 |
E I P |
||
| The Direct and Indirect Costs of Implementing Problem-Based
Learning into Traditional Professional Courses within Universities |
|||
97/9 Susan E Aldred Bob Dick |
|||
| Evaluations and Investigations Program Higher Education Division Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs |
|
||
©Commonwealth of Australia 1997
ISBN 0 642 23658 5
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968,
no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the
Australian Government Publishing Service. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction
and rights should be addressed to the manager, Commonwealth Information Services,
Australian Government Publishing Service, GPO Box 84, Canberra ACT 2601.
This report is funded under the Evaluations and Investigations Program of the
Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
[next chapter] [top of document]
4. Responses to the Open-ended Question
5. Data from the Semi-structured Interviews
6. Observing Tutors and Students in Problem-Based Learning Groups
Appendix A: Departments Contacted in the First Round
Appendix B:Letter and Questionnaire
Appendix C: Questionnaire to Coordinators
Appendix D: Cognate Departments Contacted in the Second Round
Appendix E: Subject Reported as using Problem-Based Learning
Appendix F: Example of a Problem used in Professional Education
Preface
[next chapter] [contents]
This project was funded under the 1995/96 Department of Employment, Education and Training and Youth Affairs (DEETYA) Evaluation and Investigation Program. The purpose of the project was to examine the implementation of problem-based learning (PBL) into subjects within professional education courses at The University of Queensland. More specifically, the research aimed to highlight the direct and indirect costs and any barriers associated with the implementation of this model of teaching and learning.
This report details the research findings. It is hoped that the report will constitute an important resource for the implementation of PBL into professional subjects as well as an addition to the body of literature on PBL. It highlights the need for time to enable university teachers to reflect on the learning and teaching that occurs in their subjects. It illustrates how professional education and its practitioners need to respond to the changing demands of professional life, which in turn requires closer links and greater collaboration between universities and the professions. Those thinking about implementing PBL may need to look at the contemporary demands of professional practice and the changing knowledge base. Similarly, university departments which are not part of the professional schools (i.e. cognate departments) need to become more collaborative in their approach to the schools to ensure a more appropriate curriculum and move towards a more unified approach to teaching and learning.
Clear vision at both the individual and school/departmental level is required, as is the leadership of individuals with personality, drive and commitment. This is particularly important when perceptions about PBL held by staff and students within any given institution are negative. There will always be individuals who resist change and who prefer teaching and learning to follow traditional structures in which the teacher is central. In making the paradigm shift to student-centred and problem-based learning, resistance from several quarters may be encountered.
This report provides some insight into how individuals who have implemented PBL have responded to these issues.
[next chapter] [previous chapter] [contents]
We would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the contribution of all who assisted in this project. We are particularly grateful for the cooperation of academic and general staff who participated in the study, particularly those who were interviewed and who allowed observation of classes. Without the support and participation of these staff members, this research project would not have been possible. Our thanks are also extended to the large number of current and former students of the University who generously gave of their time.
Facilities and logistical support for the project were provided by the Teaching and Educational Development Institute and the Department of Dentistry of the University of Queensland, and we are grateful for the encouragement and support of the respective heads of department, Dr David Warren Piper and Professor Greg Seymour.
Finally, we thank the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs
for providing funding under the Evaluations and Investigations Program for this study. The
input of the Advisory Committee, comprising Ms Leigh Tabrett (Higher Education Council)
and Mr Peter Nicholson (DEETYA), is gratefully acknowledged, as is the contribution of the
Mr David McCann and Ms Kate Ellmers (DEETYA), who provided valuable comment on the
presentation of the final report.
Susan E Aldred
Michael J Aldred
Laurence J Walsh
Bob Dick
December 1996
[next chapter] [previous chapter] [contents]
This report serves to highlight a number of issues which need to be considered if the implementation of PBL into professional education is to continue and grow. Staff were able to identify the direct costs associated with implementing PBL, although they were not always able to quantify them exactly. Indirect costs were largely associated with time and maintaining a balance between teaching and research. However, it became clear that a number of other factors can affect the success of an educational innovation like PBL over the longer term. These factors include appropriate professional development and educational leadership as well as institutional support. Some attention must be also be paid to resources and facilities. It must also be emphasised that much of what is reported in this document applies to all forms of student-centred learning as well as to PBL and also to educational change in general.
