Student-generated Learning Issues Research Articles

Is a PBL curriculum a better nutrient medium for student-generated learning issues than a PBL island?

Problem based learning (PBL) is often introduced in curricula in form of short segments. In the literature the value of these PBL-islands is doubted. In order to gain more insight in this curricular approach, we compared student generated learning issues, from a 7-week PBL-island introduced in a traditional curriculum (PBL-I), with the gold standard of a PBL-based model-curriculum (PBL-B) existing in parallel at the same University (Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany). Both tracks use five identical PBL-cases. Thousand seven hundred and three student-generated learning issues of 252 tutorial groups (193 PBL-I and 59 PBL-B groups with six to seven students per group) were analysed in seven different categories. Results showed that overall there were no substantial differences between both curricula. PBL-B students generated more problem-related and less basic science clinical learning issues than PBL-I students, but in both groups learning issues were related to the same number of different subjects. Furthermore, students in the PBL-curriculum tend to generate little less but slightly better phrased issues. Taken together, we found no substantial evidence with respect to student-generated learning issues that could prove that students cannot work with the PBL-method, even if it is introduced later in the curriculum and last only for a short period of time.

Prospective comparison of student-generated learning issues and resources accessed in a problem-based learning course

Background: Multiple factors can contribute to variability in content coverage and student study activities between problem-based learning (PBL) groups.Aims: The purpose of this study was to analyse the student learning issues to answer three questions:1. How do the student-generated learning issues compare to faculty-developed ‘key feature’ objectives for each case?2. Is there stability in choice of student learning issues over a four-year period?3. What resources do the students access and has this changed over a four-year period?Methods: Student-generated learning issues were collected during a course that follows a PBL design using standardized patient cases. Between 2002 and 2005, 407 students in 74 groups completed the course. The student-generated learning issues were compared with faculty-developed learning objectives to identify content covered. Students also recorded resources accessed and time spent researching the learning issues.Results: Learning issues regarding medical content had moderate correspondence to faculty objectives. However, ‘key feature’ objectives that included other content such as communication challenges, ethics issues, psychosocial stressors, etc. were identified less frequently in student learning issues. Student study time was constant across cases, groups and years. A trend toward increased use of electronic resources over time was identified, and student choice of resource material did not necessarily match the references listed in the case materials.Conclusion: Despite similarity in student study time between groups, significant variability in content of learning issues and resources accessed was apparent.

Testing a causal model for learning in a problem-based curriculum.

The aim of this study was to identify the relationship between elements that are important for the tutorial group process and the individual learning process in a problem-based curriculum. The variables under investigation were student-generated learning issues, individual learning process, reporting in the tutorial group, and achievement.A questionnaire containing 22 items was developed. Data were collected in the first year (N = 195) of the Medical School of the Maastricht University in the Netherlands during the academic year 1997-1998. The data were analysed using a structural modelling approach. The results indicate that the model fitted the data well. The path coefficients were moderately high, particular between the explanation-oriented approach and the depth of the reporting in the tutorial group. High path coefficients were also found between the depth of the reporting and achievement. In sum, the model gives insight into how important variables are related and it is recommended that data should be collected to test the model repeatedly.

Quality of student-generated learning issues in a problem-based curriculum

In a problem-based curriculum students generate learning issues that are the guidelines for their individual study. In an earlier study it was found that a useful learning issue contains a keyword that demarcates the content of a certain topic to be studied and is formulated concisely and unambiguously for all members of the tutorial group. This study investigates two questions. First, how many learning issues can be classified as being of good or bad quality as evaluated against three criteria? Second, what are examples of well and badly formulated learning issues? Learning issues were collected for two problems in the first year during two tutorial meetings of the Maastricht Medical School in the academic year 1998–99. In the next academic year, 12 first year-students were asked to judge the learning issues for each problem against three criteria. The results showed that 21% of the learning issues for one problem and 32% for the other problem were classified as scoring high on all three characteristics. A very small percentage of learning issues (5% and 2%) were classified as scoring low on all three characteristics. Most learning issues scored differently on each of the characteristics. Although most learning issues contain a keyword, many of them were formulated ambiguously and not concisely. It is concluded that first-year students are not yet able to formulate clear learning issues.

The impact of student-generated learning issues on individual study time and academic achievement

The aim of this study was twofold. The first question concerns the way students make use of the learning issues they generate (as strict guidelines or as global guidelines) and whether this changes across years of training. The second question concerned the relationship between the way students make use of learning issues and the time spent on individual study and achievement on two tests of knowledge. A questionnaire was developed, containing seven items that measured to what extent students study strictly according to the student-generated learning issues and six items that measured to what extent students study beyond the student-generated learning issues. The questionnaire also contained one question in which students had to estimate the mean time spent on individual study. Achievement was measured by two forms of tests of knowledge, a block test assessing course content and a progress test assessing long-term functional knowledge. Medical School of Maastricht University, the Netherlands. Medical students (response=69%) from the problem-based curriculum at the Maastricht University. During their first year students study strictly according to the content of the learning issues, whereas in later years students studied more according to their own learning needs and interests. In addition, students who tended to study beyond the generated learning issues spent more time on individual study and achieved better on both tests. Students in a problem-based curriculum seem to become better self-directed learners during the years of training.

