reflective questions to spark the students’ reflective thought, as well as specific standards for the format of the activity.

This activity was conducted at the conclusion of the course and served as a source of data on which the teachers were able to base their assessments of the learning process. In the course, The Decision-Making Process and Managerial Development, several reports assessed the implications of the student’s experience with PBL as an active teaching strategy and the most positive aspect of their learning. The most significant aspects have been included in this paper. Thus, the qualitative data were collected not only from interviews but also from the students’ reflective reports, adding consistency to the analytical process.

The analysis of the data collected from the interviews followed the three stages of content analysis proposed by Bardin (2007) , specifically, pre-analysis, exploration of the material and treatment of the results and, finally, inference and interpretation.

Pre-analysis consisted of organizing the material collected, which was carried out in an intuitive manner but aimed to systematize the initial ideas. In this first stage of content analysis, it is important that the researcher undertake a free-floating reading ( Bardin, 2007 ) of all the material collected in the field. Thus, following the author’s recommendations, the transcripts of the interviews and the reflective reports were read. Next, the passages most relevant to this study’s aims were chosen from the interviews and written reflections to make up the body of material necessary for the researchers to obtain a general overview of the data. In the study’s findings, spoken passages from the interviews are designated by the letter “I,” while passages from the reflective reports are designated with the letter “R.” The number following the letter identifies the student.

The second stage, again following Bardin’s (2007) recommendations, consisted of exploring the material in light of the researchers’ decision to focus on two categories considered relevant to demonstrating the implications of applying the PBL strategy with undergraduate management students. The analytical categories and subcategories were identified in this phase.

The final stage of content analysis involved the treatment and interpretation of the results. This stage consisted of codifying the corpus of the study through data processing, grouping it into units (categories and subcategories) in a way that made it possible to represent the content of the corpus of analysis.

Finally, Bardin (2007) emphasizes that when the analyst finds significant results, he or she can make inferences and advance interpretations with regard to the objectives established or to other unexpected discoveries. The results of the analysis are presented in the next sections.

4. Structuring PBL as an active teaching strategy

Several modes of PBL are mentioned in the literature; however, in the context of the Center for Research and Practice in Management, it was decided that a form of PBL would be developed in which students interact with an entrepreneur or professional manager to make the process more realistic, leading students to experience professional practice through the use of theoretical concepts.

The strategy was implemented in the morning class with the participation of a small-business entrepreneur who sells gourmet sandwiches from a food truck, and the problem to be solved by the students was as follows: “How can public awareness of the company’s product be improved in the city of João Pessoa, Paraíba state?”

The students in the evening class worked on a problem presented by an executive of a private college in the capital of another northeastern state, located approximately 140 km from the university where the study was conducted. The executive presented two problems, and the groups of students chose to solve one of the two problems: “How does the college attract potential clients who ride public transportation to a campus that is located one kilometer from the closest bus stop on a steep slope?” or “Since the college’s current facility accommodates only 2,500 students and is surrounded by a six-kilometer radius of land traditionally used for public purposes, how can the institution plan for its intended future growth, given that legislation does not permit expansion or remodeling of the current building?”

The fact that the business that was to be the object of the PBL exercise was located in another state worried the teachers, as the students were far from the company; however, the students used Google Earth and other technology to take virtual tours of the site, examine the surrounding economic environment and gather information on buildings that might be leased by the business.

The proposed PBL process involves four stages, and its application occurs in four phases. The first consists of the definition of the problem by the teacher/tutor and the choice of an entrepreneur/manager who will attend the first PBL class meeting to present the problem to the students. The second phase also occurs in the classroom and involves choosing the groups of students who will share the initial reflections following the manager’s presentation of the problem. The third phase occurs outside the classroom and involves a process of research to gather academic and non-academic information that will aid the groups in solving the problem. The fourth and final phase involves shared understanding and occurs during the second PBL class meeting when the solutions to the problem are presented, with the participation of the manager. Figure 1 shows the stages of PBL in the context of the Center for Research and Practice in Management.

Each stage is described below for the purpose of sharing the process and helping disseminate the active teaching strategy in the context of management education, as most studies of PBL do not describe its implementation in detail.

4.1 First stage: definition of the problem

Considering the PBL approach chosen for the course, after the entrepreneur/company manager is chosen, the teacher/tutor should discuss the problem to be presented to the students with him or her. The initial conversation should explain the strategy and request the entrepreneur/manager’s cooperation because it is hoped that the results of the PBL exercise will also benefit companies in the area. The planning stage also requires the teacher/tutor to prepare informative material for the students, especially in programs and courses where the strategy is not yet well known.

During this stage, the entrepreneur/manager presents a real problem that requires a solution and is able to generate a productive discussion. The problem should be objective and specific and, in the case of the course in which this PBL was implemented, can involve topics related to any area of the organization, as the students are enrolled in the final year of the undergraduate management program.

It is recommended that in describing the problem, the entrepreneur/manager contextualize the company, the sector in which it operates and its products and/or services or other points considered relevant, culminating with the presentation of the problem.

4.2 Second stage: initial diagnosis

The initial diagnosis occurs during the first PBL class meeting and should be carried out after the student groups are formed and the discussion leader and secretary of each group have been chosen. The discussion leader’s role is to facilitate the process of solving the problem posed by the entrepreneur/manager and to act as the group leader. The secretary’s role is to organize the information and take notes on the discussion. It is also the secretary’s job to organize the final PBL report with the support of the group.

At this stage, discussion of the problem posed by the entrepreneur/manager begins. At this time, the students are expected to begin the search for information through casual conversation, and it is believed that the active and reflective attitude of the group with respect to the problem posed by the entrepreneur/manager will be crucial to the search for a solution to the problem. In this stage, the teacher/tutor can also help the class by posing reflective questions to the entrepreneur/manager and to the students.

4.3 Third stage: research

The process of conducting research to solve the problem is one of the most important steps in PBL. This stage is usually conducted by groups outside of the classroom and consists of a more detailed analysis of the problem posed by the entrepreneur/manager.

At this stage, the groups of students should connect theory to practice, drawing on academic sources (books and journals) to help them understand the problem. They should also seek information in the business community that can help the group make decisions. If the entrepreneur/manager is amenable to the idea, a visit to the company may be organized, or information can be exchanged using technological resources (telephone, e-mail, text messaging, Facebook and Instagram).

Description of the problem.

Definition of the problem’s causes and hypotheses to help understand the problem’s causes.

Definition of a plan to solve the problem (a number of techniques can be used for the definition of the plan, such as the 5W2H or CANVAS method).

Reflections of the group about the proposed solutions. In this section, the group can mention the difficulties encountered in the course of solving the problem. The reflection should discuss the factors that facilitated and hindered the group activity and answer the question “What did the group members learn from the activity?”

4.4 Fourth stage: shared understanding

The stage of shared understanding occurs in the second PBL class meeting in the classroom, and it includes the participation of the entrepreneur/manager who presented the problem in the first stage. Each group presents its report to reflect on the solutions proposed, with the participation of the business representative, which makes it possible to consider the connections between theory and practice, reflection and action.

Although the groups may present different solutions, the exchange of experiences through the discussions can help them reflect on the implications of decision making in managerial activity.

The teacher/tutor is responsible for coordinating the session and can contribute with questions and comments to the groups about their proposed solutions.

5. Implications of PBL for student learning in a management program

To identify the implications of PBL for learning, six students from an undergraduate course in management, including both morning and evening classes, were interviewed. All the interviewees were male. At the time of the interview, all were in their final or penultimate semesters of the program. In addition to the interviews, the reflective reports written by students as the final project and described in the methods section were analyzed. The activity counted for two points in the third unit of the course. However, the teacher promised top marks to all who submitted the assignment, which would only be read after the conclusion of the course so that students would feel free to express their thoughts regarding the experience during the course, The Decision-Making Process and Managerial Development.

Analysis of the interviews revealed two categories that stood out as the most significant for presenting the implications of PBL in the learning of the students interviewed, which are presented in this section. They are integrating theory and practice and the factors that facilitated and limited learning through PBL. What stands out from analysis of the reports are students’ comments that the use of PBL in that course allowed them to bring together organizational practice with the theory learned not only in that course but also in previous courses.

5.1 Integration of theory with practice

It’s like this, it’s crucial because the problem is a practical one but it requires theory to be solved, so PBL provided a way to connect theory and practice, because we took that practice there and had to resort to theory, […]. (I2.9)

[…] through PBL, starting with the possible solutions and the challenges facing the businessman, we were able to reconcile it with the theory that we had been seeing in various classes over the course of the program, […]. (I3.9)

I liked the participation of company managers sharing what they experience in their organizations, bringing their problems to the classroom. From there, students try to understand the problems posed, figure out and analyze their causes […] The students act sort of like consultants, putting the wealth of knowledge into practice . (R1)

[…] I strongly believe that the debate about real-world problems experienced by managers of companies was the most productive activity, and also the one I most enjoyed getting involved with. Recounting experiences allows students to see all the theory they have been studying in the classroom applied to practice . (R6)

The link between theory and practice is still taboo for management programs at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. The use of an active learning approach such as PBL can help enhance student learning, as the students reported, based on the integration of theory with practice, that they are able to acquire or expand their ability to understand reality of the field and come up with innovative solutions to transform it.

Assessing their first six years of experience with the International Master’s Program in Practicing Management, Gosling and Mintzberg (2003) state that management classes should be taught in settings where students can reflect deeply on their experiences. Moreover, there is an obvious need for changes in the way students are currently trained, as noted by Vasconcelos et al. (2013) in their study of a Brazilian Business School. According to these authors, there is a transition underway, and the role of management today goes beyond the typical administrative duties such as planning, organization, leadership and control to enter the realms of influence, adaptation to different contexts and unpredictability.

[…] the main thing we learned is to try to think about how theory applies to a specific practice , because it’s like we talked a lot about in class, there’s theory and there’s practice, sometimes people make a distinction, “uh, it’s different and all”, but it’s not that theory is different from practice, it’s just that theory has to be adapted to different realities. So, with this activity that we just did […], it has its target audience, so we have to adapt the logic of marketing, for example, to that reality […]. (I4.1)

[…] it made several concepts we had studied more applicable, the PBL practice allowed us to make use of a lot that we had seen in several other classes […]. This was very valuable, not only for developing skills in problem solving, conflict management, etc. but also to understand some concepts that were taught in other classes, but before, without a real-life case or practical experience, just didn’t make the connections needed to consolidate the knowledge. (R14)

The fact that students highlighted the relationship between theory and practice corroborates the observation by Freitas (2012 , p. 407) that PBL “helps overcome the much-criticized separation between academic training and concrete reality, between theory and practice.” In a study by de Souza and Verdinelli (2014 , p. 45) that assessed the use of PBL, the students stated that “it is much better to learn by combining theory with practice.”

In their work, Escrivão Filho and Ribeiro (2008) claim that students learn how to learn collaboratively and autonomously by working on the problems presented in the PBL method. According to these authors, the main point is learning to solve the problems by researching management concepts.

An analysis of report R14 also confirms the opinion of Hmelo-Silver (2004) and Woods (2006) regarding PBL’s potential for developing conflict resolution and problem-solving skills, in addition to its potential for interdisciplinary learning ( Graaff and Kolmos, 2003 ).

[…] Yeah, there should be more of that during the entire program starting from the beginning, because we see lots of theory, a whole lot of theory, and sometimes forget to combine it with practice, and in my opinion, out of this whole program, I think this activity did the best job of giving us some practice , because we didn’t just watch the practice, we practically became part of the company to find the solution for it. (I1.9)

The application of theory to a problem , you know it’s real, you know that the person will take it to his company and possibly really apply it, that this will help, makes us more motivated to contribute. […] so this alignment between the theory that we see and practice that will really go to market , because it’s one thing for us to do a case study where we make suggestions and give opinions and know that it might help us in our learning but won’t be implemented because it’s a made-up study, but it’s a very different thing to know that you’re really helping a business, you’re affecting somebody’s business, and this could really help someone, that’s very rewarding. (I5.9)

During the program, we rarely had the experience of putting something into practice, of applying what we see in the classroom , I think PBL is all about this issue of reality, about the world out there and it is important to train a competitive, capable, competent professional […]. For me, theory turned out to be really applicable to practice when you get started, you see some concepts, you see how you can apply finance here, you see concepts of marketing where you have to keep some visual issues in mind, and such, you can do this, you can’t do that, you have concepts of logistics […] different courses come together there on the spot, and this is extremely important to a professional who’s being trained […]. (I6.9)

PBL put me into situations I had only heard about, just in theory, so thinking of a way to act in the face of a challenge to a real company, that helped me see and think differently about aspects that were covered, you know, it was really real, I experienced it and I kept wondering if I were that manager, what would I do, what’s the solution, is there a solution? […] I think that was the most reflective part of the course for me and the most engaging because it was real . (R30)

These findings corroborate the observations of several authors covered in the theoretical framework, such as Graaff and Kolmos (2003) , Hmelo-Silver (2004) , Savin-Baden and Major (2004) ; Woods (2006) ; Egido Gálvez et al. (2007) and Freitas (2012) , by indicating that problem-based teaching can situate the subject matter in meaningful contexts of action (or professional work), motivating students and cultivating in them a sense of responsibility for solving problems, managing conflicts and thinking in broader and more interdisciplinary terms. The study participants also cited the factors that facilitate and limit the use of the PBL strategy.

5.2 Factors that facilitate and limit learning in the adoption of PBL

The students were asked to describe the factors that facilitated and limited their learning through the use of the PBL strategy. The reports showed that the use of this strategy was viewed positively by the interviewees with regard to three facilitating factors: the practical aspect, the presence of an entrepreneur/manager and teamwork. The research conducted by de Souza and Verdinelli (2014) involving the application of questionnaires to 107 students who had participated in a PBL learning experience revealed that 77 percent of the respondents approved of the method, of whom 25 percent considered the method very effective and 52 percent considered it moderately effective.

What I think was most effective for me was the practical aspect, I always get very involved with what I learn through practice, so the fact that we were right there experiencing a real problem of a real person who was right there in front of us, we could talk with him, have him answer our questions, that we had the opportunity to visit the company that was having the problem, for me, that was one of the factors that helped me learn better. (I2.3)

I think because of my own learning style, it was the practical aspect, you know, the practice itself brought me more […] made me more, how can I say it, more interested in discussing it in more detail. In the case of PBL what I could […] it’s not something very theoretical, it’s more practical and I was more interested in participating. (I3.3)

“[…] I think the fact that the businessman came and provided a context for the company, a context for the whole problem , that got us involved with the company and with the issue, so I think that made it a lot easier for us to make suggestions to improve the problem. (I1.3)

[…] the first thing is to have the person present whose problem I’m solving, you know, listening and arguing back, or building on the face-to-face discussion […]. And so the fact that he’s there and he’s considering your ideas, that makes the learning happen […]. (I4.3)

It was the teamwork that made it a lot easier and also the presentation of the problem , how the problem was presented to us, the participation of the entrepreneur helped a lot during the reflection and the description of the problem. (I5.3)

Escrivão Filho and Ribeiro (2008) report that when they used PBL with engineering students, the students rotated their roles within the groups, acting alternately as group leader, secretary, spokesperson and participating member. Thus, they were able to experience realistic, though simulated, situations from professional life. The authors used two strategies to form the groups: during the first part of the course, the students were allowed free choice in forming their groups, which were based on friendship and affinity; however, during the second part of the course, they were encouraged to form groups that would achieve the best possible performance.

Yeah, I don’t know if the learning process, but the main difficulty with forming the groups is that not everyone participates, there are people who come just to criticize the others who are trying, but they don’t contribute anything, that’s the only thing […]. (I1.4)

I think in the case of PBL, I don’t think I had much difficulty. I was really interested in the case, I think the only difficulty was getting the team to agree on an idea, just because of this divergence of thought, but after we reached a consensus, everything went smoothly. (I3.4)

Teamwork was also identified as a challenging factor in a study on the use of PBL by Pinto et al. (2015) . The authors found that some groups had problems with leadership, as some members were resistant to respecting the established hierarchy, including the roles and responsibilities of each member, which overburdened the members who were more responsible and committed to the course.

Look, for me, the only difficulty I had was the issue of time , that I didn’t have much time to go visit the company, to get to know it in more depth, but just the fact that he came here made up a little for the problem I had . (I2.4)

Yeah! The time factor , as a student, to dedicate myself to this activity made it a little difficult, and the fact that I still haven’t gone to visit the company; Wagner presented the problem well, but to give more relevant suggestions, it would be better if we knew it in more depth, since I didn’t have time to go visit his business, my assessment was kind of superficial. (I5.4)

de Souza and Verdinelli (2014) also cited time as a limiting factor. According to these authors, students do not have sufficient time for PBL. The implementation of PBL by de Souza and Verdinelli (2014) had some features in common with this study, especially the implementation of the strategy at the end of the semester. One difference is that in the case of this study, the problem was presented by the entrepreneur/manager, while in their study, the problem was written up and presented to the students. The authors even suggest that PBL activity be implemented at the beginning of the semester. This suggestion was supported by the teachers who had been involved in implementing of the learning strategy, especially because the course had been one of the last ones in the program, and the students were involved with writing their final projects.

6. Final considerations

The use of PBL as an active teaching strategy demonstrates its potential for learning through the integration of students’ cognitive, behavioral and social dimensions, fostering closer integration with the context of professional activity.

The development of a framework for the dissemination of the PBL strategy reinforces the uniqueness and contribution of this paper as an innovative teaching strategy, as well as an opportunity to reflect on the implications of using PBL in the education of students in a management program.

The dissemination of student-centered learning strategies promotes interdisciplinary learning and the integration of theory and practice, as well as provides added motivation for learning and teamwork through practical experience with professional activity, which can make learning more meaningful. The results of this study confirm PBL’s contribution to the students who experienced it in the context of the Center for Research and Practice in Management.

The study’s results showed that teamwork is considered both a facilitating factor and a limiting factor. This indicates the complexity of student relationships in the educational context, which involves both behavioral and social aspects and should be taken into consideration by the teacher responsible for applying the strategy in the classroom. Factors such as passivity, lack of commitment from some group members and the difficulty of arriving at a consensus on the proposed solutions may hinder a group’s ability to solve the problem, and it is the duty of the teacher or tutor who sees evidence of these factors to suggest ways to minimize them.

In addition to teamwork, the time factor was identified as another challenge to learning. In a content-focused curriculum, in which the teacher is seen as the central figure and transmitter of knowledge, it is more difficult to introduce strategies that give the student an active role in learning. Moreover, the culture of self-directed learning is not yet incorporated into the behavior of many students in higher education. Thus, one of PBL’s contributions is to encourage the student to become familiar with a more experience-based learning process, through action, with emphasis on the development of a sense of self-directed development.

The use of active teaching strategies in management programs has increased in recent years; however, it is still in its infancy. Similarly, the use of the PBL strategy, especially as proposed in this work, with the presence of entrepreneurs/managers who bring real problems to the classroom, can contribute significantly to the promotion of learning and reflection among undergraduate management students. It is hoped that the presented structured process of implementing PBL in an undergraduate management program may help and motivate teachers to introduce this strategy to an ever greater number of students enrolled in higher education in Brazil.

An analysis of the results of this study reveals its potential contribution to management education in Brazil because it defines a framework for the implementation of PBL as an active learning strategy in a management program, it indicates the potential of PBL for the development of students’ competencies, it increases the potential for integrating theory with professional practice and it can aid the process of training teachers as they assess the implications of PBL for student learning.

Future studies can address themes related to PBL’s contribution to the development of professional skills and its relationship to interdisciplinary learning and students’ academic performance.

Learning cycle proposed for PBL

Description of the types of PBL

Source: Prepared by the authors based on Woods (2006)

Araújo , U.F. and Sastre , G. ( 2009 ), Aprendizagem Baseada em Problemas No Ensino Superior , Summus Editorial , São Paulo .

Bardin , L. ( 2007 ), Análise de Conteúdo , 5th ed. , Edições 70 , Lisboa .

Borges , M.C. , Chachá , S.G.F. , Quintana , S.M. , Freitas , L.C.C. and Rodrigues , M.L.V. ( 2014 ), “ Aprendizado baseado em problemas ”, Medicina (Ribeirão Preto) , Vol. 47 No. 3 , pp. 301 - 307 .

Borochovicius , E. and Tortella , J.C.B. ( 2014 ), “ Aprendizagem baseada em problemas: um método de ensino-aprendizagem e suas práticas educativas ”, Revista Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação , Vol. 22 No. 83 , pp. 263 - 294 .

Cousin , G. ( 2009 ), Research Learning in Higher Education: An Introduction to Contemporary Methods and Approaches , Routledge , New York, NY .

de Souza , N.R. and Verdinelli , M.A. ( 2014 ), “ Aprendizagem ativa em administração: Um estudo da aprendizagem baseada em problemas (PBL) na graduação ”, Revista Pretexto , Vol. 15 , pp. 29 - 47 , available at: www.fumec.br/revistas/pretexto/article/view/1496/pdf_9

Freitas , R.A.M. ( 2012 ), “ Ensino por problemas: uma abordagem para o desenvolvimento do aluno ”, Educação e Pesquisa , Vol. 38 No. 2 , pp. 403 - 418 , available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1517-97022011005000011

Gálvez , I.E. , Redruelo , R.A. , Martín , R.C. , Gascón , A.de.la.H. , Badesa , S.de.M. , García , M.G. , Hernández-Castilla , R. , Gasset , D.I. , Torrecilla , F.J.M. , Serrano , M.P. and Izquierdo , R.M.R. ( 2007 ), “ El aprendizaje basado en problemas como innovación docente en la universidad: posibilidades y limitaciones ”, Educación y futuro , Vol. 16 , pp. 85 - 100 .