As we have seen at The University of Queensland, current professional development for staff involved in the delivery of PBL subjects ranged from the formal qualification of a Graduate Certificate in Education through to personal initiatives of observing colleagues. Staff also attended workshops and tutor training meetings which took place within their own departments and at TEDI. One module of the Graduate Certificate was geared specifically to PBL and when PBL workshops were given at the institutional level these were usually presented by staff from outside the University.
It would appear that there is a need for the educational professional development of university staff to be expanded and to address a variety of teaching and learning styles. Participants expressed a need for this to be local, timely, appropriate and ongoing. Such professional development could include PBL as well as other forms of student-centred learning; as we have already stated, much of what our participants have reported in this study applies to student-centred learning in general. It may occur via activities such as workshops, by publication in the field of education together with activities at the departmental and individual staff level.
The concept of educational and curriculum leadership is important in this regard. This study shows that there exists at this University a body of staff who have gained valuable hands-on experience of PBL as tutors and/or coordinators. These individuals are a key resource for those wishing to follow in their footsteps. The lessons they have learnt are important ones which should be passed on to other staff members, in the best traditions of collegiality. There is a strong argument for role models in the dissemination of successful educational practice within a large and complex university. Such individuals not only serve as exemplars of good practice, they are also in an ideal position to question the foundations of educational activities and teaching styles that may have become both entrenched and stagnant.
Such staff could act in a variety of roles and contribute to the educational professional development of their colleagues. This could include a mentoring or support role, together with direct contribution to departmental level tutor training sessions. Experienced staff could hold sessions to demonstrate PBL and serve as models of good practice. This is one paradigm currently being used for the Graduate Medical Course. In terms of strategies for subject development and assessment in PBL, assistance and advice could be provided to individuals in the areas of problem design and appropriate methods of assessment. Further roles might include participation as presenters in modules relating to PBL in the Graduate Certificate in Education as well as staff development sessions and providing feedback on videotaped PBL sessions. A study of group dynamics would lead to an appreciation of various strategies which may be successful in small group work. Observation of functional and dysfunctional PBL groups would provide staff with important insights into group processes and would provide an opportunity for appropriate mentoring skills (on the part of the tutor) to be modelled. Problem design is another skill which can be developed through practice. Problem design can be an exercise in group process and collaborative learning which itself mirrors many of the aspects of PBL and is a valuable format in which tutors can gain skills in group work.
It is important that staff acting in leadership roles have credibility and legitimacy in the eyes of those whom they advise. Improving dialogue between departments would seem to be desirable and the culture of teaching and learning, which should be part of any learning institution, must be further developed. Further professional development may be necessary for these staff to successfully fulfil a leadership role. The openness to change of staff members in a department can vary dramatically and staff wishing to lead educational change must be aware of the potential threats to such change and those factors which influence it, as outlined by Fullan (1991). Individuals who are very well established in their habits can find it difficult to consider or adapt to change, particularly if they feel elements of coercion operating. Even when the decision made to make a major shift in styles of teaching is free of coercion and based on responses to positive influences, there remains uncertainty and potential stress associated with the unknown. There is a need to bring together groups of staff in a more cohesive manner to both form a network for support and discussion for individuals and to learn as a community.
As the data showed, staff commented on coping with changes brought about by their different roles in PBL classes compared with traditional formats. The change from 'expert lecturer' to tutor/mentor/colleague was a significant challenge to be met. Several staff and students commented on problems with tutors who wanted to retain the 'expert' label and give quick and easy answers and who thereby turned sessions into mini-lectures. This did not appear to be a function of the age of the tutor but rather of their attitude and disposition. Some instructors with years of experience in didactic teaching settings fitted easily into the role of a facilitator, while some younger staff members seemed intent on retaining the mantle of expert. Once again, this highlights the need for appropriate professional development and time to be able to reflect on one's teaching, on student learning and how these may be best facilitated in a PBL format. If fundamental beliefs about learning and teaching are to be challenged, then such challenge must be counterbalanced with support if enduring change is to be achieved.
During the interviews, several staff discussed the desirable attributes of a PBL tutor and how these could be fostered. Important properties of a tutor were an intrinsic interest in how students learn and a commitment to maximising student learning. It would seem important that tutors are respectful of students and keen for them to voice their own opinions and ideas. Tutors need to be able to communicate effectively in the language used by students and be capable of operating in a less formal context. They need to be able to establish and maintain a feeling of goodwill and cooperation in the group and be knowledgeable (although not necessarily an expert) in the area under study. These would seem to be desirable attributes to develop in any model of learning and teaching.