Qualitative analysis of student-generated learning issues to assess content coverage in problem-based learning.

Qualitative analysis of student-generated learning issues to assess content coverage in problem-based learning.

Essential characteristics of student-generated learning issues in a problem-based curriculum

In a problem-based curriculum students generate learning issues that are the guidelines for their individual study. This study investigates the essential characteristics of learning issues and the importance they have in each year of training. Two (free response) questions about characteristics of learning issues were answered by medical students. The response was 69% ( n = 495). Students reported three important characteristics which were brought together in one definition: a useful learning issue contains a keyword that demarcates the content of a certain topic to be studied and is formulated concisely and unambiguously for all members of the tutorial group. There were small differences in the importance of the characteristics between years of training.

The relationship between student-generated learning issues and self-study in problem-based learning

A major assumption of problem-based learning (PBL) is that learning issues, generated by students while discussing a problem, are used as guides for self-directed learning activities. This assumption, though basic to PBL, has never been tested. At the University of Limburg, the Netherlands, two procedures have been developed that reflect the extent to which students are able to identify important learning issues given a particular problem, and whether subsequent, independent, learning corresponds with these learning issues. The focus of the present article will be on the relationship between the two. We have explored to what extent student-generated learning issues are a major factor influencing the nature of students' self-study, or whether other factors may be involved in decisions on what to study and how much time to spend on topics selected. First, the production of learning issues was studied and represented as the percentage of overlap between learning issues raised by students and pre-set faculty objectives for each problem. The second procedure consisted of the administration of a ‘Topic Checklist’ (TOC) which purports to measure students' actual self-directed learning activities. The TOC consists of a list of topics specifying the intended course content. Students were asked to indicate on a five-point Likert scale how much time they had spent studying each topic and to what degree they had mastered that topic. Third, learning issues and TOC topics were compared directly in a qualitative sense. Comparisons between the procedures revealed that a low proportion of variance of TOC scores could be predicted from the percentage of faculty objectives identified for each problem and the direct match between learning issues and TOC scores. It is concluded that scrutinizing student-generated learning issues and topics covered during self-study may provide information about what content is covered by students in tutorial groups. The discrepancy between the results of the measurements suggests, however, that learning issues produced during group discussion are not the sole source on which students base self-study decisions. Several other factors may be involved, such as tutor guidance, content already covered in previous units, issues raised during sessions with resource persons, and the nature of the learning resources available. Therefore, the relationship between learning issues and content covered during self-study is not as straightforward as is suggested.

Problem effectiveness in a course using problem-based learning.

Problem-based learning (PBL) emphasizes active generation of learning issues by students. Both students and teachers, however, tend to worry that not all important knowledge will be acquired. To explore this question, problem effectiveness (i.e., for each problem, the degree of correspondence between student-generated learning issues and present faculty objectives) was examined in three interdependent studies. The three studies used the same participants: about 120 second-year students and 12 faculty tutors in a six-week course on normal pregnancy, delivery, and child development at the medical school of the University of Limburg in The Netherlands, 1990-91. The participants were randomly assigned to 12 tutorial groups that were each given the same 12 problems; the problems were based on 51 faculty objectives; the tutors were asked to record all learning issues generated by their groups. Study 1 addressed this question: To what degree are faculty objectives reflected by student-generated learning issues? Study 2: To what extent do students miss certain objectives, and are these objectives classifiable? Study 3: Do students generate learning issues not expected by the faculty, and are these issues relevant to course content, and finally, why do students generate these issues? To help answer these questions, the studies employed expert raters and a teacher familiar with the course content. Study 1: For the set of 12 problems, the average overlap between learning issues and faculty objectives was 64.2% with the percentages for individual problems ranging from 27.7% to 100%. Study 2: Of the 51 objectives, 30 were not identified by at least one tutorial group; these objectives were grouped into three categories; on average, each group failed to identify 7.4 objectives (15%). Study 3: Of 520 learning issues, 32 (6%) were unexpected; 15 of these were judged to be at least fairly relevant to course content; they were grouped into four categories. The students' learning activities covered an average of 64% of the intended course content; in addition, the students generated learning issues not expected by the faculty, and half of these issues were judged relevant to the course content. Thus, PBL seems to permit students to adapt learning activities to their own needs and interests.