Escrivão Filho , E. and Ribeiro , L.R.C. ( 2008 ), “ Inovando no ensino de administração: uma experiência com a aprendizagem baseada em problemas (PBL) ”, Cadernos EBAPE.BR , Vol. 6 , pp. 1 - 9 , available at: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/ojs/index.php/cadernosebape/article/view/5431/4165

Gosling , J. and Mintzberg , H. ( 2003 ), “ The five minds of a manager ”, Harvard Business Review , Vol. 81 No. 11 , pp. 54 - 63 .

Gwee , M.C. ( 2009 ), “ Problem-based learning: a strategic learning system design for the education of healthcare professionals in the 21st century ”, Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences , Vol. 25 No. 5 , pp. 231 - 239 .

Graaff , E. and Kolmos , A. ( 2003 ), “ Characteristics of problem-based learning ”, International Journal of Engineering , Vol. 19 No. 5 , pp. 657 - 662 .

Hmelo-Silver , C.E. ( 2004 ), “ Problem-based learning: what and how students learn? ”, Educational Psychology Review , Vol. 16 No. 3 , pp. 235 - 266 .

Hotchkiss , C. ( 2002 ), “ Web site creation as an active learning strategy in business law classes ”, Journal of Legal Studies Education , Vol. 20 No. 2 , pp. 235 - 247 .

Iochida , L.C. ( 2001 ), Aprendizado Baseado em Problemas (PBL Website) , Centro de Desenvolvimento do Ensino Superior em Saúde – CEDESS. Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Escola Paulista de Medicina , São Paulo , available at: www.unifesp.br/centros/cedess/PBL/ (accessed April 4, 2016 ).

Macdonald , R. ( 2005 ), “ Assessment strategies for enquiry and problem-based learning ”, in Barrett , T. , Mac Labhrainn , I. and Fallon , H. (Eds), Handbook of Enquiry & Problem Based Learning , CELT , Galway , pp. 85 - 93 .

Macdonald , R. and Savin-Baden , M.A. ( 2004 ), A Briefing on Assessment in Problem-Based Learning , LTSN Generic Centre , Series No. 13 , Heslington York .

Mamede , S. ( 2001 ), Aprendizagem Baseada em Problemas: Anatomia de uma nova abordagem educacional , Hucitec , São Paulo .

Mennin , S. , Gordan , P. , Majoor , G. and Osman , H.A.S. ( 2003 ), “ Position paper on problem-based learning ”, Education for Health: Change in Learning & Practice Vol. 16 No. 1 , pp. 98 - 113 .

Merriam , S.B. ( 2009 ), Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Interpretation , Jossey-Bass , San Francisco, CA .

Moon , J.A. ( 2004 ), A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning: Theory and Practice , Routledge , Falmer .

Moust , J.H.C. , Van Berkel , H.J.M. and Schmidt , H.G. ( 2005 ), “ Signs of erosion: reflections on three decades of problem-based learning at Maastricht University ”, Higher Education Vol. 50 , pp. 665 - 683 .

Pinto , C.P. , Scheidegger , A.P.G. , Gaudêncio , J.H.D. and Turrioni , J.B. ( 2015 ), “ Planejamento, condução e análise do método de avaliação de uma disciplina do curso de engenharia de produção fundamentada na aprendizagem baseada em problemas ”, Revista Produção , Vol. 15 No. 2 , pp. 671 - 695 .

Sakai , M.H. and Lima , G.Z. ( 1996 ), “ PBL: uma visão geral do método ”, Olho Mágico, Londrina , Vol. 2 Nos 5/6 , pp. 24 - 30 .

San Tan , S. and Frank Ng , C.K. ( 2006 ), A Problem-Based Learning Approach to Entrepreneurship Education , Republic Polytechnik , Singapore .

Savin-Baden , M. and Major , C.H. ( 2004 ), Foundations of Problem-based Learning , Open University Press – Mc-Graw Hill Education , New York, NY .

Schimidt , H.G. ( 2001 ), “ As bases cognitivas da aprendizagem baseada em problemas ”, in Mamede, S. and Penaforte, J. (Eds), Aprendizagem Baseada em Problemas: anatomia de uma abordagem educacional , Hucitec , Fortaleza , pp. 81 - 109 .

Silva , A.B. ( 2016 ), “ Action learning: lecturers, learners, and managers at the center of management education ”, in Lepeley , M.T. , Von Kimakovitz , V. and Bardy , R. (Eds), Human Centered Management in Executive Education: Global Imperatives, Innovation and New Directions Vol. 1 , 1st ed. , Palgrave Macmillan , London , pp. 126 - 139 .

Silva , M.D.S. and Santos , G.T. ( 2015 ), “ Relato das experiências vivenciadas no ambiente de aprendizagem projetado no observatório de pesquisa e prática em administração – OPPA ”, Anais V Encontro de Ensino e Pesquisa em Administração e Contabilidade da Anpad, Salvador, November, pp. 1-17 .

Vasconcelos , K.C.A. , Silva Junior , A. and Silva , P.O.M. ( 2013 ), “ Educação gerencial para atuação em ambientes de negócios sustentáveis: desafios e tendências de uma escola de negócios brasileira ”, Revista de Administração Mackenzie , Vol. 14 No. 4 , pp. 45 - 75 .

Woods , D.R. ( 2006 ), Preparing for PBL , 3rd ed. , McMaster University , Hamilton .

Further reading

Wudinger , S.D. and Carlson , J.A. ( 2010 ), Teaching Form Experiential Learning: Five Approaches That Work , Rowman & Littlefield Publishers , Lanham , MD .

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) for financial support for the implementation of this study.

Corresponding author

Related articles, we’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

• Course Design

Problem-Based Learning: Six Steps to Design, Implement, and Assess

• November 30, 2015
• Vincent R. Genareo PhD and Renee Lyons

T wenty-first century skills necessitate the implementation of instruction that allows students to apply course content, take ownership of their learning, use technology meaningfully, and collaborate. Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is one pedagogical approach that might fit in your teaching toolbox.

PBL is a student-centered, inquiry-based instructional model in which learners engage with an authentic, ill-structured problem that requires further research (Jonassen & Hung, 2008). Students identify gaps in their knowledge, conduct research, and apply their learning to develop solutions and present their findings (Barrows, 1996). Through collaboration and inquiry, students can cultivate problem solving (Norman & Schmidt, 1992), metacognitive skills (Gijbels et al., 2005), engagement in learning (Dochy et al., 2003), and intrinsic motivation. Despite PBL’s potential benefits, many instructors lack the confidence or knowledge to utilize it (Ertmer & Simons, 2006; Onyon, 2005). By breaking down the PBL cycle into six steps, you can begin to design, implement, and assess PBL in your own courses.

Step One: Identify Outcomes/Assessments

PBL fits best with process-oriented course outcomes such as collaboration, research, and problem solving. It can help students acquire content or conceptual knowledge, or develop disciplinary habits such as writing or communication. After determining whether your course has learning outcomes that fit with PBL, you will develop formative and summative assessments to measure student learning. Group contracts, self/peer-evaluation forms, learning reflections, writing samples, and rubrics are potential PBL assessments.

Step Two: Design the Scenario

Next you design the PBL scenario with an embedded problem that will emerge through student brainstorming. Think of a real, complex issue related to your course content. It’s seldom difficult to identify lots of problems in our fields; the key is writing a scenario for our students that will elicit the types of thinking, discussion, research, and learning that need to take place to meet the learning outcomes. Scenarios should be motivating, interesting, and generate good discussion. Check out the websites below for examples of PBL problems and scenarios.

Problem-Based Learning at University of Delaware

Problem-Based Learning in Biology

Science PBL

Step Three: Introduce PBL

If PBL is new to your students, you can practice with an “easy problem,” such as a scenario about long lines in the dining hall. After grouping students and allowing time to engage in an abbreviated version of PBL, introduce the assignment expectations, rubrics, and timelines. Then let groups read through the scenario(s). You might develop a single scenario and let each group tackle it in their own way, or you could design multiple scenarios addressing a unique problem for each group to discuss and research.

Step Four: Research

PBL research begins with small-group brainstorming sessions where students define the problem and determine what they know about the problem (background knowledge), what they need to learn more about (topics to research), and where they need to look to find data (databases, interviews, etc.). Groups should write the problem as a statement or research question. They will likely need assistance. Think about your own research: without good research questions, the process can be unguided or far too specific. Students should decide upon group roles and assign responsibility for researching topics necessary for them to fully understand their problems. Students then develop an initial hypothesis to “test” as they research a solution. Remember: research questions and hypotheses can change after students find information disconfirming their initial beliefs.

Step Five: Product Performance

After researching, the students create products and presentations that synthesize their research, solutions, and learning. The format of the summative assessment is completely up to you. We treat this step like a research fair. Students find resources to develop background knowledge that informs their understanding, and then they collaboratively present their findings, including one or more viable solutions, as research posters to the class.

Step Six: Assessment

During the PBL assessment step, evaluate the groups’ products and performances. Use rubrics to determine whether students have clearly communicated the problem, background, research methods, solutions (feasible and research-based), and resources, and to decide whether all group members participated meaningfully. You should consider having your students fill out reflections about their learning (including what they’ve learned about the content and the research process) every day, and at the conclusion of the process.

Although we presented PBL as steps, it really functions cyclically. For example, you might teach an economics course and develop a scenario about crowded campus sidewalks. After the groups have read the scenario, they develop initial hypotheses about why the sidewalks are crowded and how to solve the problem. If one group believes they are crowded because they are too narrow and the solution is widening the sidewalks, their subsequent research on the economic and environmental impacts might inform them that sidewalk widening isn’t feasible. They should jump back to step four, discuss another hypothesis, and begin a different research path.

This type of process-oriented, self-directed, and collaborative pedagogical strategy can prepare our students for successful post-undergraduate careers. Is it time to put PBL to work in your courses?

References Barrows, H.S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. In L. Wilkerson, & W. H. Gijselaers (Eds.), New directions for teaching and learning, No.68 (pp. 3-11). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis. Learning and instruction, 13(5), 533-568.

Ertmer, P. A., & Simons, K. D. (2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K–12 teachers. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1(1), 5.

Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research, 75(1), 27-61.

Jonassen, D. H., & Hung, W. (2008). All problems are not equal: Implications for problem-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 2(2), 4.

Norman, G. R., & Schmidt, H. G. (1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 67(9), 557-565.

Onyon, C. (2012). Problem-based learning: A review of the educational and psychological theory. The Clinical Teacher, 9(1), 22-26.

Vincent R. Genareo is a postdoctoral research associate at Iowa State University, Research Institute for Studies of Education (RISE). Renee Lyons is a PhD candidate at Clemson University, Department of Education.

Stay Updated with Faculty Focus!

Get exclusive access to programs, reports, podcast episodes, articles, and more!

• Opens in a new tab

Welcome Back

Username or Email

Remember Me

Already a subscriber? log in here.

Problem-Based Learning (PBL)

What is Problem-Based Learning (PBL)? PBL is a student-centered approach to learning that involves groups of students working to solve a real-world problem, quite different from the direct teaching method of a teacher presenting facts and concepts about a specific subject to a classroom of students. Through PBL, students not only strengthen their teamwork, communication, and research skills, but they also sharpen their critical thinking and problem-solving abilities essential for life-long learning.

See also: Just-in-Time Teaching

In implementing PBL, the teaching role shifts from that of the more traditional model that follows a linear, sequential pattern where the teacher presents relevant material, informs the class what needs to be done, and provides details and information for students to apply their knowledge to a given problem. With PBL, the teacher acts as a facilitator; the learning is student-driven with the aim of solving the given problem (note: the problem is established at the onset of learning opposed to being presented last in the traditional model). Also, the assignments vary in length from relatively short to an entire semester with daily instructional time structured for group work.

By working with PBL, students will:

• Become engaged with open-ended situations that assimilate the world of work
• Participate in groups to pinpoint what is known/ not known and the methods of finding information to help solve the given problem.
• Investigate a problem; through critical thinking and problem solving, brainstorm a list of unique solutions.
• Analyze the situation to see if the real problem is framed or if there are other problems that need to be solved.

How to Begin PBL

• Establish the learning outcomes (i.e., what is it that you want your students to really learn and to be able to do after completing the learning project).
• Find a real-world problem that is relevant to the students; often the problems are ones that students may encounter in their own life or future career.
• Discuss pertinent rules for working in groups to maximize learning success.
• Practice group processes: listening, involving others, assessing their work/peers.
• Explore different roles for students to accomplish the work that needs to be done and/or to see the problem from various perspectives depending on the problem (e.g., for a problem about pollution, different roles may be a mayor, business owner, parent, child, neighboring city government officials, etc.).
• Determine how the project will be evaluated and assessed. Most likely, both self-assessment and peer-assessment will factor into the assignment grade.

Designing Classroom Instruction

See also: Inclusive Teaching Strategies

• Take the curriculum and divide it into various units. Decide on the types of problems that your students will solve. These will be your objectives.
• Determine the specific problems that most likely have several answers; consider student interest.
• Arrange appropriate resources available to students; utilize other teaching personnel to support students where needed (e.g., media specialists to orientate students to electronic references).
• Decide on presentation formats to communicate learning (e.g., individual paper, group PowerPoint, an online blog, etc.) and appropriate grading mechanisms (e.g., rubric).
• Decide how to incorporate group participation (e.g., what percent, possible peer evaluation, etc.).

How to Orchestrate a PBL Activity

• Explain Problem-Based Learning to students: its rationale, daily instruction, class expectations, grading.
• Serve as a model and resource to the PBL process; work in-tandem through the first problem
• Help students secure various resources when needed.
• Supply ample class time for collaborative group work.
• Give feedback to each group after they share via the established format; critique the solution in quality and thoroughness. Reinforce to the students that the prior thinking and reasoning process in addition to the solution are important as well.

Teacher’s Role in PBL

See also: Flipped teaching

As previously mentioned, the teacher determines a problem that is interesting, relevant, and novel for the students. It also must be multi-faceted enough to engage students in doing research and finding several solutions. The problems stem from the unit curriculum and reflect possible use in future work situations.

• Determine a problem aligned with the course and your students. The problem needs to be demanding enough that the students most likely cannot solve it on their own. It also needs to teach them new skills. When sharing the problem with students, state it in a narrative complete with pertinent background information without excessive information. Allow the students to find out more details as they work on the problem.
• Place students in groups, well-mixed in diversity and skill levels, to strengthen the groups. Help students work successfully. One way is to have the students take on various roles in the group process after they self-assess their strengths and weaknesses.
• Support the students with understanding the content on a deeper level and in ways to best orchestrate the various stages of the problem-solving process.

The Role of the Students

See also: ADDIE model

The students work collaboratively on all facets of the problem to determine the best possible solution.

• Analyze the problem and the issues it presents. Break the problem down into various parts. Continue to read, discuss, and think about the problem.
• Construct a list of what is known about the problem. What do your fellow students know about the problem? Do they have any experiences related to the problem? Discuss the contributions expected from the team members. What are their strengths and weaknesses? Follow the rules of brainstorming (i.e., accept all answers without passing judgment) to generate possible solutions for the problem.
• Get agreement from the team members regarding the problem statement.
• Put the problem statement in written form.
• Solicit feedback from the teacher.
• Be open to changing the written statement based on any new learning that is found or feedback provided.
• Generate a list of possible solutions. Include relevant thoughts, ideas, and educated guesses as well as causes and possible ways to solve it. Then rank the solutions and select the solution that your group is most likely to perceive as the best in terms of meeting success.
• Include what needs to be known and done to solve the identified problems.
• Prioritize the various action steps.
• Consider how the steps impact the possible solutions.
• See if the group is in agreement with the timeline; if not, decide how to reach agreement.
• What resources are available to help (e.g., textbooks, primary/secondary sources, Internet).
• Determine research assignments per team members.
• Establish due dates.
• Determine how your group will present the problem solution and also identify the audience. Usually, in PBL, each group presents their solutions via a team presentation either to the class of other students or to those who are related to the problem.
• Both the process and the results of the learning activity need to be covered. Include the following: problem statement, questions, data gathered, data analysis, reasons for the solution(s) and/or any recommendations reflective of the data analysis.
• A well-stated problem and conclusion.
• The process undertaken by the group in solving the problem, the various options discussed, and the resources used.
• Your solution’s supporting documents, guests, interviews and their purpose to be convincing to your audience.
• In addition, be prepared for any audience comments and questions. Determine who will respond and if your team doesn’t know the answer, admit this and be open to looking into the question at a later date.
• Reflective thinking and transfer of knowledge are important components of PBL. This helps the students be more cognizant of their own learning and teaches them how to ask appropriate questions to address problems that need to be solved. It is important to look at both the individual student and the group effort/delivery throughout the entire process. From here, you can better determine what was learned and how to improve. The students should be asked how they can apply what was learned to a different situation, to their own lives, and to other course projects.

See also: Kirkpatrick Model: Four Levels of Learning Evaluation

I am a professor of Educational Technology. I have worked at several elite universities. I hold a PhD degree from the University of Illinois and a master's degree from Purdue University.

Similar Posts

Definitions of educational technology.

Educational Technology What is educational technology? There are a variety of definitions of educational technology. What is instructional design and technology? The Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT): Educational technology is the study…

Anchored Instruction Model

While there have been many contributors to the paradigm of anchored instruction, John Bransford is considered the leader of this framework. Through the Cognition & Technology Group at Vanderbilt University, he facilitated the…

Gagne’s Nine Events of Instruction

Heralded as a pioneer in educational instruction, Robert M. Gagné revolutionized instructional design principles with his WW II-era systematic approach, often referred to as the Gagné Assumption. The general idea, which seems familiar…

How Can We Align Learning Objectives, Instructional Strategies, and Assessments?

What is course alignment When a course is being designed, it is important to ensure that ensure that these three components of your course are aligned. In order to align various components of…

Open Source Learning Management Systems (LMS)

Learning Management Systems (LMSs) are becoming a vital part of classrooms in the 21th Century. This is a list of open source learning management systems. By open source we mean that source code of…

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Together with Edward Gurst, David Krathwohl, Max Englehart and Walter Hill, psychologist Benjamin Bloom released Taxonomy of Educational Objectives in 1956. This framework would prove to be valuable to teachers and instructors everywhere…

Problem-Based Learning and Case-Based Learning

• Reference work entry
• First Online: 17 December 2022
• pp 1235–1253
• Cite this reference work entry

• Joerg Zumbach 5 &
• Claudia Prescher 6  

Part of the book series: Springer International Handbooks of Education ((SIHE))

1467 Accesses

Problem-based learning (PBL) is a learner-centered small-group learning approach that supports active learning. This chapter provides core definitions of PBL and other forms of case-based learning. To be precise, several aspects of designing PBL are described, such as problem design, process structure, small-group learning, tutoring, and others. Research and evaluation of PBL compared to traditional approaches are summarized mostly based on meta-analyses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Team-Based Learning

How novices use expert case libraries for problem solving.

Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2015). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: Definition, rationale and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34 (1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934336

Article   Google Scholar  

Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20 , 481–486.

Barrows, H. S. (1988). The tutorial process . Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.

Google Scholar  

Batdı, V. (2014a). A meta-analysis study comparing problem based learning with traditional instruction. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13 (51), 346–364. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.12812

Batdı, V. (2014b). The effects of a problem based learning approach on students’ attitude levels: A meta-analysis. Educational Research and Reviews, 9 (9), 272–276. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2014.1771

Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32 , 347–364.

Camp, G., van het Kaar, A., van der Molen, H., & Schmidt, H. (2014). PBL: Step by step . Department of Educational Development and Research, Maastricht University.

Colliver, J. A. (2000). Effectiveness of problem-based learning curricula: Research and theory. Academic Medicine, 75 (3), 259–266.

Deibl, I., Zumbach, J., Geiger, V., & Neuner, C. (2018). Constructive alignment in the field of educational psychology: Development and application of a questionnaire for assessing constructive alignment. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 17 (3), 293–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725718791050

Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13 , 533–568.

Dodds, A. E., Orsmond, R. H., & Elliott, S. L. (2001). Assessment in problem-based learning: The role of the tutor. Annals of the Academy of Medicine Singapore, 30 , 66–70.

Dolmans, D. H. J. M., & Schmidt, H. G. (2006). What do we know about cognitive and motivational effects of small group tutorials in problem-based learning? Advances in health sciences education, 11 (4), 321–336.

Dolmans, D. H. J. M., & Schmidt, H. G. (2010). The problem-based learning process. In H. van Berkel, A. Scherpbier, H. Hillen & C. van der Vleuten (Eds.), Lessons from problem-based Learning . : Oxford University Press. Retrieved 9 Dec. 2020, from https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199583447.001.0001/acprof-9780199583447-chapter-003 .

Galvao, T. F., Silva, M. T., Neiva, C. S., Ribeiro, L. M., & Pereira, M. G. (2014). Problem-based learning in pharmaceutical education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The scientific World Journal . https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/578382

Gao, X., Luo, S., Mu, D., Xiong, Y., Guanjian, L., & Wan, C. (2016). Effects of problem-based learning in paediatric education in China: A meta-analysis. Journal of Evidence Based Medicine, 9 (3), 136–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/jebm.12190

Gavgani, V. Z., Hazrati, H., & Ghojazadeh, M. (2015). The efficacy of digital case scenario versus paper case scenario on clinical reasoning in problem based learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Research and Development in Medical Education, 4 (1), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.15171/rdme.2015.003

Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of educational research, 75 (1), 27–61.

Gillies, R. M. (2007). Cooperative learning: Integrating theory and practice . Sage.

Book   Google Scholar  

Groves, M., Régo, P., & O‘Rourke, P. (2005). Tutoring in problem-based learning medical curricula: The influence of tutor background and style on effectiveness. BMC Medical Education, 5 (1), 1–7.

Hambrick, D. Z. (2019). Expertise. In R. Sternberg & J. Funke (Eds.), The psychology of human thought: An introduction (pp. 235–254). Heidelberg University Press.

Hemker, L., Prescher, C., & Narciss, S. (2017). Design and evaluation of a problem-based learning environment for teacher training. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 11 (2), 10. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/ijpbl/vol11/iss2/10/

Henry, C., & Foss, L. (2015). Case sensitive? A review of the literature on the use of case method in entrepreneurship research. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 21 (3), 389–409.

Hillen, H., Scherpbier, A., & Wijnen, W. (2010). History of problem-based learning in medical education. Retrieved 9 Dec. 2020, from https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199583447.001.0001/acprof-9780199583447-chapter-002 .

Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark. Educational Psychologist, 42 (2), 99–107.

Huang, B., Zheng, L., Li, C., Li, L., & Yu, H. (2013). Effectiveness of problem-based learning in Chinese Dental Education: A meta-analysis. Journal of Dental Education, 77 (3), 377–383. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.0022-0337.2013.77.3.tb05482.x

Hung, W. (2016). All PBL starts here: The problem. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10 (2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1604

Hung, W., & Amida, A. (2020). Problem-based learning in college science. In J. Mintzes & E. Walter (Eds.), Active learning in college science (pp. 325–340). Springer.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Johansen, M. L., Martenson, D. F., & Bircher, J. (1992). Students as tutors in problem-based learning: Does it. Medical Education, 26 , 163–165.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2004). Cooperation and the use of technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 785–812). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kassab, S., Abu-Hijleh, M. F., Al-Shboul, Q., & Hamdy, H. (2005). Student-led tutorials in problem-based learning: Educational outcomes and students’ perceptions. Medical Teacher, 27 (6), 521–526.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41 , 75–86.

Koh, G. C. (2016). Revisiting the ‘Essentials of problem-based learning’. Medical Education, 50 (6), 596–599.

Kolodner, J. L. (1993). Case-based reasoning . Morgan Kaufman.

Kolodner, J. L. (1997). Educational implications of analogy. American Psychologist, 52 (1), 57–66.

Kubiszyn, T., & Borich, G. (2007). Educational testing and measurement (8th ed.). Wiley.

McCaughan, K. (2013). Barrows’ integration of cognitive and clinical psychology in PBL tutor guidelines. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7 (1). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1318

Mende, S., Proske, A., & Narciss, S. (2021). Individual preparation for collaborative learning: Systematic review and synthesis. Educational Psychologist, 56 ( 1 ), 29–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1828086

Moust, J. (2010). The role of the tutor. In H. van Berkel, A. Scherpbier, H. Hillen & C. van der Vleuten (Eds.), Lessons from problem-based learning . : Oxford University Press. Retrieved 9 Dec. 2020, from https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199583447.001.0001/acprof-9780199583447-chapter-006

Mpofu, D. J. S., Das, M., Murdoch, J. C., & Lanphear, J. H. (1997). Effectiveness of problems used in problem-based learning. Medical education, 31 (5), 330–334.

Nendaz, M. R., & Tekian, A. (1999). Assessment in problem-based learning medical schools: A literature review. Teaching and learning in medicine, 11 (4), 232–243.

Sa, B., Ezenwaka, C., Singh, K., Vuma, S., & Majumder, A. (2019). Tutor assessment of PBL process: Does tutor variability affect objectivity and reliability? BMC Medical Education, 19 (1), 76.

Salari, M., Roozbehi, A., Zarafi, A., & Tarmazi, A. R. (2018). Pure PBL, Hybrid PBL and Lecturing: Which one is more effective in developing cognitive skills of undergraduate students in pediatric nursing course? BMC Medical Education, 18 (195). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1305-0

Sayyah, M., Shirbandi, K., Saki-Malehi, A., & Rahim, F. (2017). Use of a problem-based learning teaching model for undergraduate medical and nursing education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Advances in Medical Education and Practice , 691–700. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S143694

Schmidt, H. G. (1983). Problem-based learning: Rationale and description. Medical Education, 17 , 11–16.

Schmidt, H. G., & Bouhuijs, P. A. (1980). Onderwijs in taakgerichte groepen . Spectrum.

Schmidt, H. G., Loyens, S. M., Van Gog, T., & Paas, F. (2007). Problem-based learning is compatible with human cognitive architecture: Commentary on Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark. Educational Psychologist, 42 (2), 91–97.

Schmidt, H., & Moust, J. (2010). Designing problems. In H. van Berkel, A. Scherpbier, H. Hillen & C. van der Vleuten (Eds.), Lessons from problem-based learning . : Oxford University Press. Retrieved 11 Jan. 2021, from https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199583447.001.0001/acprof-9780199583447-chapter-005

Servant, V., & Schmidt, H. G. (2016). Revisiting ‘Foundations of problem-based learning: Some explanatory notes’. Medical Education, 50 (7), 698–701.

Shyu, S. Y. (2001). How to turn the students into research masters by internet-online project learning and instructional innovation. Taiwan Education, 607 , 25–34.

Silverthorn, D. U. (2020). When active learning fails… and what to do about it. In J. Mintzes & E. Walter (Eds.), Active learning in college science (pp. 985–1001). Springer.

Sockalingam, N., Rotgans, J., & Schmidt, H. G. (2011). Student and tutor perceptions on attributes of effective problems in problem-based learning. Higher Education, 62 (1), 1–16.

Strobel, J., & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A Meta-synthesis of Meta-analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 3 (1), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1676

ten Cate, O., & Durning, S. J. (2018). Understanding clinical reasoning from multiple perspectives: A conceptual and theoretical overview. In O. ten Cate, E. Custers, & S. Durning (Eds.), Principles and practice of case-based clinical reasoning education. Innovation and change in professional education (pp. 35–46). Springer.

Teng, C. C., & Luo, Y. P. (2015). Effects of perceived social loafing, social interdependence, and group affective tone on students’ group learning performance. The Asia-pacific education researcher, 24 (1), 259–269.

University of York (n.d.). York Law School. Guide to Problem-Based Learning. Retrieved 24 Feb. 2021 from https://www.york.ac.uk/media/law/documents/pbl_guide.pdf

van Berkel, H., Scherpbier, A., Hillen, H., & van der Vleuten, C. (Eds.). (2010). Lessons from problem-based learning . Oxford University Press.

Van Til, C., & van der Heijden, F. (2009). PBL study skills. An overview . Department of Educational Development and Research, Maastricht University.

Verheggen, M., & Snellen-Balendong, H. (2010). Designing a problem-based learning medical curriculum. In H. van Berkel, A. Scherpbier, H. Hillen & C. van der Vleuten (Eds .), Lessons from problem-based learning . : Oxford University Press. Retrieved 9 Dec. 2020, from https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199583447.001.0001/acprof-9780199583447-chapter-004 .

Walker, A., & Leary, H. (2009). A problem based learning meta analysis: Differences across problem types, implementation types, disciplines, and assessment levels. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3 (1). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1061

Wong, Y. J. (2003). Harnessing the potential of problem-based learning in legal education. The Law Teacher, 37 (2), 157–173.

Wood, D. F. (2003). Problem based learning. BMJ, 326 (7384), 328–330.

Yoon, B. Y., Choi, I., Choi, S., Kim, T.-H., Roh, H., Rhee, B. D., & Lee, J. T. (2016). Using standardized patients versus video cases for representing clinical problems in problem-based learning. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 28 (2), 169–178.

Zhang, S., Xu, J., Wang, H., Zhang, D., Zhang, Q., & Zou, L. (2018). Effects of problem-based learning in Chinese radiology education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine., 97 (9). https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000010069

Zumbach, J. (2003). Problembasiertes Lernen . Waxmann.

Zumbach, J., & Spraul, P. (2007). The role of expert and novice tutors in computer mediated and face-to-face problem-based learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2 (2), 161–187.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Educational Research, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria

Joerg Zumbach

Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany

Claudia Prescher

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joerg Zumbach .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Bonita Springs, FL, USA

Douglas A. Bernstein

School of Science - Faculty of Psychology, Psychology of Learning and Instruction, Technische Universitaet Dresden, Dresden, Sachsen, Germany

Susanne Narciss

Department of Human, Philosophical and Educational Sciences (DISUFF), University of Salerno, Fisciano, Italy

Giuseppina Marsico

Section Editor information

University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria

Chair of Psychology of Learning and Instruction, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Deutschland

Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA

Department of Human, Philosophic, and Education Sciences, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Zumbach, J., Prescher, C. (2023). Problem-Based Learning and Case-Based Learning. In: Zumbach, J., Bernstein, D.A., Narciss, S., Marsico, G. (eds) International Handbook of Psychology Learning and Teaching. Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28745-0_58

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28745-0_58

Published : 17 December 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-28744-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-28745-0

eBook Packages : Education Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Education

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Illinois Online
• Illinois Remote

• TA Resources
• Teaching Consultation
• Teaching Portfolio Program
• Grad Academy for College Teaching
• Faculty Events
• The Art of Teaching
• 2022 Illinois Summer Teaching Institute
• Large Classes
• Leading Discussions
• Laboratory Classes
• Lecture-Based Classes
• Planning a Class Session
• Questioning Strategies
• Classroom Assessment Techniques (CATs)
• Problem-Based Learning (PBL)
• The Case Method
• Community-Based Learning: Service Learning
• Group Learning
• Just-in-Time Teaching
• Creating a Syllabus
• Motivating Students
• Dealing With Cheating
• Discouraging & Detecting Plagiarism
• Diversity & Creating an Inclusive Classroom
• Harassment & Discrimination
• Professional Conduct
• Foundations of Good Teaching
• Student Engagement
• Assessment Strategies
• Course Design
• Student Resources
• Teaching Tips
• Graduate Teacher Certificate
• Certificate in Foundations of Teaching
• Teacher Scholar Certificate
• Certificate in Technology-Enhanced Teaching
• Master Course in Online Teaching (MCOT)
• 2022 Celebration of College Teaching
• 2023 Celebration of College Teaching
• Hybrid Teaching and Learning Certificate
• 2024 Celebration of College Teaching
• Classroom Observation Etiquette
• Teaching Philosophy Statement
• Pedagogical Literature Review
• Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
• Instructor Stories
• Podcast: Teach Talk Listen Learn
• Universal Design for Learning

Sign-Up to receive Teaching and Learning news and events

Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is a teaching method in which complex real-world problems are used as the vehicle to promote student learning of concepts and principles as opposed to direct presentation of facts and concepts. In addition to course content, PBL can promote the development of critical thinking skills, problem-solving abilities, and communication skills. It can also provide opportunities for working in groups, finding and evaluating research materials, and life-long learning (Duch et al, 2001).

PBL can be incorporated into any learning situation. In the strictest definition of PBL, the approach is used over the entire semester as the primary method of teaching. However, broader definitions and uses range from including PBL in lab and design classes, to using it simply to start a single discussion. PBL can also be used to create assessment items. The main thread connecting these various uses is the real-world problem.

Any subject area can be adapted to PBL with a little creativity. While the core problems will vary among disciplines, there are some characteristics of good PBL problems that transcend fields (Duch, Groh, and Allen, 2001):

• The problem must motivate students to seek out a deeper understanding of concepts.
• The problem should require students to make reasoned decisions and to defend them.
• The problem should incorporate the content objectives in such a way as to connect it to previous courses/knowledge.
• If used for a group project, the problem needs a level of complexity to ensure that the students must work together to solve it.
• If used for a multistage project, the initial steps of the problem should be open-ended and engaging to draw students into the problem.

The problems can come from a variety of sources: newspapers, magazines, journals, books, textbooks, and television/ movies. Some are in such form that they can be used with little editing; however, others need to be rewritten to be of use. The following guidelines from The Power of Problem-Based Learning (Duch et al, 2001) are written for creating PBL problems for a class centered around the method; however, the general ideas can be applied in simpler uses of PBL:

• Choose a central idea, concept, or principle that is always taught in a given course, and then think of a typical end-of-chapter problem, assignment, or homework that is usually assigned to students to help them learn that concept. List the learning objectives that students should meet when they work through the problem.
• Think of a real-world context for the concept under consideration. Develop a storytelling aspect to an end-of-chapter problem, or research an actual case that can be adapted, adding some motivation for students to solve the problem. More complex problems will challenge students to go beyond simple plug-and-chug to solve it. Look at magazines, newspapers, and articles for ideas on the story line. Some PBL practitioners talk to professionals in the field, searching for ideas of realistic applications of the concept being taught.
• What will the first page (or stage) look like? What open-ended questions can be asked? What learning issues will be identified?
• How will the problem be structured?
• How long will the problem be? How many class periods will it take to complete?
• Will students be given information in subsequent pages (or stages) as they work through the problem?
• What resources will the students need?
• What end product will the students produce at the completion of the problem?
• Write a teacher's guide detailing the instructional plans on using the problem in the course. If the course is a medium- to large-size class, a combination of mini-lectures, whole-class discussions, and small group work with regular reporting may be necessary. The teacher's guide can indicate plans or options for cycling through the pages of the problem interspersing the various modes of learning.
• The final step is to identify key resources for students. Students need to learn to identify and utilize learning resources on their own, but it can be helpful if the instructor indicates a few good sources to get them started. Many students will want to limit their research to the Internet, so it will be important to guide them toward the library as well.

The method for distributing a PBL problem falls under three closely related teaching techniques: case studies, role-plays, and simulations. Case studies are presented to students in written form. Role-plays have students improvise scenes based on character descriptions given. Today, simulations often involve computer-based programs. Regardless of which technique is used, the heart of the method remains the same: the real-world problem.

Where can I learn more?

• PBL through the Institute for Transforming Undergraduate Education at the University of Delaware
• Duch, B. J., Groh, S. E, & Allen, D. E. (Eds.). (2001). The power of problem-based learning . Sterling, VA: Stylus.
• Grasha, A. F. (1996). Teaching with style: A practical guide to enhancing learning by understanding teaching and learning styles. Pittsburgh: Alliance Publishers.

Center for Innovation in Teaching & Learning

249 Armory Building 505 East Armory Avenue Champaign, IL 61820

217 333-1462

Email: [email protected]

Office of the Provost

Center for Teaching Innovation

Resource library.

• Establishing Community Agreements and Classroom Norms
• Sample group work rubric
• Problem-Based Learning Clearinghouse of Activities, University of Delaware

Problem-Based Learning

Problem-based learning  (PBL) is a student-centered approach in which students learn about a subject by working in groups to solve an open-ended problem. This problem is what drives the motivation and the learning. 

Why Use Problem-Based Learning?

Nilson (2010) lists the following learning outcomes that are associated with PBL. A well-designed PBL project provides students with the opportunity to develop skills related to:

• Working in teams.
• Managing projects and holding leadership roles.
• Oral and written communication.
• Self-awareness and evaluation of group processes.
• Working independently.
• Critical thinking and analysis.
• Explaining concepts.
• Self-directed learning.
• Applying course content to real-world examples.
• Researching and information literacy.
• Problem solving across disciplines.

Considerations for Using Problem-Based Learning

Rather than teaching relevant material and subsequently having students apply the knowledge to solve problems, the problem is presented first. PBL assignments can be short, or they can be more involved and take a whole semester. PBL is often group-oriented, so it is beneficial to set aside classroom time to prepare students to   work in groups  and to allow them to engage in their PBL project.

Students generally must:

• Examine and define the problem.
• Explore what they already know about underlying issues related to it.
• Determine what they need to learn and where they can acquire the information and tools necessary to solve the problem.
• Evaluate possible ways to solve the problem.
• Solve the problem.
• Report on their findings.

Getting Started with Problem-Based Learning

• Articulate the learning outcomes of the project. What do you want students to know or be able to do as a result of participating in the assignment?
• Create the problem. Ideally, this will be a real-world situation that resembles something students may encounter in their future careers or lives. Cases are often the basis of PBL activities. Previously developed PBL activities can be found online through the University of Delaware’s PBL Clearinghouse of Activities .
• Establish ground rules at the beginning to prepare students to work effectively in groups.
• Introduce students to group processes and do some warm up exercises to allow them to practice assessing both their own work and that of their peers.
• Consider having students take on different roles or divide up the work up amongst themselves. Alternatively, the project might require students to assume various perspectives, such as those of government officials, local business owners, etc.
• Establish how you will evaluate and assess the assignment. Consider making the self and peer assessments a part of the assignment grade.

Nilson, L. B. (2010).  Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors  (2nd ed.).  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Definitions and Distinctions

John R. Savery

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published in the Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning .

Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions.  Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning , 1 (1), 9–20. Retrieved from  http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/ijpbl/

Introduction

When asked to provide an overview of problem-based learning for the introductory issue of this journal, I readily agreed, thinking it was a wonderful opportunity to write about a subject I care about deeply. As I began to jot down ideas about “What is PBL?” it became clear that I had a problem. Some of what I knew about PBL was learned through teaching and practicing PBL, but so much more had been acquired by reading the many papers authored by experts with decades of experience conducting research and practicing problem-based learning. These authors had frequently begun their papers with a context-setting discussion of “What is PBL?” What more was there to say?

Origins of PBL

In discussing the origins of PBL, Boud and Feletti (1997) stated:

PBL as it is generally known today evolved from innovative health sciences curricula introduced in North America over 30 years ago. Medical education, with its intensive pattern of basic science lectures followed by an equally exhaustive clinical teaching programme, was rapidly becoming an ineffective and inhumane way to prepare students, given the explosion in medical information and new technology and the rapidly changing demands of future practice. Medical faculty at McMaster University in Canada introduced the tutorial process, not only as a specific instructional method (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980) but also as central to their philosophy for structuring an entire curriculum promoting student-centered, multidisciplinary education, and lifelong learning in professional practice. (p. 2)

Barrows (1994; 1996) recognized that the process of patient diagnosis (doctors’ work) relied on a combination of a hypothetical-deductive reasoning process and expert knowledge in multiple domains. Teaching discipline specific content (anatomy, neurology, pharmacology, psychology, etc.) separately, using a “traditional” lecture approach, did little to provide learners with a context for the content or for its clinical application. Further confounding this traditional approach was the rapidly changing knowledge base in science and medicine, which was driving changes in both theory and practice.

During the 1980s and 1990s the PBL approach was adopted in other medical schools and became an accepted instructional approach across North America and in Europe. There were some who questioned whether or not a physician trained using PBL was as well prepared for professional practice as a physician trained using traditional approaches. This was a fair question, and extensive research was conducted to answer it. A meta-analysis of 20 years of PBL evaluation studies was conducted by Albanese and Mitchell (1993), and also by Vernon and Blake (1993), and concluded that a problem-based approach to instruction was equal to traditional approaches in terms of conventional tests of knowledge (i.e., scores on medical board examinations), and that students who studied using PBL exhibited better clinical problem-solving skills. A smaller study of graduates of a physical therapy program that utilized PBL (Denton, Adams, Blatt, & Lorish, 2000) showed that graduates of the program performed equally well with PBL or traditional approaches but students reported a preference for the problem-centered approach. Anecdotal reports from PBL practitioners suggest that students are more engaged in learning the expected content (Torp & Sage, 2002).

However, a recent report on a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of PBL used in higher education programs for health professionals (Newman, 2003) stated that “existing overviews of the field do not provide high quality evidence with which to provide robust answers to questions about the effectiveness of PBL” (p. 5). Specifically this analysis of research studies attempted to compare PBL with traditional approaches to discover if PBL increased performance in adapting to and participating in change; dealing with problems and making reasoned decisions in unfamiliar situations; reasoning critically and creatively; adopting a more universal or holistic approach; practicing empathy, appreciating the other person’s point of view; collaborating productively in groups or teams; and identifying one’s own strengths and weaknesses and undertaking appropriate remediation (self-directed learning). A lack of well-designed studies posed a challenge to this research analysis, and an article on the same topic by Sanson-Fisher and Lynagh (2005) concluded that “Available evidence, although methodologically flawed, offers little support for the superiority of PBL over traditional curricula” (p. 260). This gap in the research on the short-term and long-term effectiveness of using a PBL approach with a range of learner populations definitely indicates a need for further study.

Despite this lack of evidence, the adoption of PBL has expanded into elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, universities, and professional schools (Torp & Sage, 2002). The University of Delaware (http://www.udel.edu/pbl/) has an active PBL program and conducts annual training institutes for instructors wanting to become tutors. Samford University in Birmingham, Alabama (http://www.samford.edu/pbl/) has incorporated PBL into various undergraduate programs within the Schools of Arts and Sciences, Business, Education, Nursing, and Pharmacy. The Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy (http://www.imsa.edu/center/) has been providing high school students with a complete PBL curriculum since 1985 and serves thousands of students and teachers as a center for research on problem-based learning. The Problem-based Learning Institute (PBLI) (http://www.pbli.org/) has developed curricular materials (i.e., problems) and teacher-training programs in PBL for all core disciplines in high school (Barrows & Kelson, 1993). PBL is used in multiple domains of medical education (dentists, nurses, paramedics, radiologists, etc.) and in content domains as diverse as MBA programs (Stinson & Milter, 1996), higher education (Bridges & Hallinger, 1996), chemical engineering (Woods, 1994), economics (Gijselaers, 1996), architecture (Kingsland, 1989), and pre-service teacher education (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). This list is by no means exhaustive, but is illustrative of the multiple contexts in which the PBL instructional approach is being utilized.

The widespread adoption of the PBL instructional approach by different disciplines, for different age levels, and in different content domains has produced some misapplications and misconceptions of PBL (Maudsley, 1999). Certain practices that are called PBL may fail to achieve the anticipated learning outcomes for a variety of reasons. Boud and Feletti (1997, p. 5) described several possible sources for the confusion:

• Confusing PBL as an approach to curriculum design with the teaching of problem-solving,
• Adoption of a PBL proposal without sufficient commitment of staff at all levels,
• Lack of research and development on the nature and type of problems to be used,
• Insufficient investment in the design, preparation and ongoing renewal of learning resources,
• Inappropriate assessment methods which do not match the learning outcomes sought in problem-based programs, and
• Evaluation strategies which do not focus on the key learning issues and which are implemented and acted upon far too late.

The possible sources of confusion listed above appear to hold a naïve view of the rigor required to teach with this learner-centered approach. In the next section I will discuss some of the essential characteristics and features of PBL.

Characteristics of PBL

PBL is an instructional (and curricular) learner-centered approach that empowers learners to conduct research, integrate theory and practice, and apply knowledge and skills to develop a viable solution to a defined problem. Critical to the success of the approach is the selection of ill-structured problems (often interdisciplinary) and a tutor who guides the learning process and conducts a thorough debriefing at the conclusion of the learning experience. Several authors have described the characteristics and features required for a successful PBL approach to instruction. The reader is encouraged to read the source documents, as brief quotes do not do justice to the level of detail provided by the authors. Boud and Feletti (1997) provided a list of the practices considered characteristic of the philosophy, strategies, and tactics of problem-based learning. Duch, Groh, and Allen (2001) described the methods used in PBL and the specific skills developed, including the ability to think critically, analyze and solve complex, real-world problems, to find, evaluate, and use appropriate learning resources; to work cooperatively, to demonstrate effective communication skills, and to use content knowledge and intellectual skills to become continual learners. Torp and Sage (2002) described PBL as focused, experiential learning organized around the investigation and resolution of messy, real-world problems. They describe students as engaged problem solvers, seeking to identify the root problem and the conditions needed for a good solution and in the process becoming self-directed learners. Hmelo-Silver (2004) described PBL as an instructional method in which students learn through facilitated problem solving that centers on a complex problem that does not have a single correct answer. She noted that students work in collaborative groups to identify what they need to learn in order to solve a problem, engage in self-directed learning, apply their new knowledge to the problem, and reflect on what they learned and the effectiveness of the strategies employed.

On the website for the PBL Initiative (http://www.pbli.org/pbl/generic_pbl.htm) Barrows (nd) describes in detail a set of Generic PBL Essentials, reduced to bullet points below. Each of these essential characteristics has been extended briefly to provide additional information and resources.

• Students must have the responsibility for their own learning. PBL is a learner-centered approach—students engage with the problem with whatever their current knowledge/experience affords. Learner motivation increases when responsibility for the solution to the problem and the process rests with the learner (Savery & Duffy, 1995) and as student ownership for learning increases (Savery, 1998; 1999). Inherent in the design of PBL is a public articulation by the learners of what they know and about what they need to learn more. Individuals accept responsibility for seeking relevant information and bringing that back to the group to help inform the development of a viable solution.
• The problem simulations used in problem-based learning must be ill-structured and allow for free inquiry. Problems in the real world are ill-structured (or they would not be problems). A critical skill developed through PBL is the ability to identify the problem and set parameters on the development of a solution. When a problem is well-structured learners are less motivated and less invested in the development of the solution. (See the section on Problems vs. Cases below.)
• Learning should be integrated from a wide range of disciplines or subjects. Barrows notes that during self-directed learning, students should be able to access, study and integrate information from all the disciplines that might be related to understanding and resolving a particular problem—just as people in the real world must recall and apply information integrated from diverse sources in their work. The rapid expansion of information has encouraged a cross-fertilization of ideas and led to the development of new disciplines. Multiple perspectives lead to a more thorough understanding of the issues and the development of a more robust solution.
• Collaboration is essential. In the world after school most learners will find themselves in jobs where they need to share information and work productively with others. PBL provides a format for the development of these essential skills. During a PBL session the tutor will ask questions of any and all members to ensure that information has been shared between members in relation to the group’s problem.
• What students learn during their self-directed learning must be applied back to the problem with reanalysis and resolution. The point of self-directed research is for individuals to collect information that will inform the group’s decision-making process in relation to the problem. It is essential that each individual share coherently what he or she has learned and how that information might impact on developing a solution to the problem.
• A closing analysis of what has been learned from work with the problem and a discussion of what concepts and principles have been learned are essential. Given that PBL is a very engaging, motivating and involving form of experiential learning, learners are often very close to the immediate details of the problem and the proposed solution. The purpose of the post-experience debriefing process (see Steinwachs, 1992; Thiagarajan, 1993 for details on debriefing) is to consolidate the learning and ensure that the experience has been reflected upon. Barrows (1988) advises that learners examine all facets of the PBL process to better understand what they know, what they learned, and how they performed.
• Self and peer assessment should be carried out at the completion of each problem and at the end of every curricular unit. These assessment activities related to the PBL process are closely related to the previous essential characteristic of reflection on knowledge gains. The significance of this activity is to reinforce the self-reflective nature of learning and sharpen a range of metacognitive processing skills.
• The activities carried out in problem-based learning must be those valued in the real world. A rationale and guidelines for the selection of authentic problems in PBL is discussed extensively in Savery & Duffy (1995), Stinson and Milter (1996), Wilkerson and Gijselaers (1996), and MacDonald (1997). The transfer of skills learned through PBL to a real-world context is also noted by Bransford, Brown, & Cocking (2000, p. 77).
• Student examinations must measure student progress towards the goals of problem-based learning. The goals of PBL are both knowledge-based and process-based. Students need to be assessed on both dimensions at regular intervals to ensure that they are benefiting as intended from the PBL approach. Students are responsible for the content in the curriculum that they have “covered” through engagement with problems. They need to be able to recognize and articulate what they know and what they have learned.
• Problem-based learning must be the pedagogical base in the curriculum and not part of a didactic curriculum.

The author states, “The problem simulations used in problem-based learning must be ill-structured and allow for free inquiry.” Create your own “messy, real-world” problem. Decide on a main curriculum area (most good problems are interdisciplinary) and an age group. Construct a problem that could be used in a problem-based classroom. Share it with two people and get their feedback. Revise the problem and submit.

These descriptions of the characteristics of PBL identify clearly 1) the role of the tutor as a facilitator of learning, 2) the responsibilities of the learners to be self-directed and self-regulated in their learning, and 3) the essential elements in the design of ill-structured instructional problems as the driving force for inquiry. The challenge for many instructors when they adopt a PBL approach is to make the transition from teacher as knowledge provider to tutor as manager and facilitator of learning (see Ertmer & Simons, 2006). If teaching with PBL were as simple as presenting the learners with a “problem” and students could be relied upon to work consistently at a high level of cognitive self-monitoring and self-regulation, then many teachers would be taking early retirement. The reality is that learners who are new to PBL require significant instructional scaffolding to support the development of problem-solving skills, self-directed learning skills, and teamwork/collaboration skills to a level of self-sufficiency where the scaffolds can be removed. Teaching institutions that have adopted a PBL approach to curriculum and instruction (including those noted earlier) have developed extensive tutor-training programs in recognition of the critical importance of this role in facilitating the PBL learning experience. An excellent resource is The Tutorial Process by Barrows (1988), which explains the importance of the tutor as the metacognitive coach for the learners.

Given that change to teaching patterns in public education moves at a glacial pace, it will take time for institutions to commit to a full problem-based learning approach. However, there are several closely related learner-centered instructional strategies, such as project-based learning, case-based learning, and inquiry-based learning, that are used in a variety of content domains that can begin to move students along the path to becoming more self-directed in their learning. In the next section I examine some of similarities and differences among these approaches.

Problem-Based Learning vs. Case-Based and Project-Based Learning

Both case-based and project-based approaches are valid instructional strategies that promote active learning and engage the learners in higher-order thinking such as analysis and synthesis. A well-constructed case will help learners to understand the important elements of the problem/situation so that they are better prepared for similar situations in the future. Case studies can help learners develop critical thinking skills in assessing the information provided and in identifying logic flaws or false assumptions. Working through the case study will help learners build discipline/context-specific vocabulary/terminology, and an understanding of the relationships between elements presented in the case study. When a case study is done as a group project, learners may develop improved communication and collaboration skills. Cases may be used to assess student learning after instruction, or as a practice exercise to prepare learners for a more authentic application of the skills and knowledge gained by working on the case.

Project-based learning is similar to problem-based learning in that the learning activities are organized around achieving a shared goal (project). This instructional approach was described by Kilpatrick (1921), as the Project Method and elaborated upon by several researchers, including Blumenfeld, Soloway, Marx, Krajcik, Guzdial, and Palinscar (1991). Within a project-based approach learners are usually provided with specifications for a desired end product (build a rocket, design a website, etc.) and the learning process is more oriented to following correct procedures. While working on a project, learners are likely to encounter several “problems” that generate “teachable moments” (see Lehman, George, Buchanan, & Rush, this issue). Teachers are more likely to be instructors and coaches (rather than tutors) who provide expert guidance, feedback and suggestions for “better” ways to achieve the final product. The teaching (modeling, scaffolding, questioning, etc.) is provided according to learner need and within the context of the project. Similar to case-based instruction learners are able to add an experience to their memory that will serve them in future situations.

While cases and projects are excellent learner-centered instructional strategies, they tend to diminish the learner’s role in setting the goals and outcomes for the “problem.” When the expected outcomes are clearly defined, then there is less need or incentive for the learner to set his/her own parameters. In the real world it is recognized that the ability to both define the problem and develop a solution (or range of possible solutions) is important.

Problem-Based Learning vs. Inquiry-Based Learning

These two approaches are very similar. Inquiry-based learning is grounded in the philosophy of John Dewey (as is PBL), who believed that education begins with the curiosity of the learner. Inquiry-based learning is a student-centered, active learning approach focused on questioning, critical thinking, and problem solving. Inquiry-based learning activities begin with a question followed by investigating solutions, creating new knowledge as information is gathered and understood, discussing discoveries and experiences, and reflecting on new-found knowledge. Inquiry-based learning is frequently used in science education (see, for example, the Center for Inquiry-Based Learning http://www.biology.duke.edu/cibl/) and encourages a hands-on approach where students practice the scientific method on authentic problems (questions). The primary difference between PBL and inquiry-based learning relates to the role of the tutor. In an inquiry-based approach the tutor is both a facilitator of learning (encouraging/expecting higher-order thinking) and a provider of information. In a PBL approach the tutor supports the process and expects learners to make their thinking clear, but the tutor does not provide information related to the problem—that is the responsibility of the learners. A more detailed discussion comparing and contrasting these two approaches would be an excellent topic for a future article in this journal.

Challenges Still Ahead for PBL

Problem-based learning appears to be more than a passing fad in education. This instructional approach has a solid philosophical and epistemological foundation (which, due to space constraints, is not discussed fully here; see Duffy & Cunningham, 1996, Savery & Duffy, 1995; Torp & Sage, 2002) and an impressive track record of successful graduates in medical education and many other fields of study. In commenting on the adoption of PBL in undergraduate education, White (1996) observed:

Many of the concerns that prompted the development of problem-based learning in medical schools are echoed today in undergraduate education. Content-laden lectures delivered to large enrollment classes typify science courses at most universities and many colleges. Professional organizations, government agencies, and others call for a change in how science is taught as well as what is taught. While problem-based learning is well known in medical education, it is almost unknown in the undergraduate curriculum. (p. 75)

The use of PBL in undergraduate education is changing gradually (e.g., Samford University, University of Delaware) in part because of the realization by industry and government leaders that this information age is for real. At the Wingspread Conference (1994) leaders from state and federal governments and experts from corporate, philanthropic, higher education, and accreditation communities were asked for their opinions and visions of undergraduate education and to identify some important characteristics of quality performance for college and university graduates. Their report identified as important high-level skills in communication, computation, technological literacy, and information retrieval that would enable individuals to gain and apply new knowledge and skills as needed. The report also cited as important the ability to arrive at informed judgments by effectively defining problems, gathering and evaluating information related to those problems, and developing solutions; the ability to function in a global community; adaptability; ease with diversity; motivation and persistence (for example being a self-starter); ethical and civil behavior; creativity and resourcefulness; technical competence; and the ability to work with others, especially in team settings. Lastly, the Wingspread Conference report noted the importance of a demonstrated ability to deploy all of the previous characteristics to address specific problems in complex, real-world settings, in which the development of workable solutions is required. Given this set of characteristics and the apparent success of a PBL approach at producing graduates with these characteristics one could hope for increased support in the use of PBL in undergraduate education.

The adoption of PBL (and any other instructional innovation) in public education is a complicated undertaking. Most state-funded elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools are constrained by a state-mandated curriculum and an expectation that they will produce a uniform product. High-stakes standardized testing tends to support instructional approaches that teach to the test. These approaches focus primarily on memorization through drill and practice, and rehearsal using practice tests. The instructional day is divided into specific blocks of time and organized around subjects. There is not much room in this structure for teachers or students to immerse themselves in an engaging problem. However, there are many efforts underway to work around the constraints of traditional classrooms (see, for example, PBL Design and Invention Center -http://www.pblnet.org/, or the PBL Initiative—http://www.pbli.org/core.htm), as well as the article by Lehman and his colleagues in this issue. I hope in future issues of this journal to learn more about implementations of PBL in K–12 educational settings.

We do live in interesting times—students can now access massive amounts of information that was unheard-of a decade ago, and there are more than enough problems to choose from in a range of disciplines. In my opinion, it is vitally important that current and future generations of students experience a problem-based learning approach and engage in constructive solution-seeking activities. The bar has been raised as the 21st century gathers momentum and more than ever, higher-order thinking skills, self-regulated learning habits, and problem-solving skills are necessary for all students. Providing students with opportunities to develop and refine these skills will take the efforts of many individuals—especially those who would choose to read a journal named the Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning.

Application Exercises

• What are the pros and cons of PBL?
• For a specific learner audience and set of learning objectives, design four class activities, one that would follow each of the following four learning theories: case-based learning, project-based learning, inquiry-based learning, and problem-based learning.

Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of the literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68 (1), 52-81.

Barrows, H. S. (1988). The tutorial process. Springfield: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.

Barrows, H. S. (1994). Practice-based learning: Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Springfield: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.

Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. In L. Wilkerson & W. Gijselaers (Eds.), Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory and practice. New Directions For Teaching and Learning Series, No. 68 (pp. 3-11). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Barrows, H. S., & Kelson, A. (1993). Problem-based learning in secondary education and the Problem-based Learning Institute (Monograph). Springfield: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.

Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York: Springer.

Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palinscar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26 (3/4), 369-398.

Boud, D., & Feletti, G. (1997). The challenge of problem-based learning (2nd ed.). London: Kogan Page.

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Bridges, E.M., & Hallinger, P. (1996). Problem-based learning in leadership education. In L. Wilkerson & W. Gijselaers (Eds.), Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory and practice. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, No. 68 (pp. 53-61). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Denton, B. G., Adams, C. C., Blatt, P. J., & Lorish, C. D. (2000). Does the introduction of problem-based learning change graduate performance outcomes in a professional curriculum? Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 11 (2&3), 147-162.

Duch, B. J., Groh, S. E., & Allen, D. E. (2001). Why problem-based learning? A case study of institutional change in undergraduate education. In B. Duch, S. Groh, & D. Allen (Eds.), The power of problem-based learning (pp. 3-11). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology. New York: Macmillan.

Ertmer, P. A., & Simons, K. D. (2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K–12 teachers. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1 (1), 40-54.

Gijselaers, W. H. (1996). Connecting problem-based practices with educational theory. In L. Wilkerson & W. Gijselaers (Eds.), Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory and practice. New Directions in Teaching and Learning. No. 68, Winter 1996 (pp. 13-21). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266.

Kingsland, A. J. (1989). The assessment process in architecture at Newcastle. In B. Wallis (Ed.), Problem-based learning: The Newcastle workshop. Proceedings of the ten-year anniversary conference (pp. 121-130) Faculty of Medicine, University of Newcastle.

Kilpatrick, W. H. (1921). Dangers and difficulties of the project method and how to overcome them: Introductory statement: Definition of terms. Teachers College Record, 22 (4), p. 283-287 (ID Number: 3982) Retrieved January 23, 2006 from http://www.tcrecord.org.

MacDonald, P. J. (1997). Selection of health problems for a problem based curriculum. In D. Boud & G. Feletti (Eds.), The challenge of problem-based learning (2nd ed.) (pp. 93-102). London: Kogan Page.

Maudsley, G. (1999) Do we all mean the same thing by “problem-based learning”? A review of the concepts and a formulation of the ground rules. Academic Medicine, 74(2), 178-85.

Newman, M. (2003). A pilot systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of problem-based learning. Retrieved December 12, 2005 from http://www.ltsn-01.ac.uk/docs/pbl_report.pdf.

Sanson-Fisher R. W., & Lynagh, M., C. (2005). Problem-based learning: A dissemination success story? Medical Journal of Australia, 183(5), 258-260.

Savery, J.R., & Duffy, T.M. (1995). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 135-148). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

Savery, J. R. (1998). Fostering ownership with computer supported collaborative writing in higher education. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 103-127). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Savery, J. R. (1999). Enhancing motivation and learning through collaboration and the use of problems. In S. Fellows & K. Ahmet (Eds.), Inspiring students: Case studies in motivating the learner (pp. 33-42). London: Kogan Page.

Steinwachs, B. (1992). How to facilitate a debriefing. Simulation & Gaming, 23(2) 186-195.

Stinson, J. E., & Milter, R. G. (1996). Problem-based learning in business education: Curriculum design and implementation issues. In L. Wilkerson & W. H. Gijselaers (Eds.), Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory and practice. New Directions For Teaching and Learning Series, No. 68 (pp. 32-42). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Thiagarajan, S. (1993). How to maximize transfer from simulation games through systematic debriefing. In F. Percival, S. Lodge & D. Saunders (Eds.), The Simulation and Gaming Yearbook, vol. 1 (pp. 45-52). London: Kogan Page.

Torp, L., & Sage, S. (2002). Problems as possibilities: Problem-based learning for K-16 education (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Vernon, D. T. A., & Blake, R. L. (1993). Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluation research. Academic Medicine, 68(7), 550-563.

White, H. B. (1996). Dan tries problem-based learning: A case study. In L. Richlin (Ed.), To Improve the Academy, vol. 15 (pp. 75-91). Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press and the Professional and Organizational Network in Higher Education.

Wilkerson, L., & Gijselaers, W. (Eds.). (1996). Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory and practice. New Directions For Teaching and Learning Series, No. 68. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Williams, S. M. (1992). Putting case-based instruction into context: Examples from legal and medical education. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 367-427.

Wingspread Conference. (1994). Quality assurance in undergraduate education: What the public expects. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.

Woods, D. R. 1994. Problem-based learning: How to gain the most from PBL. Waterdown, Ontario: Donald R. Woods.

John R. Savery is an assistant professor in the College of Education, the University of Akron. Email: [email protected].

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to John R. Savery, The University of Akron, Akron, OH 44325-6240.

Overview of Problem-Based Learning Copyright © 2018 by John R. Savery is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Principles of problem-based learning (pbl) in stem education: using expert wisdom and research to frame educational practice.

1. Introduction

• Building teacher knowledge, skills, and confidence in STEM teaching and learning, and
• Implementing useful and useable models of STEM education that focus on the pedagogical practices that underpin STEM as an integrated, cohesive, and meaningful approach to learning is something that is missing in the current educational landscape.

2. Literature Review

2.1. stem education.

STEM education is an interdisciplinary approach to learning which removes the traditional barriers separating the four disciplines of science, technology, engineering and mathematics and integrates them into real-world, rigorous, relevant learning experiences for students. (p. 4)

2.2. Origins of Problem-Based Learning (PBL)

• construct an extensive and flexible knowledge base,
• develop effective problem-solving skills,
• develop self-directed lifelong learning skills,
• become effective collaborators, and
• become intrinsically motivated to learn [ 12 ].

2.3. Summary—Linking PBL and STEM Education

3. methodology, 3.1. participant recruitment and selection, 3.2. approach.

• Why use PBL? (Why is it important? What does it have to offer?)
• What makes a good problem for PBL?
• When planning a PBL experience, what needs to be considered? (Is a team-teaching approach necessary? How should groups be formed? How do you anticipate resources that will be needed?)
• What are the important roles for the teacher and the student when engaging in PBL?
• What are some of the challenges in implementing PBL?
• As educators, we often talk about engagement from a cognitive, affective and behavioural perspective. What does PBL have to offer in terms of student and teacher engagement?
• What outcomes could be expected from engaging in a PBL process?
• What would be the success indicators for a successful PBL experience?
• We are developing a pedagogical framework for PBL in STEM education for years 6–10 (ages 11–15 years). The siloed nature of the school curriculum can present many barriers to implementing PBL. How might such barriers be overcome? What else should we consider in developing a pedagogical framework for PBL in school-based STEM education?

4.1. Theme 1: The Nature of Learning in PBL

4.1.1. learning as a process.

“It’s (PBL) more about the process of how they approach the learning, and not the product. So, understanding that problems are not something that you can solve step by step, but rather it’s something that you can try to understand first, and then when you understand it you start trying different things to approach the problem. And that reflection on what you’re doing and the result and what you need to do next, and where to find information, and what questions to ask... that’s what helps with this as a learning strategy.” (Focus Group 1)

“...a scenario (in medicine)…is the trigger for learning…they go to the doctor and they have a sore throat and various other symptoms. And what you are trying to figure out is not only what is wrong with them but…also learn about the throat and airways or something and maybe viruses and bacteria at the same time… trying to see this as a whole system. And the whole intent is that students would go to the library, seek out information, come back, have another meeting and try to resolve this issue. It may take three or four meetings before they get to the point when they go Ah ha! we’ve got this! And in the process, they have taught each other a whole lot about the scenario.” (Focus Group 2)

“The problem-based (approach) was more about a problem that you could deal with in a short space of time… the reality of engineering was a much larger project that took time and needed that time in order to be able to solve the problem …moving towards a project.” (Focus Group 2)

“And sometimes the problem would take two class periods…So, it was a much smaller, much more defined problem, but it would use the same process of looking at the problem, trying to work out what it was that they were trying to do as a team. Breaking up, going away, doing a bit of research. Which might only have been 15 min, and coming back and sharing that with the rest of the team, looking at how that helped them solve the problem that they had.” (Focus Group 2)

“It takes a long time to get the students to understand what this is. They need to understand the process of working with PBL and that takes time. So, I think patience is very important. It’s not necessarily going to be what you expect it to be the first time. …that takes a long time to make it really work, make it like a good program… be patient with the results, the outcome, what you actually expect to see.” (Focus Group 1)

4.1.2. Active Learning

“I think PBL works because it helps students connect to all the things that they know and that they’re familiar with. And when you’re able to bring previous experiences, developing learning is easier.” (Focus Group 1)

“PBL is also a way of empowering kids and students into thinking about how can I have agency in terms of these new complex problems that arise? And we do not know all the answers, for sure. And in many ways, young people have more innovative approaches to some of these problems.” (Focus Group 1)

4.1.3. Learning as ‘Looped’

“You’ve got, first of all, a loop of ‘Do I really understand that problem?’ You’ve actually then got another loop, which is ‘How do I design a solution to this problem?’ Quite apart from ‘What do I need to know that I haven’t learned in classes or that I’ve forgotten in classes?’” (Focus Group 2)

“And that’s a very different dichotomy, and the one that you’ve described really clearly, that two loop thing.…the focus [usually] is too much on the second loop. And they miss the first loop, which is the learning, that inherent knowledge base, going through that thought process.” (Focus Group 2)

4.2. Theme 2: PBL Requires a Rich Problem

4.2.1. relevant and authentic contexts.

“We work with what we call ‘real problems’ when we work with PBL, which I think is both relevant for the students no matter what age….it makes them more motivated. They choose maybe the problem themselves, they know what they want to do. It’s student-centred, which gives them a lot of opportunities.” (Focus Group 1)

“I suppose, it’s about maintaining engagement with what students are learning in STEM……. I think success criteria would be that it helps students contextualise why they learn the things they learn and they can see how it actually helps build that picture of the world around them.” (Focus Group 2)

4.2.2. Open-Ended, Complex Problems

“A certain amount of open-endedness, so that every group can engage differently with it and come up with a different solution. As long as it’s well argued and well thought through. Whereas, if it’s so convergent that everybody is hunting for the same answer, …. students lose interest, because they just go, ‘Ah, well, that groups already found the answer. So, why are we bothering?’ But, if everybody’s contributing something unique to the topic… then it’s really rich and then you discover that the whole class has got a much richer view of the story than any single group within the class.” (Focus Group 2)

“And there’s not one right or one wrong, and we may have three or four different designs that all turn out to be really valuable, and we may have one design that ended up to be a flop, but it had such great ideas as part of it that this group got an idea from that group.” (Focus Group 1)

“Students got really grumpy, because they didn’t understand that they had to ask questions. They thought that they were given an assignment, the assignment would be self-contained. They would just go away and do it and bring back the answer... they really needed to ask clarifying questions, and they didn’t realise they needed to ask clarifying questions. They just felt stuck. So, learning the process is really important.” (Focus Group 2)

“How tightly scoped does it need to be, how open-ended does it need to be? … there is a sweet spot for ensuring that it’s open enough, but still keeps them on the task that you want them to actually achieve.” (Focus Group 2)

“But if we can design curriculum where they actually can take small action steps that do empower them to feel like they can be part of a solution, even on whatever level they are…if that can be part of a curriculum to some actionable steps that they can take as individuals, then that just makes their learning and their ownership that much better.” (Focus Group 1)

4.2.3. Requires Collaboration

“...collaboration …would be a huge part of any work related to good problems that can take a team of people trying to figure things out...the sharing of the ideas of design, whatever we’re designing, to say, ‘Oh, here’s what we’re thinking, and here’s a picture, here’s materials. We’re trying to build this.’ Or, ‘These are ideas right now.’ And every group is thinking about it differently and they’re sharing and they’re giving each other feedback and they’re saying, ‘Oh, what about that? Is that going to be a problem?’ Or, ‘Oh, here’s an idea for you.’” (Focus Group 1)

“Something that is really central…what I have found really valuable for students on many levels is the sharing of the ideas of design…whatever we design…to say ‘here is what we’re thinking’…every group is thinking about it differently and their sharing, and their giving each other feedback.” (Focus Group 2)

“To create this community of learners, we have a problem we’re working on, we have different ideas, we’re going to try to pursue it differently, but we’re really collaborating and we’re not competing, we’re really collaborating to see which design is going to be most effective for what we’re trying to learn. And there’s not one right or one wrong, and we may have three or four different designs that all turn out to be really valuable, and we may have one design that ended up to be a flop, but it had such great ideas as part of it that this group got an idea from that group. …. they can be a valuable part of other people’s learning, not just the teacher as the valuable part of people’s learning.” (Focus Group 1)

4.3. Theme 3: Pedagogical Implications

4.3.1. effective scaffolding.

“It sounds quite boring, but it’s more about the structure than it is about the problem, in a sense. As long as that problem is something of interest to them and engages them [the students], their enthusiasm and their creativity and they can find a niche within it that they want to explore, you’re still going to have a very scaffolded and structured program sitting behind it. And I think that’s some of the downfalls of some of the projects we’ve seen that didn’t do that.” (Focus Group 2)

“Because students at different levels of development will have different capacity to cope with open-ended questions to a different degree. So, I think that question is really one of scaffolding. I think you have to think of the learners in the age group that you’re dealing with and their prior experience and where you’re wanting them to go. So, it’s a continuum rather than a single juncture in learning. So, it has to be a scaffolded experience.” (Focus Group 2)

4.3.2. Integrating Learning

“You’ve got to have those three levels of learning, like that surface level, the knowledge stuff, the in-between stuff which is being able to do the sort of deep level thinking where you link synoptically different things from different subject areas. And then the transfer level, which is the ability to extrapolate beyond the scenario kind of stuff. And I think you have to build that within a good project. You need the knowledge, you need the application across disciplines and you need the transferability. And you have to build a project, I think, that has those three elements.” (Focus Group 2)

“Curriculum coherence is really important for teachers. I think the curriculum needs to be coherent and I think teachers need to have this understanding of coherent. So, this idea of reading the curriculum before to get the big picture and understand that with that, with PBL that the act of construction of ideas, and that this idea of learning over time and building understanding takes time. And so, if you have a coherent curriculum that you can connect back and forth with, that it’s not something as a teacher that, ‘Oh, this week they need to understand this and this and this,’ but that it takes time. So, the idea of curriculum coherence and tying that with pedagogy.” (Focus Group 1)

“Get a clear problem statement. And that might be the first one or two weeks where students are just learning about the problem and getting successively better statements of what the problem is to be solved…. what’s the problem to be solved here? Interesting question that might take us several weeks. Then to say, ‘Oh, but then we can start to dig into what do the solutions look like to that problem.’ And that can take several weeks… So, you can do it in a very structured way, where in a sense you’ve got a cascade of problems of different layers.” (Focus Group 2)

4.3.3. Reconsidering Assessment

“I think this is where we go wrong with PBL. I think we’re very focused on learning objectives…we should not be talking about behavioural learning. We should be talking about intentions of learning…otherwise you’re locking us into a curriculum which is not creative, which is not collaborative. And that’s what the problem with objectives is—that they are too behavioural…you’re closing the learning down.” (Focus Group 1)

“I can see students in terms of the joy of learning, the persistence because of the challenge and the joy of the challenge, and also that there’s a true interest in solving this problem or whatever we’re doing, so that to me is the engagement part. And then this idea of an indicator is that they want to continue, they want to do more, they want to go on in science or in STEM because of what has taken place in their experiences.” (Focus Group 1)

5. Discussion

5.1. principles of a pbl model of school based stem education.

• Problems embedded in rich and relevant learning contexts.
• Flexible knowledge, skills, and capabilities.
• Active and strategic metacognitive reasoning.
• Collaboration based on intrinsic motivation.

5.1.1. Problems Embedded in Rich and Relevant Learning Contexts

5.1.2. flexible knowledge, skills and capabilities, 5.1.3. active and strategic metacognitive reasoning, 5.1.4. collaboration based on intrinsic motivation, 5.1.5. interconnectedness of pbl principles, 5.2. pbl in school-based stem education, 6. conclusions and implications, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest, abbreviations.

• Department of Industry, Science, Innovation and Resources. Australia’s National Science Statement. March 2017. Available online: https://www.industry.gov.au/data-and-publications/australias-national-science-statement (accessed on 29 July 2021).
• Johnson, C.C.; Peters-Burton, E.E.; Moore, T.J. STEM Road Map: A framework for Integrated STEM Education ; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Marginson, S.; Tytler, R.; Freeman, B.; Roberts, K. STEM: Country Comparisons: International Comparisons of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education. Final Report ; Australian Council of Learned Academies: Canberra, ACT, Australia, 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• National Science and Technology Council. Charting a Course for Success: America’s Strategy for STEM Education ; United States Government: Washington, DC, USA, 2018.
• PWC. A Smart Move: Future-Proofing Australia’s Workforce by Growing Skills in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM). 2015. Available online: https://www.pwc.com.au/pdf/a-smart-move-pwc-stem-report-april-2015.pdf (accessed on 29 July 2021).
• Deloitte. The Deloitte Innovation Survey 2015. 2015. Available online: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/lu/Documents/about-deloitte/lu-en-innovations-survey-25032015.pdf (accessed on 29 July 2021).
• National Skills Commission, Australia. The State of Australia’s Skills 2021: Now and into the Future. 2021. Available online: https://www.nationalskillscommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-03/2021%20State%20of%20Australia%27s%20Skills_0.pdf (accessed on 16 September 2022).
• Timms, M.J.; Moyle, K.; Weldon, P.R.; Mitchell, P. Challenges in STEM Learning in Australian Schools: Literature and Policy Review ; Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER): Camberwell, VIC, Australia, 2018; Available online: https://research.acer.edu.au/policy_analysis_misc/28 (accessed on 29 July 2021).
• Shernoff, D.J.; Sinha, S.; Bressler, D.M.; Ginsburg, L. Assessing teacher education and professional development needs for the implementation of integrated approaches to STEM education. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2017 , 4 , 13. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] [ Green Version ]
• Berry, M.; Chalmers, C.; Chandra, V. Can We Teach STEM in a More Meaningful and Integrated Way? In Proceedings of the 2nd International STEM in Education Conference, Beijing, China, 24–27 November 2012; Available online: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/57318/1/stem2012_82.pdf (accessed on 28 July 2021).
• Corrigan, D. Spotlight Report 2: Implementing and Integrated STEM Education in Schools—Five Key Questions Answered. Monash University: Education Futures. 2020. Available online: https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/2479444/sr2-stem-education-education-corrigan.pdf (accessed on 29 July 2021).
• Hmelo-Silver, C.E. Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2004 , 16 , 235–266. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Salomon, G.; Perkins, D.N. Rocky roads to transfer: Rethinking mechanisms of a neglected phenomenon. Educ. Psychol. 1998 , 24 , 113–142. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gonzalez, L. The Problem-Based Learning Model. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Educational Innovation through Technology (EITT), Biloxi, MS, USA, 27–31 October 2019; pp. 180–183. Available online: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8924063 (accessed on 23 September 2022).
• Lombardi, P. Instructional Methods Strategies and Technologies to Meet the Needs of All Learners ; LibreTexts, 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thorndahl, K.L.; Stentoft, D. Thinking Critically About Critical Thinking and Problem-Based Learning in Higher Education: A Scoping Review. Interdiscip. J. Probl.-Based Learn. 2020 , 14 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, H.; Moore, T.J.; Roehrig, G.H.; Park, M.S. STEM integration: Teacher perceptions and practice. J. Pre-Coll. Eng. Educ. Res. 2011 , 1 , 2. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vasquez, J.A.; Comer, M.; Sneider, C. STEM Lesson Essentials, Grades 3–8: Integrating Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics ; Heinemann: Portsmouth, NH, USA, 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Savery, J.R. Comparative pedagogical models of problem-based learning. In The Wiley Handbook on Problem-Based Learning ; Moallem, M., Hung, W., Dabbagh, N., Eds.; John Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 81–104. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Osborne, J.; Dillon, J. Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections ; Report to the Nuffield Foundation; King’s College: London, UK, 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Murphy, S.; MacDonald, A.; Danaia, L.; Wang, C. An analysis of Australian STEM education strategies. Policy Futur. Educ. 2019 , 17 , 122–139. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bybee, R.W. The Case for STEM Education: Challenges and Opportunities ; NSTA Press: Arlington, VA, USA, 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Krajcik, J.; Delen, İ. Engaging learners in STEM education. Eest. Haridusteaduste Ajak. 2017 , 5 , 35–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Krajcik, J.; Delen, İ. How to support learners in developing usable and lasting knowledge of STEM. Int. J. Educ. Math. Sci. Technol. 2017 , 5 , 21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Frykholm, J.; Glasson, G. Connecting science and mathematics instruction: Pedagogical context knowledge for teachers. Sch. Sci. Math. 2005 , 105 , 127–141. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Furner, J.M.; Kumar, D.D. The mathematics and science integration argument: A stand for teacher education. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 2007 , 3 , 185–189. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Stohlmann, M.; Moore, T.J.; Roehrig, G.H. Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. J. Pre-Coll. Eng. Educ. Res. 2012 , 2 , 4. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Barrows, H.S.; Tamblyn, R. Problem-Based Learning: An Approach to Medical Education ; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1980. [ Google Scholar ]
• Servant-Miklos, V.F.C.; Norman, G.R.; Schmidt, H.G. A Short Intellectual History of Problem based Learning. In The Wiley Handbook of Problem Based Learning , 1st ed.; Moallem, M., Hung, W., Dabbagh, N., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kolmos, A. Reflections on project work and problem-based learning. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 1996 , 21 , 141–148. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dahlgren, M.A.; Dahlgren, L.O. Portraits of PBL: Students’ experiences of the characteristics of problem-based learning in physiotherapy, computer engineering and psychology. Instr. Sci. 2002 , 30 , 111–127. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• de Graaff, E.; Kolmos, A. Characteristics of Problem-Based Learning. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 2003 , 19 , 657–662. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dolmans, D.H.; De Grave, W.; Wolfhagen, I.H.; Van Der Vleuten, C.P. Problem-based learning: Future challenges for educational practice and research. Med. Educ. 2005 , 39 , 732–741. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Jonassen, D.H. Toward a Design Theory of Problem Solving. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2000 , 48 , 63–85. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, M.; Shi, Y.; Pan, Z.; Li, C.; Pan, X.; Lopez, F. Examining middle school teachers’ implementation of a technology-enriched problem-based learning program: Motivational factors, challenges, and strategies. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 2020 , 53 , 279–295. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kim, M.K. Theoretically grounded guidelines for assessing learning progress: Cognitive changes in ill-structured complex problem-solving contexts. Educ. Tech Res. Dev 2012 , 60 , 601–622. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hung, W. Theory to reality: A few issues in implementing problem-based learning. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2011 , 59 , 529–552. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jonassen, D.H. Instructional design models for well-Structured and ill-Structured Problem-Solving Learning Outcomes. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 1997 , 45 , 65–94. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jonassen, D. Supporting problem solving in PBL. Interdiscip. J. Probl.-Based Learn. 2011 , 5 , 95–119. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Hung, W.; Amida, A. Problem-Based Learning in College Science. In Active Learning in College Science ; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 325–339. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wilkerson, L.; Gijselaers, W.H. Concluding comments. New Dir. Teach. Learn. 1996 , 68 , 101–104. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Grohs, J.R.; Kirk, G.R.; Soledad, M.M.; Knight, D.B. Assessing systems thinking: A tool to measure complex reasoning through ill-structured problems. Think. Ski. Creat. 2018 , 28 , 110–130. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Derler, H.; Berner, S.; Grach, D.; Posch, A.; Seebacher, U. Project-Based learning in a transinstitutional research setting: Case study on the development of sustainable food products. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 233. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Leary, H.; Walker, A.; Lefler, M.; Kuo, Y. Self-Directed Learning in Problem-Based Learning. In The Wiley Handbook of Problem-Based Learning ; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 181–198. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wilson, K. Exploring the challenges and enablers of implementing a STEM project-based learning programme in a diverse junior secondary context. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 2020 , 19 , 881–898. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Savin-Baden, M. Problem-Based Learning in Higher Education: Untold Stories ; SRHE and Open University Press: Buckingham, UK, 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Savery, J.R.; Duffy, T.M. Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In Constructivist Learning Environments: Case Studies in Instructional Design ; Wilson, B., Ed.; Educational Technology Publications: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1995; pp. 135–148. [ Google Scholar ]
• Savery, J.R. Fostering ownership with computer supported collaborative writing in higher education. In Electronic Collaborators: Learner-Centered Technologies for Literacy, Apprenticeship, and Discourse ; Bonk, C.J., King, K.S., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1998; pp. 103–127. [ Google Scholar ]
• Savery, J.R. Enhancing motivation and learning through collaboration and the use of problems. In Inspiring Students: Case Studies in Motivating the Learner ; Fellows, S., Ahmet, K., Eds.; Kogan Page: London, UK, 1999; pp. 33–42. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barrows, H.S. The Tutorial Process ; Southern Illinois University School of Medicine: Springfield, IL, USA, 1988. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gill, P.; Baillie, J. Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: An update for the digital age. Br. Dent. J. 2018 , 225 , 668–672. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Krueger, R.A.; Casey, M.A. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research , 3rd ed.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners ; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams, A.; Katz, L. The use of focus group methodology in education: Some theoretical and practical considerations. Int. Electron. J. Leadersh. Learn. 2001 , 5 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Sim, J.; Waterfield, J. Focus group methodology: Some ethical challenges. Qual. Quant. 2019 , 53 , 3003–3022. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ Green Version ]
• Bryman, A. Social Research Methods , 5th ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006 , 3 , 77–101. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, Y.; Pásztor, A. Effects of problem-based learning instructional intervention on critical thinking in higher education: A meta-analysis. Think. Ski. Creat. 2022 , 45 , 101069. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mann, L.; Chang, M.; Chandrasekaran, S.; Coddington, A.; Daniel, S.; Cook, E.; Crossin, E.; Cosson, B.; Turner, J.; Mazzurco, A.; et al. From problem-based learning to practice-based education: A framework for shaping future engineers. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 2021 , 46 , 27–47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• El Sayary, A.; Forawi, S.; Mansour, N. STEM Education and Problem-Based Learning ; The Routledge International Handbook of Research on Teaching Thinking: Abingdon, UK, 2015; pp. 357–368. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gee, K.A.; Wong, K.K. A cross national examination of inquiry and its relationship to student performance in science: Evidence from the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2006. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2012 , 53 , 303–318. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Von Secker, C. Effects of inquiry-based teacher practices on science excellence and equity. J. Educ. Res. 2002 , 95 , 151–160. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Thibaut, L.; Knipprath, H.; Dehaene, W.; Depaepe, F. The influence of teachers’ attitudes and school context on instructional practices in integrated STEM education. Teach. Teach. Educ. 2018 , 71 , 190–205. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gao, X.; Li, P.; Shen, J.; Sun, H. Reviewing assessment of student learning in interdisciplinary STEM education. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2020 , 7 , 24. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Savery, J.R. Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Essent. Read. Probl.-Based Learn. Explor. Extending Leg. Howard S. Barrows 2015 , 9 , 5–15. [ Google Scholar ]

Share and Cite

Smith, K.; Maynard, N.; Berry, A.; Stephenson, T.; Spiteri, T.; Corrigan, D.; Mansfield, J.; Ellerton, P.; Smith, T. Principles of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) in STEM Education: Using Expert Wisdom and Research to Frame Educational Practice. Educ. Sci. 2022 , 12 , 728. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100728

Smith K, Maynard N, Berry A, Stephenson T, Spiteri T, Corrigan D, Mansfield J, Ellerton P, Smith T. Principles of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) in STEM Education: Using Expert Wisdom and Research to Frame Educational Practice. Education Sciences . 2022; 12(10):728. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100728

Smith, Kathy, Nicoleta Maynard, Amanda Berry, Tanya Stephenson, Tabetha Spiteri, Deborah Corrigan, Jennifer Mansfield, Peter Ellerton, and Timothy Smith. 2022. "Principles of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) in STEM Education: Using Expert Wisdom and Research to Frame Educational Practice" Education Sciences 12, no. 10: 728. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100728

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Med Sci Educ
• v.31(3); 2021 Jun

Effective Learning Behavior in Problem-Based Learning: a Scoping Review

Azril shahreez abdul ghani.

1 Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Kulliyah of Medicine, Bandar Indera Mahkota Campus, International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuantan, 25200 Pahang Malaysia

2 Department of Medical Education, School of Medical Sciences, Health Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, Kota Bharu, 16150 Kelantan Malaysia

Ahmad Fuad Abdul Rahim

Muhamad saiful bahri yusoff, siti nurma hanim hadie.

3 Department of Anatomy, School of Medical Sciences, Health Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian, 16150 Kota Bharu, Kelantan Malaysia

Problem-based learning (PBL) emphasizes learning behavior that leads to critical thinking, problem-solving, communication, and collaborative skills in preparing students for a professional medical career. However, learning behavior that develops these skills has not been systematically described. This review aimed to unearth the elements of effective learning behavior in a PBL context, using the protocol by Arksey and O’Malley. The protocol identified the research question, selected relevant studies, charted and collected data, and collated, summarized, and reported results. We discovered three categories of elements—intrinsic empowerment, entrustment, and functional skills—proven effective in the achievement of learning outcomes in PBL.

Introduction

Problem-based learning (PBL) is an educational approach that utilizes the principles of collaborative learning in small groups, first introduced by McMaster Medical University [ 1 ]. The shift of the higher education curriculum from traditional, lecture-based approaches to an integrated, student-centered approach was triggered by concern over the content-driven nature of medical knowledge with minimal clinical application [ 2 ]. The PBL pedagogy uses a systematic approach, starting with an authentic, real-life problem scenario as a context in which learning is not separated from practice as students collaborate and learn [ 3 ]. The tutor acts as a facilitator who guides the students’ learning, while students are required to solve the problems by discussing them with group members [ 4 ]. The essential aspect of the PBL process is the ability of the students to recognize their current knowledge, determine the gaps in their knowledge and experience, and acquire new knowledge to bridge the gaps [ 5 ]. PBL is a holistic approach that gives students an active role in their learning.

Since its inception, PBL has been used in many undergraduate and postgraduate degree programs, such as medicine [ 6 , 7 ], nursing [ 8 ], social work education [ 9 ], law [ 10 ], architecture [ 11 ], economics [ 12 ], business [ 13 ], science [ 14 ], and engineering [ 15 ]. It has also been applied in elementary and secondary education [ 16 – 18 ]. Despite its many applications, its implementation is based on a single universal workflow framework that contains three elements: problem as the initiator for learning, tutor as a facilitator in the group versions, and group work as a stimulus for collaborative interaction [ 19 ]. However, there are various versions of PBL workflow, such as the seven-step technique based on the Maastricht “seven jumps” process. The tutor’s role is to ensure the achievement of learning objectives and to assess students’ performance [ 20 , 21 ].

The PBL process revolves around four types of learning principles: constructive, self-directed, collaborative, and contextual [ 19 ]. Through the constructive learning process, the students are encouraged to think about what is already known and integrate their prior knowledge with their new understanding. This process helps the student understand the content, form a new opinion, and acquire new knowledge [ 22 ]. The PBL process encourages students to become self-directed learners who plan, monitor, and evaluate their own learning, enabling them to become lifelong learners [ 23 ]. The contextualized collaborative learning process also promotes interaction among students, who share similar responsibilities to achieve common goals relevant to the learning context [ 24 ]. By exchanging ideas and providing feedback during the learning session, the students can attain a greater understanding of the subject matter [ 25 ].

Dolmans et al. [ 19 ] pointed out two issues related to the implementation of PBL: dominant facilitators and dysfunctional PBL groups. These problems inhibit students’ self-directed learning and reduce their satisfaction level with the PBL session. A case study by Eryilmaz [ 26 ] that evaluated engineering students’ and tutors’ experience of PBL discovered that PBL increased the students’ self-confidence and improved essential skills such as problem-solving, communications, critical thinking, and collaboration. Although most of the participants in the study found PBL satisfactory, many complained about the tutor’s poor guidance and lack of preparation. Additionally, it was noted that 64% of the first-year students were unable to adapt to the PBL system because they had been accustomed to conventional learning settings and that 43% of students were not adequately prepared for the sessions and thus were minimally involved in the discussion.

In a case study by Cónsul-giribet [ 27 ], newly graduated nursing professionals reported a lack of perceived theoretical basic science knowledge at the end of their program, despite learning through PBL. The nurses perceived that this lack of knowledge might affect their expertise, identity, and professional image.

Likewise, a study by McKendree [ 28 ] reported the outcomes of a workshop that explored the strengths and weaknesses of PBL in an allied health sciences curriculum in the UK. The workshop found that problems related to PBL were mainly caused by students, the majority of whom came from conventional educational backgrounds either during high school or their first degree. They felt anxious when they were involved in PBL, concerned about “not knowing when to stop” in exploring the learning needs. Apart from a lack of basic science knowledge, the knowledge acquired during PBL sessions remains unorganized [ 29 ]. Hence, tutors must guide students in overcoming this situation by instilling appropriate insights and essential skills for the achievement of the learning outcomes [ 30 ]. It was also evident that the combination of intention and motivation to learn and desirable learning behavior determined the quality of learning outcomes [ 31 , 32 ]. However, effective learning behaviors that help develop these skills have not been systematically described. Thus, this scoping review aimed to unearth the elements of effective learning behavior in the PBL context.

Scoping Review Protocol

This scoping review was performed using a protocol by Arksey and O’Malley [ 33 ]. The protocol comprises five phases: (i) identification of research questions, (ii) identification of relevant articles, (iii) selection of relevant studies, (iv) data collection and charting, and (v) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results.

Identification of Research Questions

This scoping review was designed to unearth the elements of effective learning behavior that can be generated from learning through PBL instruction. The review aimed to answer one research question: “What are the effective learning behavior elements related to PBL?” For the purpose of the review, an operational definition of effective learning behavior was constructed, whereby it was defined as any learning behavior that is related to PBL instruction and has been shown to successfully attain the desired learning outcomes (i.e., cognitive, skill, or affective)—either quantitatively or qualitatively—in any intervention conducted in higher education institutions.

The positive outcome variables include student viewpoint or perception, student learning experience and performance, lecturer viewpoint and expert judgment, and other indirect variables that may be important indicators of successful PBL learning (i.e., attendance to PBL session, participation in PBL activity, number of interactions in PBL activity, and improvement in communication skills in PBL).

Identification of Relevant Articles

An extensive literature search was conducted on articles published in English between 2015 and 2019. Three databases—Google Scholar, Scopus, and PubMed—were used for the literature search. Seven search terms with the Boolean combination were used, whereby the keywords were identified from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) databases. The search terms were tested and refined with multiple test searches. The final search terms with the Boolean operation were as follows: “problem-based learning” AND (“learning behavior” OR “learning behaviour”) AND (student OR “medical students” OR undergraduate OR “medical education”).

Selection of Relevant Articles

The articles from the three databases were exported manually into Microsoft Excel. The duplicates were removed, and the remaining articles were reviewed based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These criteria were tested on titles and abstracts to ensure their robustness in capturing the articles related to learning behavior in PBL. The shortlisted articles were reviewed by two independent researchers, and a consensus was reached either to accept or reject each article based on the set criteria. When a disagreement occurred between the two reviewers, the particular article was re-evaluated independently by the third and fourth researchers (M.S.B.Y and A.F.A.R), who have vast experience in conducting qualitative research. The sets of criteria for selecting abstracts and final articles were developed. The inclusion and exclusion criteria are listed in Table ​ Table1 1 .

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Data Charting

The selected final articles were reviewed, and several important data were extracted to provide an objective summary of the review. The extracted data were charted in a table, including the (i) title of the article, (ii) author(s), (iii) year of publication, (iv) aim or purpose of the study, (v) study design and method, (iv) intervention performed, and (v) study population and sample size.

Collating, Summarizing, and Reporting the Results

A content analysis was performed to identify the elements of effective learning behaviors in the literature by A.S.A.G and S.N.H.H, who have experience in conducting qualitative studies. The initial step of content analysis was to read the selected articles thoroughly to gain a general understanding of the articles and extract the elements of learning behavior which are available in the articles. Next, the elements of learning behavior that fulfil the inclusion criteria were extracted. The selected elements that were related to each other through their content or context were grouped into subtheme categories. Subsequently, the combinations of several subthemes expressing similar underlying meanings were grouped into themes. Each of the themes and subthemes was given a name, which was operationally defined based on the underlying elements. The selected themes and subthemes were presented to the independent researchers in the team (M.S.B.Y and A.F.A.R), and a consensus was reached either to accept or reformulate each of the themes and subthemes. The flow of the scoping review methods for this study is illustrated in Fig.  1 .

The flow of literature search and article selection

Literature Search

Based on the keyword search, 1750 articles were obtained. Duplicate articles that were not original articles found in different databases and resources were removed. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria of title selection, the eligibility of 1750 abstracts was evaluated. The articles that did not fulfil the criteria were removed, leaving 328 articles for abstract screening. A total of 284 articles were screened according to the eligibility criteria for abstract selection. Based on these criteria, 284 articles were selected and screened according to the eligibility criteria for full article selection. Fourteen articles were selected for the final review. The information about these articles is summarized in Table ​ Table2 2 .

Studies characteristics

Study Characteristics

The final 14 articles were published between 2015 and 2019. The majority of the studies were conducted in Western Asian countries ( n  = 4), followed by China ( n  = 3), European countries ( n  = 2), Thailand ( n  = 2), Indonesia ( n  = 1), Singapore ( n  = 1), and South Africa ( n  = 1). Apart from traditional PBL, some studies incorporated other pedagogic modalities into their PBL sessions, such as online learning, blended learning, and gamification. The majority of the studies targeted a single-profession learner group, and one study was performed on mixed interprofessional health education learners.

Results of Thematic Analysis

The thematic analysis yielded three main themes of effective learning behavior: intrinsic empowerment, entrustment, and functional skills. Intrinsic empowerment overlies four proposed subthemes: proactivity, organization, diligence, and resourcefulness. For entrustment, there were four underlying subthemes: students as assessors, students as teachers, feedback-giving, and feedback-receiving. The functional skills theme contains four subthemes: time management, digital proficiency, data management, and collaboration.

Theme 1: Intrinsic Empowerment

Intrinsic empowerment enforces student learning behavior that can facilitate the achievement of learning outcomes. By empowering the development of these behaviors, students can become lifelong learners [ 34 ]. The first element of intrinsic empowerment is proactive behavior. In PBL, the students must be proactive in analyzing problems [ 35 , 36 ] and their learning needs [ 35 , 37 ], and this can be done by integrating prior knowledge and previous experience through a brainstorming session [ 35 , 38 ]. The students must be proactive in seeking guidance to ensure they stay focused and confident [ 39 , 40 ]. Finding ways to integrate content from different disciplines [ 35 , 41 ], formulate new explanations based on known facts [ 34 , 35 , 41 ], and incorporate hands-on activity [ 35 , 39 , 42 ] during a PBL session are also proactive behaviors.

The second element identified is “being organized” which reflects the ability of students to systematically manage their roles [ 43 ], ideas, and learning needs [ 34 ]. The students also need to understand the task for each learning role in PBL, such as chairperson or leader, scribe, recorder, and reflector. This role needs to be assigned appropriately to ensure that all members take part in the discussion [ 43 ]. Similarly, when discussing ideas or learning needs, the students need to follow the steps in the PBL process and organize and prioritize the information to ensure that the issues are discussed systematically and all aspects of the problems are covered accordingly [ 34 , 37 ]. This team organization and systematic thought process is an effective way for students to focus, plan, and finalize their learning tasks.

The third element of intrinsic empowerment is “being diligent.” Students must consistently conduct self-revision [ 40 ] and keep track of their learning plan to ensure the achievement of their learning goal [ 4 , 40 ]. The students must also be responsible for completing any given task and ensuring good understanding prior to their presentation [ 40 ]. Appropriate actions need to be undertaken to find solutions to unsolved problems [ 40 , 44 ]. This effort will help them think critically and apply their knowledge for problem-solving.

The fourth element identified is “being resourceful.” Students should be able to acquire knowledge from different resources, which include external resources (i.e., lecture notes, textbooks, journal articles, audiovisual instructions, the Internet) [ 38 , 40 , 45 ] and internal resources (i.e., students’ prior knowledge or experience) [ 35 , 39 ]. The resources must be evidence-based, and thus should be carefully selected by evaluating their cross-references and appraising them critically [ 37 ]. Students should also be able to understand and summarize the learned materials and explain them using their own words [ 4 , 34 ]. The subthemes of the intrinsic empowerment theme are summarized in Table ​ Table3 3 .

 Intrinsic empowerment subtheme with the learning behavior elements

Theme 2: Entrustment

Entrustment emphasizes the various roles of students in PBL that can promote effective learning. The first entrusted role identified is “student as an assessor.” This means that students evaluate their own performance in PBL [ 46 ]. The evaluation of their own performance must be based on the achievement of the learning outcomes and reflect actual understanding of the content as well as the ability to apply the learned information in problem-solving [ 46 ].

The second element identified in this review is “student as a teacher.” To ensure successful peer teaching in PBL, students need to comprehensively understand the content of the learning materials and summarize the content in an organized manner. The students should be able to explain the gist of the discussed information using their own words [ 4 , 34 ] and utilize teaching methods to cater to differences in learning styles (i.e., visual, auditory, and kinesthetic) [ 41 ]. These strategies help capture their group members’ attention and evoke interactive discussions among them.

The third element of entrustment is to “give feedback.” Students should try giving constructive feedback on individual and group performance in PBL. Feedback on individual performance must reflect the quality of the content and task presented in the PBL. Feedback on group performance should reflect the ways in which the group members communicate and complete the group task [ 47 ]. To ensure continuous constructive feedback, students should be able to generate feedback questions beforehand and immediately deliver them during the PBL sessions [ 44 , 47 ]. In addition, the feedback must include specific measures for improvement to help their peers to take appropriate action for the future [ 47 ].

The fourth element of entrustment is “receive feedback.” Students should listen carefully to the feedback given and ask questions to clarify the feedback [ 47 ]. They need to be attentive and learn to deal with negative feedback [ 47 ]. Also, if the student does not receive feedback, they should request it either from peers or teachers and ask specific questions, such as what aspects to improve and how to improve [ 47 ]. The data on the subthemes of the entrustment theme are summarized in Table ​ Table4 4 .

Entrustment subtheme with the learning behavior elements

Theme 3: Functional Skills

Functional skills refer to essential skills that can help students learn independently and competently. The first element identified is time management skills. In PBL, students must know how to prioritize learning tasks according to the needs and urgency of the tasks [ 40 ]. To ensure that students can self-pace their learning, a deadline should be set for each learning task within a manageable and achievable learning schedule [ 40 ].

Furthermore, students should have digital proficiency, the ability to utilize digital devices to support learning [ 38 , 40 , 44 ]. The student needs to know how to operate basic software (e.g., Words and PowerPoints) and the basic digital tools (i.e., social media, cloud storage, simulation, and online community learning platforms) to support their learning [ 39 , 40 ]. These skills are important for peer learning activities, which may require information sharing, information retrieval, online peer discussion, and online peer feedback [ 38 , 44 ].

The third functional skill identified is data management, the ability to collect key information in the PBL trigger and analyze that information to support the solution in a problem-solving activity [ 39 ]. Students need to work either individually or in a group to collect the key information from a different trigger or case format such as text lines, an interview, an investigation, or statistical results [ 39 ]. Subsequently, students also need to analyze the information and draw conclusions based on their analysis [ 39 ].

The fourth element of functional skill is collaboration. Students need to participate equally in the PBL discussion [ 41 , 46 ]. Through discussion, confusion and queries can be addressed and resolved by listening, respecting others’ viewpoints, and responding professionally [ 35 , 39 , 43 , 44 ]. In addition, the students need to learn from each other and reflect on their performance [ 48 ]. Table ​ Table5 5 summarizes the data on the subthemes of the functional skills theme.

Functional skills subtheme with the learning behavior elements

This scoping review outlines three themes of effective learning behavior elements in the PBL context: intrinsic empowerment, entrustment, and functional skills. Hence, it is evident from this review that successful PBL instruction demands students’ commitment to empower themselves with value-driven behaviors, skills, and roles.

In this review, intrinsic empowerment is viewed as enforcement of students’ internal strength in performing positive learning behaviors related to PBL. This theme requires the student to proactively engage in the learning process, organize their learning activities systematically, persevere in learning, and be intelligently resourceful. One of the elements of intrinsic empowerment is the identification and analysis of problems related to complex scenarios. This element is aligned with a study by Meyer [ 49 ], who observed students’ engagement in problem identification and clarification prior to problem-solving activities in a PBL session related to multiple engineering design. Rubenstein and colleagues [ 50 ] discovered in a semi-structured interview the importance of undergoing a problem identification process before proposing a solution during learning. It was reported that the problem identification process in PBL may enhance the attainment of learning outcomes, specifically in the domain of concept understanding [ 51 ].

The ability of the students to acquire and manage learning resources is essential for building their understanding of the learned materials and enriching discussion among team members during PBL. This is aligned with a study by Jeong and Hmelo-Silver [ 52 ], who studied the use of learning resources by students in PBL. The study concluded that in a resource-rich environment, the students need to learn how to access and understand the resources to ensure effective learning. Secondly, they need to process the content of the resources, integrate various resources, and apply them in problem-solving activities. Finally, they need to use the resources in collaborative learning activities, such as sharing and relating to peer resources.

Wong [ 53 ] documented that excellent students spent considerably more time managing academic resources than low achievers. The ability of the student to identify and utilize their internal learning resources, such as prior knowledge and experience, is also important. A study by Lee et al. [ 54 ] has shown that participants with high domain-specific prior knowledge displayed a more systematic approach and high accuracy in visual and motor reactions in solving problems compared to novice learners.

During the discussion phase in PBL, organizing ideas—e.g., arranging relevant information gathered from the learning resources into relevant categories—is essential for communicating the idea clearly [ 34 ]. This finding is in line with a typology study conducted by Larue [ 55 ] on second-year nursing students’ learning strategies during a group discussion. The study discovered that although the content presented by the student is adequate, they unable to make further progress in the group discussion until they are instructed by the tutor on how to organize the information given into a category [ 55 ].

Hence, the empowerment of student intrinsic behavior may enhance students’ learning in PBL by allowing them to make a decision in their learning objectives and instilling confidence in them to achieve goals. A study conducted by Kirk et al. [ 56 ] proved that highly empowered students obtain better grades, increase learning participation, and target higher educational aspirations.

Entrustment is the learning role given to students to be engaging and identify gaps in their learning. This theme requires the student to engage in self-assessment, prepare to teach others, give constructive feedback, and value the feedback received. One of the elements of entrustment is the ability to self-assess. In a study conducted by Mohd et al. [ 57 ] looking at the factors in PBL that can strengthen the capability of IT students, they discovered that one of the critical factors that contribute to these skills is the ability of the student to perform self-assessment in PBL. As mentioned by Daud, Kassim, and Daud [ 58 ], the self-assessment may be more reliable if the assessment is performed based on the objectives set beforehand and if the criteria of the assessment are understood by the learner. This is important to avoid the fact that the result of the self-assessment is influenced by the students’ perception of themselves rather than reflecting their true performance. However, having an assessment based on the learning objective only focuses on the immediate learning requirements in the PBL. To foster lifelong learning skills, it should also be balanced with the long-term focus of assessment, such as utilizing the assessment to foster the application of knowledge in solving real-life situations. This is aligned with the review by Boud and Falchikov [ 59 ] suggesting that students need to become assessors within the concept of participation in practice, that is, the kind that is within the context of real life and work.

The second subtheme of entrustment is “students as a teacher” in PBL. In our review, the student needs to be well prepared with the teaching materials. A cross-sectional study conducted by Charoensakulchai and colleagues discovered that student preparation is considered among the important factors in PBL success, alongside other factors such as “objective and contents,” “student assessment,” and “attitude towards group work” [ 60 ]. This is also aligned with a study conducted by Sukrajh [ 61 ] using focus group discussion on fifth-year medical students to explore their perception of preparedness before conducting peer teaching activity. In this study, the student in the focus group expressed that the preparation made them more confident in teaching others because preparing stimulated them to activate and revise prior knowledge, discover their knowledge gaps, construct new knowledge, reflect on their learning, improve their memory, inspire them to search several resources, and motivate them to learn the topics.

The next element of “student as a teacher” is using various learning styles to teach other members in the group. A study conducted by Almomani [ 62 ] showed that the most preferred learning pattern by the high school student is the visual pattern, followed by auditory pattern and then kinesthetic. However, in the university setting, Hamdani [ 63 ] discovered that students prefer a combination of the three learning styles. Anbarasi [ 64 ] also explained that incorporating teaching methods based on the student’s preferred learning style further promotes active learning among the students and significantly improved the long-term retrieval of knowledge. However, among the three learning styles group, he discovered that the kinesthetic group with the kinesthetic teaching method showed a significantly higher post-test score compared to the traditional group with the didactic teaching method, and he concluded that this is because of the involvement of more active learning activity in the kinesthetic group.