It may be that, for some staff, all the above points represent a fundamental challenge to their thinking about the role of a university teacher. While some staff responded readily to such challenges and indeed sought the challenge, there may be cases in which staff have no choice but to make the move to PBL. This was not the case for most of our participants-they had instigated change themselves. Thus professional development needs to be tailored to meet specific needs relating to this type of learning and teaching. Tutors need to be able to identify their role in the PBL setting and establish principles for working with small groups.
Some students clearly prefer more traditional styles of teaching and learning, are comfortable with surface approaches to learning and are very much curriculum- and subject-bound in their personal study habits. It is important that staff are aware that educational change affects students as deeply as it affects staff, as Fullan (1991) points out. As staff and students told us, PBL may be unlike anything they have experienced in their educational careers to date. For PBL to be successful, students as well as tutors need an adequate introduction to the concept. Guidelines for working in groups are useful, as is an awareness that it is difficult to be self-motivated from the start. Students need to realise that there may be a diminishing level of guidance as the subject and/or the course progresses. However, diminishing guidance should not be used as an excuse for staff to abandon students to their own devices, as this leads to understandable frustration and disillusionment. Self-motivation and the fostering of independence are important aspects which need to be supported and reinforced by tutors as well as by other students in the group. It would seem that success is linked to fostering a positive attitude among students and this may be done by involving them in negotiations over group formation and assessment and treating students as colleagues during the implementation of PBL.
The issue of student selection for professional courses needs to be addressed on an ongoing basis, particularly if there is going to be an increased use of PBL in professional education-given the trends this seems likely. Accepting students on the basis of one numerical score may not be the most appropriate manner in which to select students for a demanding course and subsequent demanding career. Perhaps the corollary of this is that students need to look carefully at the demands of a professional course and the learning and teaching that will be experienced in that course. If they are uncomfortable with self-directed small group learning then it may be that their choice of career will be affected. If student selection processes are not altered, then those students who have particular difficulty in coping with small group interaction, whether this be due to language or cultural differences, may need additional support at first. It would seem from the data in this report that if PBL is to expand, then the pre-requisites for communication skills, both written and oral, may need to be examined in some detail.
Institutional support for teaching innovation can occur at the university level and/or the departmental level. Both of these have been referred to in this report. Situations change with time and this is difficult to illustrate in a project of this type. For instance, where at first PBL had been ignored or overtly resisted, if it was later seen to be a success then support might follow the initiative rather than precede it. In turn, several initiatives of this type which are successful and gain exposure at the institutional level may also prompt wider change.
The culture of learning and teaching that exists in any given situation is important in this regard. While there may be support at the departmental level, this may be lacking at higher levels within the institution. This makes it more important to have a critical mass of people committed to the same goals for learning and teaching. The participants in this sample tended to operate largely in isolation. Although they all expressed an interest in the efforts of their colleagues in other departments, there was little or no interaction between them. There is no specific institutional support in the shape of an interest group set up for staff teaching in PBL mode, although this had existed briefly up to the time at which this project began, largely due to the particular interests of a temporary appointee to TEDI. As has been noted earlier, it is important that support is given for such a group to re-emerge.
Further institutional support for PBL could include specific funding of initiatives in this area by individual departments as well as the provision of courses and hands-on workshops for staff involved in PBL as tutors or problem designers. This would overcome feelings of isolation and would provide tangible support for individual members of staff experiencing difficulties. To such mechanisms could be added the further development of staff through formal programmes such as the Graduate Certificate in Education and institutional and/or departmental support in the form of scholarships to cover course fees. Overt support at the institutional level gives legitimacy to innovative efforts of staff and eventually change may become institutionalised (Curry 1992).