The ability of students to give constructive feedback on individual tasks is an important element in promoting student contribution in PBL because feedback from peers or teachers is needed to reassure themselves that they are on the right track in the learning process. Kamp et al. [ 65 ] performed a study on the effectiveness of midterm peer feedback on student individual cognitive, collaborative, and motivational contributions in PBL. The experimental group that received midterm peer feedback combined with goal-setting with face-to-face discussion showed an increased amount of individual contributions in PBL. Another element of effective feedback is that the feedback is given immediately after the observed behavior. Parikh and colleagues survey student feedback in PBL environments among 103 final-year medical students in five Ontario schools, including the University of Toronto, McMaster University, Queens University, the University of Ottawa, and the University of Western Ontario. They discovered that there was a dramatic difference between McMaster University and other universities in the immediacy of feedback they practiced. Seventy percent of students at McMaster reported receiving immediate feedback in PBL, compared to less than 40 percent of students from the other universities, in which most of them received feedback within one week or several weeks after the PBL had been conducted [ 66 ]. Another study, conducted among students of the International Medical University of Kuala Lumpur examining the student expectation on feedback, discovered that immediate feedback is effective if the feedback is in written form, simple but focused on the area of improvement, and delivered by a content expert. If the feedback is delivered by a content non-expert and using a model answer, it must be supplemented with teacher dialogue sessions to clarify the feedback received [ 67 ].

Requesting feedback from peers and teachers is an important element of the PBL learning environment, enabling students to discover their learning gaps and ways to fill them. This is aligned with a study conducted by de Jong and colleagues [ 68 ], who discovered that high-performing students are more motivated to seek feedback than low-performing students. The main reason for this is because high-performing students seek feedback as a tool to learn from, whereas low-performing students do so as an academic requirement. This resulted in high-performing students collecting more feedback. A study by Bose and Gijselaers [ 69 ] examined the factors that promote feedback-seeking behavior in medical residency. They discovered that feedback-seeking behavior can be promoted by providing residents with high-quality feedback to motivate them to ask for feedback for improvement.

By assigning an active role to students as teachers, assessors, and feedback providers, teachers give them the ownership and responsibility to craft their learning. The learner will then learn the skills to monitor and reflect on their learning to achieve academic success. Furthermore, an active role encourages students to be evaluative experts in their own learning, and promoting deep learning [ 70 ].

Functional skills refer to essential abilities for competently performing a task in PBL. This theme requires the student to organize and plan time for specific learning tasks, be digitally literate, use data effectively to support problem-solving, and work together efficiently to achieve agreed objectives. One of the elements in this theme is to have a schedule of learning tasks with deadlines. In a study conducted by Tadjer and colleagues [ 71 ], they discovered that setting deadlines with a restricted time period in a group activity improved students’ cognitive abilities and soft skills. Although the deadline may initially cause anxiety, coping with it encourages students to become more creative and energetic in performing various learning strategies [ 72 , 73 ]. Ballard et al. [ 74 ] reported that students tend to work harder to complete learning tasks if they face multiple deadlines.

The students also need to be digitally literate—i.e., able to demonstrate the use of technological devices and tools in PBL. Taradi et al. [ 75 ] discovered that incorporating technology in learning—blending web technology with PBL—removes time and place barriers in the creation of a collaborative environment. It was found that students who participated in web discussions achieved a significantly higher mean grade on a physiology final examination than those who used traditional methods. Also, the incorporation of an online platform in PBL can facilitate students to develop investigation and inquiry skills with high-level cognitive thought processes, which is crucial to successful problem-solving [ 76 ].

In PBL, students need to work collaboratively with their peers to solve problems. A study by Hidayati et al. [ 77 ] demonstrated that effective collaborative skills improve cognitive learning outcomes and problem-solving ability among students who undergo PBL integrated with digital mind maps. To ensure successful collaborative learning in PBL, professional communication among students is pertinent. Research by Zheng and Huang [ 78 ] has proven that co-regulation (i.e., warm and responsive communication that provides support to peers) improved collaborative effort and group performance among undergraduate and master’s students majoring in education and psychology. This is also in line with a study by Maraj and colleagues [ 79 ], which showed the strong team interaction within the PBL group leads to a high level of team efficacy and academic self-efficacy. Moreover, strengthening communication competence, such as by developing negotiation skills among partners during discussion sessions, improves student scores [ 80 ].

PBL also includes opportunities for students to learn from each other (i.e., peer learning). A study by Maraj et al. [ 79 ] discovered that the majority of the students in their study perceived improvement in their understanding of the learned subject when they learned from each other. Another study by Lyonga [ 81 ] documented the successful formation of cohesive group learning, where students could express and share their ideas with their friends and help each other. It was suggested that each student should be paired with a more knowledgeable student who has mastered certain learning components to promote purposeful structured learning within the group.

From this scoping review, it is clear that functional skills equip the students with abilities and knowledge needed for successful PBL. Studies have shown that strong time management skills, digital literacy, data management, and collaborative skills lead to positive academic achievement [ 77 , 82 , 83 ].

Limitation of the Study

This scoping review is aimed to capture the recent effective learning behavior in problem-based learning; therefore, the literature before 2015 was not included. Without denying the importance of publication before 2015, we are relying on Okoli and Schabram [ 84 ] who highlighted the impossibility of retrieving all the published articles when conducting a literature search. Based on this ground, we decided to focus on the time frame between 2015 and 2019, which is aligned with the concepts of study maturity (i.e., the more mature the field, the higher the published articles and therefore more topics were investigated) by Kraus et al. [ 85 ]. In fact, it was noted that within this time frame, a significant number of articles have been found as relevant to PBL with the recent discovery of effective learning behavior. Nevertheless, our time frame did not include the timing of the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic outbreak, which began at the end of 2019. Hence, we might miss some important elements of learning behavior that are required for the successful implementation of PBL during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Surprisingly, the results obtained from this study are also applicable for the PBL sessions administration during the COVID-19 pandemic situation as one of the functional skills identified is digital proficiency. This skill is indeed important for the successful implementation of online PBL session.

This review identified the essential learning behaviors required for effective PBL in higher education and clustered them into three main themes: (i) intrinsic empowerment, (ii) entrustment, and (iii) functional skills. These learning behaviors must coexist to ensure the achievement of desired learning outcomes. In fact, the findings of this study indicated two important implications for future practice. Firstly, the identified learning behaviors can be incorporated as functional elements in the PBL framework and implementation. Secondly, the learning behaviors change and adaption can be considered to be a new domain of formative assessment related to PBL. It is noteworthy to highlight that these learning behaviors could help in fostering the development of lifelong skills for future workplace challenges. Nevertheless, considerably more work should be carried out to design a solid guideline on how to systematically adopt the learning behaviors in PBL sessions, especially during this COVID-19 pandemic situation.

This study was supported by Postgraduate Incentive Grant-PhD (GIPS-PhD, grant number: 311/PPSP/4404803).

Declarations

The study has received an ethical approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee of Universiti Sains Malaysia.

No informed consent required for the scoping review.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Problem-based learning and the case method

By  Emma Simmons , January 2016

What does problem-based learning (PBL) offer in management education, and how does it relate to teaching with cases? Connect explores.

In the September 2015 Academy of Management Learning & Education , researchers and teachers at four US universities initiated a discussion on how PBL, as practiced in some medical schools, might provide a pedagogical approach to remedy certain perceived shortcomings in management education graduates. The article, Problem-Based Learning: Lessons From Medical Education and Challenges for Management Education identifies, in particular, the ‘call for greater emphasis on relevant skills’ as being often inadequately addressed by other teaching approaches commonly used at business schools, including the case method.

What is problem-based learning?

As the name suggests, PBL places working on a ‘problem’ at the heart of an active learning session (as opposed to passively listening to a lecture, for example). According to the authors: ‘The essential defining characteristic is learning structured around an ambiguous and complex problem in which the professor becomes a facilitator supporting and guiding students in their attempts to solve a real-world problem.’ At the heart of the methodology is the idea of integrating content knowledge with skills development applicable to real-life situations. They write: ‘The PBL process develops critical thinking and problem-solving skills, problem synthesis skills, imagination and creativity, information search and evaluation skills, ability to deal with ambiguity and uncertainty, oral and written communication skills and collaboration skills.’ To achieve this, students will typically work in groups, interspersing team time with their own independent investigation, reflection and feedback, all ‘guided’ and challenged by the instructor.

PBL is widely practiced in medical schools, though not in all; as in management education, debate continues as to which pedagogies produce the best professionals. The underlying rationale for those that do use PBL is that future patients of medical students will present with unique combinations of symptoms, and that before proceeding to diagnosis of the ailment(s), let alone proposing remedies, it is imperative that doctors know how to analyse competently, and be able to uncover, often in collaboration with other medical professionals, what is really going on, in all its complexity; ie identify the right problem(s). Accurate diagnosis will always be crucial for the eventual success of treatment, and in medicine, the stakes around ‘getting it right’ are some of the highest in society. To do this, the future doctor will need to be able to skilfully apply to his or her medical knowledge, based on the literature and best practice, the appropriate skills of investigative thinking, teamwork, and practical resource deployment.

The authors suggest that it is useful to see parallels between the presentation of a sick patient and the unpredictable business situations that will, just as inevitably, present themselves to executives. There is a consequent need to develop teaching that will provide business students, too, with the necessary skills to deal effectively with new and real ‘problems’. We spoke with lead author, Toni Ungaretti, of Johns Hopkins University. For her, the questions business and management educators, like their medical counterparts, need to be asking are: ‘How do you maximise learning for students? How can we produce ‘authentic’ learning? How can we prepare our students for problems we don’t know?’

Keeping it in the family?

While Ungaretti and her co-authors suggest PBL as a powerful way to address these challenges, there are certainly similarities and parallels between both the objectives and practice of PBL, and that of case-based learning, which they refer to as PBL’s ‘better known relative.’ Many aspects are common to both pedagogies. A problem – frequently a ‘dilemma’ in cases – is the starting point for both, though in PBL students will usually delve deeper, back, into the analysis and understanding of the actual problem. The process of seeking a path towards possible solutions is, in both, participant-centred under the skilful guidance of the instructor - rather than being handed to them by the teacher. A true PBL experience is open to possible outcomes that are supported by evidence; the authors summarise: ‘CBL (case-based learning) provides cases that have solutions, whereas PBL provides problems that are yet to be solved’. Some case practitioners might take issue with this distinction, for example, when cases focus on rapidly evolving technologies or business models, when case subjects are composites or constructions rather than real companies, when cases present situations with deliberately uncertain outcomes, or, when a case class might decide that the outcome that really occurred in life was not, in fact, an adequate ‘solution’ at all.

Nevertheless, cases are often used to effectively develop many of the same desirable ‘real world’ thinking as PBL – if not actual ‘practical,’ real-world skills - including those of analysis, research, team-thinking, dealing with ambiguity and discussion, while allowing for relevant theory to be imparted alongside the process. The very point of a case class is for the instructor to create an environment in which exploration of ‘real’ or ‘quasi-real’ dilemmas can be carried out, but, in safety. But, also in this respect, the authors seek to distinguish the two pedagogies: ‘CBL provides a safe environment in which to take risks; whereas PBL provides a risky environment with a safety net.’ According to Toni Ungaretti, ‘the group work environment of PBL is less orchestrated and may appear chaotic, but it is in fact highly structured to facilitate the discovery of viable, evidence-based solutions.’

Indeed, the same skilful ‘orchestration and behind the scenes work’ she highlights can also be observed in a successful case instructor; their respective class preparation needs to be at least as detailed as that of each other. Ungaretti points out: ‘Physicians gradually assume more responsibilities as they grow in competence and their instructors develop confidence in their abilities to make independent judgements – they are creating the environment for students to construct their own learning.’ Just as with business school case teaching, this seemingly simple instructor process may appear effortless – even to the students. But it is highly skilled, and, in the view of Ungaretti and her co-authors, any teachers interested in using PBL for the first time will need support and collaboration to develop materials and to facilitate learning. New case teachers and writers undoubtedly also require support from their institutions and colleagues. One can also assume that both pedagogies may often find themselves competing for time in those academic environments where research output prevails as the number one objective set for faculty.

A perspective from history

Could it be then, that PBL and case-based learning are in fact much closer ‘relatives’? In Making the Case , published in 2003 in Harvard Magazine , David Garvin provides a fascinating overview of the evolution of the case method at Harvard University, from its cradle at the Law School in 1870, through its adoption at Harvard Business School in 1920, to its introduction at Harvard Medical School in 1985. According to Garvin: ‘All professional schools face the same difficult challenge: how to prepare students for the world of practice ... how to diagnose, decide, and act. A surprisingly wide range of professional schools ... have concluded that the best way to teach these skills is by the case method.’

What strikes the reader of Garvin’s article is that although case teaching, originally modelled on the Socratic method, was separately deployed in each school, its incarnation has differed according to the interpretation of the requirements of each profession, with each school having ‘tailored the method to its own ends, focusing on distinctive aptitudes and skills’ – but, while still essentially remaining the case method. While the initial approach at the Law School ‘viewed law as a science and appellate court decisions as the “specimens” from which general principles should be induced’, the first programme of case writing at the Business School was ‘built around real business issues and yet-to-be-made decisions.’ At the Law School, the goal was to develop precise, analytical thinking (ie to learn to ‘think like a lawyer’); at the Business School, the goal was to cultivate persuasive skills and the ‘courage to act’.

Harvard Medical School’s much later move towards ‘active learning’ was ‘designed to cement students’ understanding of basic science by linking it immediately to practical problems – typically, the case histories of individual patients.’ Here, the rigorous requirements of medical practice, and the outpouring of research (the sheer volume of published articles meant that keeping up with the latest findings had to be an ongoing activity), led the case method to evolve in new ways; ‘... discovery ... lies at the heart of the medical school’s case method. The cycle of case presentation, identification of a learning agenda, and independent study is repeated as additional segments of a case unfold.’ Cases ‘are springboards for self-study, not documents prepared in advance of discussion. Because the problem is presented before students have learned all of the associated scientific or clinical concepts, cases serve as catalysts for learning, not as the primary content.’ The classical medical case process, Garvin explains, ‘goes by the name of “problem-based learning”’ and he acknowledges its original development by some pioneering medical schools in the 1960s and 1970s, notably Canada’s McMaster University.

Achieving ‘authentic’ learning

While a discussion of PBL and case pedagogies provides interesting and valuable insights, at its heart lies the shared desire of educators to prepare their students as effectively as possible for the professional challenges they will face after graduation. We also spoke with David Garvin for this article. ‘A re-examination of PBL in a management education context responds to the valid concern that we need to better equip our students with the practical skills they will need through ‘real-world’ exposure,’ he observes. ‘Really strong management cases can get close to the actual experience of a real situation, , including such complex human elements as biased reasoning, political manoeuvring, taken-for-granted assumptions, incomplete or filtered information, and the like, but, they can be hard to identify – and the issues still get worked out in class.’ However, ‘PBL itself faces challenges in offering totally authentic problems to work on,’ he adds. ‘Companies can be reluctant to provide details of the full scope of the problem(s) they face, especially when they involve sensitive people issues, and, in many cases a company will already have a particular course of action in mind, so the genuinely open search for information leading to a ‘real’ solution by the students will be curtailed.’

This raises the question as to whether ‘real-world’ learning can ever be adequately achieved in a classroom and Garvin observes that some proposed examples of PBL are, actually, closer to field, or consulting-based, student projects. He reminds us how, in 2008, Harvard Business School first conceived the FIELD Program , which, in one of its three component experiences, sees students spending at least two weeks, anywhere in the world, working on real projects in real environments. FIELD was created precisely to address the challenges of helping participants acquire and practise skills such as as giving and receiving feedback, developing self-awareness, global and integration intelligence, and research in a live business context. Since 2012, the program has become an established component of the Harvard MBA alongside the other largely case-based elements.

Ultimately, most instructors seem to agree that a mix of pedagogies, underpinned by clear and focused learning objectives, will be necessary to comprehensively equip graduates with the breadth of theoretical and practical skills they will need for a rich, meaningful and successful career after business school. As so often in discussions about different pedagogies, the bottom line turns out to be quality. As Toni Ungaretti and her co-authors put it ‘In short, we see the need for a blend of pedagogies .... The issue is not that one is better than the other, but how both can be done well.’

Our feature in the April issue of Connect will examine in more detail what skills employers actually want in business school graduates .

This article was published in Connect , Issue 19, January 2016.

More case method features

Contributors

Learning with cases can be a challenging experience.

Our interactive study guide takes students through the process, providing practical tips, tricks and tools.

Learning with Cases: An Interactive Study Guide

Most popular.

• Preview copies

In this introductory guide to teaching with cases we ask why teach with cases, explore how to prepare for case teaching, and introduce some tools and techniques. 

Discover more

COLLABORATE WITH 

A. Suradika Professor, Master of Educational Technology, Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Indonesia Indonesia

H. I. Dewi Associate Professor, Master of Educational Technology, Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Indonesia Indonesia

magister teknologi pendidikan

M. I. Nasution Student, Master of Educational Technology, Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Indonesia Indonesia

Project-Based Learning and Problem-Based Learning Models in Critical and Creative Students

This research is experimental research with a 2 x 2 factorial design involving students in the critical and creative categories. Data collection used a description test instrument. Data were analyzed inferentially by hypothesis testing ANACOVA comparison. Problem-Based Learning (PBL) directs students to learn, directs individual and group investigations, generates and performs work, and assesses the problem-solving process. While the syntaxes for Project-Based Learning (PjBL) are starting learning with essential questions, designing a plan for the project, creating the schedule, monitoring students and project progress, assessing the outcome, and evaluating. This study concludes that there is no difference in chemistry learning outcomes between students who are taught using PBL and PjBL, and students who are critical and creative. For syntax, there are similarities in the activities of critical and creative students, at the PjBL stage, in designing a project and evaluating a product, and at the PBL stage, in guiding individual investigations and developing and presenting results.

Alfi, C., Sumarmi, S., & Amirudin, A. (2016). Pengaruh pembelajaran geografi berbasis masalah dengan blended learning terhadap kemampuan berpikir kritis Peserta didik SMA. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, dan Pengembangan, 1(4), 597-602.

Angriani, A. D., Bernard, B., Nur, R., & Nurjawahirah, N. (2016). Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Melalui Pembelajaran Kooperatif Think-Talk-Write Pada Peserta Didik Kelas Viii1 Mtsn Model Makassar. MaPan: Jurnal Matematika Dan Pembelajaran, 4(1), 11-28.

Arifin, Z. (2009). Evaluasi Pembelajaran, Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosda Karya.

Arikunto, S. (2015). Dasar-dasar evaluasi pendidikan jilid 2. Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara.

Asmuni, A. (2020). Problematika pembelajaran daring di masa pandemi covid-19 dan solusi pemecahannya. Jurnal paedagogy, 7(4), 281-288.

Assaf, D. (2018). Motivating language learners during times of crisis through project-based learning: Filming activities at the Arab international university (AIU). Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 8(12), 1649-1657.

Barrett, T. (2013). Learning about the problem in problem-based learning (PBL) by listening to students’ talk in tutorials: a critical discourse analysis study. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 37(4), 519-535.

Belagra, M., & Draoui, B. (2018). Project-based learning and information and communication technology’s integration: Impacts on motivation. International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, 55(4), 293-312.

Bender, W. N. (2012). Project-based learning: Differentiating instruction for the 21st century. Corwin Press.

Binti, A. (2020). Analisa Kemampuan Berfikir Kritis Dan Penalaran Peserta Didik Dalam Pemecahan Masalah Matematis Dengan Model Problem-Based Learning. In Social, Humanities, and Educational Studies (SHES): Conference Series (Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 633-639).

Black, S., & Allen, J. D. (2018). Part 5: Learning is a social act. The Reference Librarian, 59(2), 76-91.

Brundiers, K., & Wiek, A. (2013). Do we teach what we preach? An international comparison of problem-and project-based learning courses in sustainability. Sustainability, 5(4), 1725-1746.

Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S. ... & Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652-661.

Changwong, K., Sukkamart, A., & Sisan, B. (2018). Critical thinking skill development: Analysis of a new learning management model for Thai high schools. Journal of International Studies, 11(2).

Defiyanti, & Sumarni, W. (2019). Analisis Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Peserta Didik Pada Penerapan Problem-Based Learning Berbantuan Lembar Kerja Peserta Didik Bermuatan Etnosains. Phenomenon, 09(2), 206–218.

Dewi, H. I. (2015). Pengembangan Strategi Pembelajaran Berlandaskan Cara Berpikir Kreatif untuk Membuat Karya Arsitektur. JTP-Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan, 17(2), 107-118.

Dimmitt, N. (2017, September). The power of project-based learning: Experiential education to develop critical thinking skills for university students. In CBU International Conference Proceedings (Vol. 5, pp. 575-579).

Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 12, 43-52.

Ennis R (1996) Critical thinking. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River

Fadlilah, A. N. (2020). Strategi menghidupkan motivasi belajar anak usia dini selama pandemi covid-19 melalui publikasi. Jurnal Obsesi: Jurnal Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, 5(1), 373-384.

Farhan, M., & Retnawati, H. (2014). Keefektifan PBL dan IBL ditinjau dari prestasi belajar, kemampuan representasi matematis, dan motivasi belajar. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 1(2), 227-240.

Fathiara, A., Badarudin, B., & Muslim, A. H. (2019). Meningkatkan keterampilan berpikir kritis dan gemar membaca peserta didik melalui model predict observe explain berbasis literasi. Muallimuna: Jurnal Madrasah Ibtidaiyah, 4(2), 92-101.

Fatirul, A. N., & ST, M. P. (2020). Strategi Pembelajaran Problem Based Learning Berbantuan Internet dan Gaya Kognitif terhadap Prestasi Belajar. Jakad Media Publishing.

George Lucas Educational Foundation. (2014). What is Project-Based Learning (PBL). https://www.edutopia.org/project-based-learning.

Gilhooly, K. J., Ball, L. J., & Macchi, L. (2015). Insight and creative thinking processes: Routine and special. Thinking & Reasoning, 21(1), 1-4.

Hall, W., Palmer, S., & Bennett, M. (2012). A longitudinal evaluation of a project-based learning initiative in an engineering undergraduate programme. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(2), 155-165.

Halmaida, H., Mahzum, E., & Susanna, S. (2020). The Effort To Improve Critical Thinking SKILLS In Physics Learning Through Project Based Learning Model. Asian Journal of Science Education, 2(2), 93-98.

Hidayatsyah, H. (2021). Kemampuan pemecahan masalah Peserta didik menggunakan model Problem-Based learning berbantuan Geogebra. Jurnal Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 5(1), 458-470.

Holmes, L. M. (2012). The effects of Project-based learning on 21st-century skills and no child left behind accountability standards (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database

I Putu Yogi, Y. S. P., Nyeneng, I., & Distrik, I. W. (2021). The Effect of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Approaches on Critical Thinking Skills Using PBL Learning Models. Berkala Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika, 9(1), 1-15.

Ikhsan, M., Munzir, S., & Fitria, L. (2017). Kemampuan berpikir kritis dan metakognisi Peserta didik dalam menyelesaikan masalah matematika melalui pendekatan problem solving. AKSIOMA: Jurnal Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika, 6(2), 234.

Jusmaya, A., & Efyanto, W. (2018). Meningkatkan Kemampuan Critical Thinking MahaPeserta didik dengan MenerapkanProject Based Learning. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Seni, 19(2), 116-127.

Kauchak, D., & Eggen, P. (2012). Learning and Teaching.

Kean, A. C., & Kwe, N. M. (2014). Meaningful learning in the teaching of culture: The project-based learning approach. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 2(2), 189-197

Khoiri, W., Rochmad, R., & Cahyono, A. N. (2013). Problem-Based learning berbantuan multimedia dalam pembelajaran matematika untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berpikir kreatif. Unnes Journal of Mathematics Education, 2(1).

Krajcik, J. S., & Shin, N. (2014). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 275–297). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Le Pertel, N., Fisher, J., & van Dam, N. (2020). Neuroscience of embodied reflection:somatic/mindbody/contemplative practices, health, and transformative learning. Reflective Practice, 21(6), 803-818.

Leow, F. T., & Neo, M. (2014). Interactive multimedia learning: Innovating classroom education in a Malaysian university. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 13(2), 99-110.

Liu, Z. K., He, J., & Li, B. (2015). Critical and creative thinking as learning processes at top-ranking Chinese middle schools: possibilities and required improvements. High Ability Studies, 26(1), 139-152.

Loewen, S., & Plonsky, L. (2017). An A–Z of applied linguistics research methods. Bloomsbury Publishing.

Luzyawati, L. (2017). Analisis kemampuan berpikir kritis Peserta didik SMA materi alat indera melalui model pembelajaran inquiry pictorial riddle. Edu Sains: Jurnal Pendidikan Sains dan Matematika, 5(2), 9-21.

Marzuki, M., & Basariah, B. (2017). The influence of problem-based learning and project citizen model in the civic education learning on student’s critical thinking ability and self-discipline. Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan, 36(3).

Maulana, H. A., & Hamidi, M. (2020). Persepsi Mahapeserta didik terhadap Pembelajaran Daring pada Mata Kuliah Praktik di Pendidikan Vokasi. Equilibrium: Jurnal Pendidikan, 8(2), 224–231.

Munandar, U. (2016). Pengembangan kreativitas anak berbakat. Rineka cipta.

National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking. (NCECT) 2017. A draft statement of principles Retrieved.

OECD. (2019). PISA 2018. PISA 2018 Result Combined Executive Summaries. PISA-OECD Publishing.

Piergiovanni, P. R. (2014). Creating a critical thinker. College Teaching, 62(3), 86-93.

Poonpon, K. (2017). Enhancing English skills through project-based learning. The English Teacher, 10.

Purnomo, D. S. (2022). Efektivitas Problem-Based learning dan project based learning terhadap prestasi belajar matematika ditinjau dari digital literacy pada peserta didik kelas viii smp negeri 3 klaten tahun ajaran 2021/2022 (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Widya

Rahabav, P. (2016). The Effectiveness of Academic Supervision for Teachers. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(9), 47-55.

Reigeluth, C. M. (2013). Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Volume II. Routledge.

Rusmono. (2017). Problem-Based Learning itu perlu. Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia.

Sawyer, R. K. (2014). The future of learning: Grounding educational innovation in the learning sciences. The Cambridge Handbook of the learning sciences, 726-746.

Sawyer, R. K. (Ed.). (2005). The Cambridge Handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press.

Setyosari, P., & Sumarmi, S. (2017). Penerapan model Problem-Based learning meningkatkan motivasi dan hasil belajar IPS. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, dan Pengembangan, 2(9), 1188-1195

Silaen, I. A. V., Adriana, M., & Rahayu, R. (2021). Pengaruh Model Pembelajaran Contextual Teaching Learning Dan Realistic Mathematics Education Terhadap Kemampuan Pemahaman Konsep Matematika Dan Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematis Di Kelas VIII SMP IT Ibnu Halim Medan Tahun Pelajaran 2020/2021. ALACRITY: Journal Of Education, 12-20.

Silva, A. B. D., Bispo, A. C. K. D. A., Rodriguez, D. G., & Vasquez, F. I. F. (2018). Problem-based learning: A proposal for structuring PBL and its implications for learning among students in an undergraduate management degree program. Revista de Gestão, 25(2), 160-177.

Sulaeman, M. (2020). Aplikasi Project-Based Learning. Jawa Barat: Bioma Publishing.

Sugiyono, S. (2020). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Sukmadinata, N. S., & Syaodih, E. (2012). Kurikulum dan Pembelajaran Kompetensi, Bandung: PT. Refika Aditama.

Surapranata, S. (2020). Analisis, validitas, reliabilitas, dan interpretasi hasil tes.

Susanto, A. (2013). Teori Belajar dan Pembelajaran di Seklah Dasar. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Susilawati, A., Hernani, H., & Sinaga, P. (2017). The Application of Project-Based Learning Using Mind Maps to Improve Students’Environmental Attitudes Towards Waste Management in Junior High Schools. International Journal of Education, 9(2), 120-125.

Tuzlukova, V., Al Busaidi, S., & Burns, S. L. (2017). Critical thinking in the Language Classroom: Teacher Beliefs and Methods. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 25(2).

Ülger, K. A. N. İ., & Imer, Z. (2013). The effect of Problem-Based learning (PBL) approach on students’ creative thinking ability. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(1), 382-392.

Vogler, J. S., Thompson, P., Davis, D. W., Mayfield, B. E., Finley, P. M., & Yasseri, D. (2018). The hard work of soft skills: augmenting the project-based learning experience with interdisciplinary teamwork. Instructional Science, 46(3), 457-488.

Wahyono, P., Husamah, H., & Budi, A. S. (2020). Guru profesional di masa pandemi COVID-19: Review implementasi, tantangan, dan solusi pembelajaran daring. Jurnal pendidikan profesi guru, 1(1), 51-65.

Yaldız, N., & Bailey, M. (2019). The Effect of Critical Thinking on Making the Right Decisions in the New Venture Process. Procedia Computer Science, 158, 281-286.

Yang, K., Woomer, G. R., & Matthews, J. T. (2012). Collaborative learning among undergraduate students in community health nursing. Nurse Education in Practice, 12(2), 72-76.

Yusriani, Y., Arsyad, M., & Arafah, K. (2020). Kesulitan Guru dalam Mengimplementasikan Model Pembelajaran Berbasis Proyek pada Mata Pelajaran Fisika di SMA Negeri Kota Makassar. In Prosiding Seminar Nasional Fisika PPs Universitas Negeri Makassar (Vol. 2, pp. 138-141).

Zalbidea, J. (2017). ‘One task fits all’? The roles of task complexity, modality, and working memory capacity in L2 performance. The Modern Language Journal, 101(2), 335-352.

• There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN: 2089-4392

Hosted by Mason Publishing , part of the George Mason University Libraries .

PERBANDINGAN PENINGKATAN KEMAMPUAN PEMECAHAN MASALAH MATEMATIS SISWA SMP ANTARA YANG MEMPEROLEH PEMBELAJARAN MODEL ELICITING ACTIVITIES (MEAS) DAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL)

Siti Malikiyah, Siti Malikiyah (2019) PERBANDINGAN PENINGKATAN KEMAMPUAN PEMECAHAN MASALAH MATEMATIS SISWA SMP ANTARA YANG MEMPEROLEH PEMBELAJARAN MODEL ELICITING ACTIVITIES (MEAS) DAN PROBLEM BASED LEARNING (PBL). S1 thesis, Universitas Pendidikan Matematika.

Baca Full Text klik disini

“The Comparison of the Enhancement of Mathematical Problem Solving Ability of Junior High School Students between those who obtained Model Eliciting Activities (MEAs) Learning and Problem Based Learning (PBL)” Siti Malikiyah (1506538). Mathematics Education. Faculty of Mathematics and Science Education. Indonesia University of Education. This study aims to determine whether there are any differences enhancement in mathematical problem solving abilities between Junior High School students who obtain Modeling Activities Learning (MEAs) and Junior High School students who obtain Problem Based Learning (PBL) and to know and to analyze Junior High School students' responses to mathematics learning through Model Eliciting Activities (MEAs) and Problem Based Learning (PBL). The research design used in this study was Quasi Experimental Research. The population in this study were all eighth grade students of Junior High School in Bandung city. The sample used in this study were two experimental classes, with experimental class 1 and experimental class 2 totaling 27 students. The way to take sample in this research was using purposive sample technique. The conclusions of this study are (1) There is no difference in the enhancement of mathematical problem solving abilities between students who obtain Model Eliciting Activities (MEAs) learning and Problem Based Learning (PBL). (2) In general, the responses of students who receive Model Eliciting Activities (MEAs) learning and Problem Based Learning (PBL) provide a fairly positive attitude, which shows a sense of pleasure, enthusiasm and benefits of learning. Keywords: mathematical problem solving ability, model eliciting activities problem based learning

Actions (login required)

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Proposal PBL

Pendidikan di Indonesia sekarang sedang menghadapi tantangan yang hebat. Tuntutan untuk mengembangkan sumber daya manusia melalui pendidikan mutlak harus dilakukan. Harapan untuk mendapatkan manusia Indonesia yang unggul melalui pendidikan ternyata mendapat kendala yang tidak ringan. Salah satu kendala tersebut disebabkan kurangnya kreatifitas guru-guru dalam melaksanakan pembelajaran di sekolah. Dalam keseluruhan proses pendidikan di sekolah, kegiatan belajar mengajar merupakan kegiatan yang paling pokok. Keberhasilan pencapaian tujuan pendidikan terutama ditentukan oleh proses belajar mengajar yang dialami siswa. Pendidikan di sekolah mempunyai tujuan mengubah siswa agar dapat memiliki pengetahuan, keterampilan, dan sikap pelajar sebagai bentuk perubahan perilaku hasil belajar (Arikunto,2009). Upaya untuk mengurangi permasalahan-permasalahan di atas dengan tujuan untuk meningkatkan hasil belajar biologi siswa adalah dengan mengembangkan model-model pembelajaran yang inovatif dan memberi kesempatan kepada siswa untuk ikut berperan secara aktif dalam proses belajar mengajar. Model pembelajaran adalah cara yang digunakan guru dalam proses belajar mengajar dengan berbagai variasi sehingga siswa tidak bosan dan tercipta suasana belajar yang menarik dan menyenangkan (Sanjaya, 2010). Selain itu, model pembelajaran yang digunakan guru juga seharusnya dapat membantu proses analisis peserta didik. Salah satu model yang bisa digunakan adalah model Problem Based Learning. Diharapkan model ini lebih baik untuk meningkatkan keaktifan peserta didik jika dibandingkan dengan model konvensional. Keefektifan model ini adalah peserta didik lebih aktif dalam berpikir dan memahami materi secara berkelompok dengan melakukan investigasi dan inkuiri terhadap permasalahan yang nyata di sekitarnya sehingga mereka mendapatkan kesan yang mendalam dan lebih bermakna tentang apa yang mereka pelajari.

Related Papers

Bayuda Luqman Al-Farisi, M.Pd.

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui pengaruh model pembelajaran problem based learning terhadap hasil belajar siswa pada konsep Virus. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah kuasi eksperimen dengan teknik pengambilan sampel dilakukan dengan cara sampling purposive. Jumlah sampel sebanyak 72 siswa yang terdiri dari 36 siswa sebagai kelas eksperimen dan 36 siswa sebagai kelas kontrol. Penelitian ini dilakukan di SMAN 6 Kota Tangerang Selatan dengan kelas X-MIA2 sebagai kelas eksperimen dan kelas X-MIA 5 sebagai kelas kontrol. Instrumen yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah tes tertulis, meliputi pretes dan postes dalam bentuk uraian dengan jumlah 10 butir soal serta lembar observasi kegiatan untuk guru dan siswa. Teknik analisis data yang dilakukan untuk uji normalitas menggunakan uji lilliefors dan untuk uji homogenitas menggunakan uji fischer, dilanjutkan dengan uji hipotesis menggunakan uji t. Hasil uji t diperoleh thitung sebesar 3,15; sedangkan ttabel pada taraf signifikansi 5% diperoleh sebesar 1,96 menunjukkan bahwa thitung > ttabel. Dengan demikian, hipotesis alternatif (Ha) diterima dan hipotesis nol (H0) ditolak. Maka dapat disimpulkan terdapat pengaruh dari penggunaan model pembelajaran problem based learning terhadap hasil belajar biologi siswa pada konsep Virus.

Ahya Siti Hasanah

Abstrak: Media yang ditawarkan untuk mengatasi kesulitan siswa dalam mempelajari materi yang prosesnya sulit diamati secara langsung yaitu dengan media pembelajaran CD interaktif. Penelitian dilakukan di SMA Negeri 1 Lawang dengan sampel penelitian yaitu siswa kelas XI IA 1 dan XI IA 4 sebagai kelas eksperimen dan siswa kelas XI IA 2 dan XI IA 3 sebagai kelas kontrol. Rancangan yang digunakan adalah rancangan penelitian eksperimen semu dengan desain penelitian pre test-post test nonequivalent group design. Hasil menunjukkan bahwa terdapat perbedaan hasil belajar kognitif yang signifikan antara siswa yang memanfaatkan CD interaktif melalui siklus belajar dengan siswa yang mendapatkan pembelajaran melalui strategi konvensional. Kata kunci: CD interaktif, motivasi, hasil belajar kognitif, hasil belajar afektif Abstract: Offered media to overcome students’ difficulties in learning subjects whose process is difficult to observe directly is by interactive CD learning media. This research was held in Public Senior High School 1 Lawang with the research’s sample is students of class XI IA 1 and XI IA4 as experiment class and students of class XI IA 2 and XI IA3 as control class. Scheme used in this research is a quasi-experimental research scheme with research design pre test-post test nonequivalent group design. This research shows that there is a different cognitive study result which is significant between students used interactive CD through study cycle with they who got learning through conventional strategy. Keywords: interactive CD, motivation, cognitive study result, affective study result

alin lindah

amir mahmud

Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi

This study was aimed to determine the effect of problem based learning and group investigation on: (1) learning outcomes; and (2) creative thinking ability of student in class XI of SMAN 1 Muara Batu. This type of research is a quasi-experimental research with pretest-posttest control group design. Samples were selected using random cluster sampling technique and divided into experimental and control classes. Class XI IPA 3 was applied problem-based learning model, class XI IPA 1 was applied to the model group investigation, and class XI IPA 2 was applied in the conventional learning (control). Multiple choices were used to measure learning outcomes, while tests of creative thinking skills in the form of essay questions. Data were analyzed using Analysis Covarian (Anacova) at significance level α = 0.05 and followed by Tukey's test with SPSS 21.0. The results showed that: (1) There was an effect of learning model to the learning outcomes of students (F = 14.183, P = 0.000). Students who were taught by problem-based learning model was significantly different from those of group investigation and conventional learning model; and (2) There was an effect of learning model to students creative thinking abilities (F = 12.030, P = 0.000). Students who were taught by problem-based learning model was not significantly different from the group investigation model but differed significantly with students who were taught by conventional learning model.

ABSTRAK Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mengasah kemampuan siswa dalam menganalisis, mengkritisi dan mengaitkan konsep yang dipelajari di sekolah dengan kebudayaan lokal yang berkembang di masyarakat agar siswa memperoleh pemahaman mendalam terhadap konsep yang dipelajarinya. Tujuan penelitian ini mengkaji 1) aktivitas belajar siswa, 2) peningkatan keterampilan berpikir kritis (KBK) siswa, dan 3) respon siswa terhadap penerapan pembelajaran berbasis sains budaya lokal ngaseup. Penelitian dilaksanakan dari bulan April sampai Mei 2016. Populasi dalam penelitian ini adalah seluruh siswa kelas XI MIPA SMAN 1 Maja. Sampel terdiri dari 30 siswa kelas XI MIPA 3 sebagai kelas eksperimen dan 30 siswa kelas XI MIPA 1 sebagai kelas kontrol. Desain penelitian yang digunakan adalah pretest-posttest control group design dengan teknik pengumpulan data menggunakan tes, observasi dan angket. Data dianalisis dengan menggunakan software SPSS 17.0. Hasil penelitian menunjukan 1) aktivitas belajar siswa kelas eksperimen lebih baik dari kelas kontrol; 2) KBK siswa kelas eksperimen dan kontrol meningkat, rata-rata N-Gain kelas eksperimen sebesar 0,56 dan rata-rata N-Gain kelas kontrol sebesar 0,47. Hasil uji statistik mnghasilkan sig. 0,001 < 0,05, artinya Ho ditolak dan Ha diterima; 3) respon siswa terhadap pembelajaran berbasis sains budaya lokal ngaseup termasuk dalam kriteria sangat kuat. Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini yaitu 1) terdapat perbedaan peningkatan KBK siswa yang signifikan antara kelas eksperimen dan kontrol, 2) aktivitas belajar siswa di kelas eksperimen jauh lebih baik dari kelas kontrol, 3) siswa memberi respon positif terhadap pembelajaran berbasis sains budaya lokal ngaseup.

Syah Al Muhammad Syafiq

This study aims to describe the feasibility of interactive multimedia based inquiry on material Human Reproduction System to improve learning outcomes and practice students critical thinking skills

sule sutisna

Abstrak Bangsa indonesia saat ini sedang mengalami krisis akhlak khususnya dikalangan pelajar seperti tawuran antar pelajar, tindak kekerasan, perilaku seks yang tidak normal, seks bebas dikalangan pelajar dan lain-lain sepertinya sudah menjadi penghias rutin setiap berita dimedia massa. Peran guru sebagai agent of change (agen perubahan) sangatlah penting dalam pendidikan dan pembelajaran. Guru merupakan salah satu penentu keberhasilan siswa mendapatkan pengalaman belajar dalam membangun kecerdasan intelektual (IQ), kecerdasan emosional (EQ), dan kecerdasan spiritual (SQ) untuk mencapai puncak prestasi. Penelitian ini dilakukan di SMA Negeri 1 Mandirancan, tepatnya dikelas XI IPA 1 (Kelas eksperimen) dengan jumlah siswa 27 siswa dan kelas XI IPA 3 (kelas kontrol) dengan jumlah siswa 27 siswa. Penelitian menggunakan desain Pre test Post test Control Group Design. Teknik pengumpulan data yang digunakan adalah lembar observasi, tes dan angket. Data yang diperoleh dianalisis dengan menggunakan uji statistik meliputi uji normalitas, uji homogenitas dan uji t (hipotesis). Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan peningkatan hasil belajar siswa setelah diterapkannya pembelajaran biologi berbasis nilai imtaq. Peningkatan hasil belajar siswa kelas eksperimen lebih tinggi daripada kelas kontrol hal ini dibuktikan dengan hasil rata-rata N-Gain 0,61 dengan kriteria sedang pada kelas ekperimen dan 0,43 pada kelas kontrol dengan kriteria sedang. Aktivitas on task siswa pada kegiatan awal, kegiatan pembelajaran dan kegiatan evaluasi sebesar 72,48% dengan off task sebesar 27,52% pada kelas eksperimen dan respon siswa terhadap penerapan pembelajaran biologi berbasis nilai imtaq sangat baik dengan rata-rata pernyataan positif memperoleh persentase 68,79% dengan kriteria kuat, sedangkan rata-rata pernyataan negatif memperoleh presentase 64,31% dengan kriteria kuat. Kata Kunci : Penerapan Pembelajaran Biologi Berbasis Nilai Imtaq, Hasil Belajar

Window Civylizase

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Karlin Unyu

tiara amelia

Almira Ulimaz, S.Si, M.Pd

Sri Wahyu Widyaningsih

Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan (FITK) UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta

FITK PRESS UIN Jakarta

Rani Rahmahdini

Mrs Nurhani

Agus Bahar Rachman , kasim muh , Dewi Baderan , Anang Legowo

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024