It is important that an emphasis is maintained on both content and process in higher education. At this University, there has been growing interest in the processes of learning and teaching, heightened by the establishment of a Teaching and Learning Committee that operates at University level. This committee has recently published guidelines on assessment which represent a move towards criterion-based assessment and a move away from the type of assessment-driven learning with which traditional teaching is associated. The University administration has also begun a major reorganisation of academic structures, as noted earlier. This will impact upon all areas and particularly those departments associated with professional schools. While energy is directed towards this, the more fundamental process of developing and improving learning and teaching across the University might be diverted. However, the Teaching and Learning Committee has also begun to develop plans for rewarding departments for the quality of teaching rather than solely the quantity of teaching. This initiative might provide tangible rewards for departments involved in enhancing student learning which is the ethos of PBL. It is also important at the institutional level to emphasise that teaching as well as research forms the backbone of academic work and that staff are rewarded for teaching as well as research by promotions and tenure so that this encourages future generations of university teachers. Rewarding excellence and innovation in teaching gives a level of credibility to the staff involved, enabling them to act in the leadership role described above. It also encourages others to reflect and perhaps change their own practice if they feel such change may be met with reward.
At the meta-institutional level, support for learning and teaching initiatives that are perceived as expensive and time-consuming may be challenged by the Federal Government's changes to university funding. This belief persists even though the experience of respondents in this project was that cost was not a major impediment to the implementation of PBL. Indeed, many had found their changes from a traditional to PBL format essentially cost-neutral in terms of direct costs.
Nevertheless, in difficult fiscal circumstances, there will be tendency for departments and institutions to favour didactic teaching modes such as the large lecture format because of the reduced staffing costs of such measures compared with the costs of multiple tutors which might be required for PBL. Such temptations must be resisted vigorously. The quality of student learning and the appropriateness of the learning and teaching approach must be used as the deciding factor in determining subject delivery modes. Clearly, a reliance on purely financial considerations could adversely affect the implementation of PBL. The moves to reward quality of teaching might help in protecting and nurturing PBL and other forms of student-centred learning.
We have already commented that staff in our sample did not see direct cost considerations as a major factor in implementing PBL. This could be due to the fact that they were so committed to the process that they felt it was worth overcoming any obstacle in their way. Obtaining funding to introduce PBL is linked to the departmental culture which, if positive, will support PBL subjects with the funds necessary to provide an acceptable ratio of tutors to students. An additional cost which might need to be considered in relation to PBL is the increased utilisation of library resources and information technology in general by students, although the latter is a general phenomenon and applies not only to PBL.
The physical architecture of any learning institution mirrors its philosophies of learning and teaching. While inappropriate facilities may not be illustrative of a lack of will at the institutional level in support of PBL, if moves are made which increase the utilisation of PBL in many professional courses, then it may be that the initial costs will be high due to the need to refurbish old or inappropriate facilities, or provide new ones. As noted earlier, it was clear from staff and student responses and observation that some PBL sessions were being conducted in far from ideal venues. It seems likely that if students are neutral or antagonistic to PBL to start with, then poor physical conditions may well reinforce negative attitudes. Those wishing to implement PBL need to consider seriously the space available and its suitability for small group sessions. Some factors that need to be considered in this context include the style and arrangement of furniture, the availability of black/white boards, freedom from interference by other groups and access to resource materials.
One issue which has not been discussed so far is that of PBL in general. All the PBL initiatives discussed in relation to this study with the exception of one had been implemented at the single subject level. In some cases, PBL was only a part of the teaching for that subject, being supplemented by practical classes or more formal teaching. Purists might argue that this does not constitute PBL; however, this study did not intend to assess PBL in this way; rather, we intended to look at any constraints which might have affected the implementation process. The question must be asked however, is it practical or useful to implement PBL in this fragmented fashion or should staff hold out for more far-reaching and fundamental curriculum change as the Medical Faculty has done?
In response to this question, we can only comment that any initiative which serves to motivate students, allows university teachers to reflect on the learning and teaching process and generate debate as to the relative merits of research and teaching is a positive force for all concerned. In conducting this study, we have been impressed by the enthusiasm, commitment and obvious enjoyment shown by the participants. It is obviously not practical for all professional schools to move towards a fully integrated PBL curriculum model in one move. Successful PBL initiatives at the subject level may be the vanguard for such real, extensive and enduring change.
[next chapter] [previous chapter] [contents]
These recommendations encompass the subject coordinator/tutor, students, assessment, facilities and resources together with the institution. Underpinning all these recommendations is a continuing need to promote a culture of learning and teaching and reflection on educational processes.
Recommendation 1:
Recommendation 2:
Recommendation 3:
Recommendation 4:
Recommendation 5:
Recommendation 6:
Recommendation 7:
Recommendation 8:
Recommendation 9: