Problem-based learning in DIT 102

As mentioned in the introduction section, which gave a synopsis of events and reasoning behind the introduction of problem-based learning in DIT, the pedagogical model was chosen to address several problems encountered within the context of the Irish educational system. Part of the reasoning behind this pedagogical choice was that problem-based learning would encourage students to adopt a deep approach to their learning, for them to take more control of their learning and that the approach would support the development of students’ conceptual understanding and problem solving skills. The particular mode that the DIT School of Physics problem-based model took, as defined by Savin-Baden (2005), is an amalgamation of mode 1 “the single module approach” and mode 5 “tutors see PBL as a vital component of the curriculum”. This is because the physics module is more extensive than a single module as it is a vital component of the curriculum. It is worth noting that although problem-based learning is the main teaching method for the physics course, a

103

section is delivered through peer-instruction (Mazur 1997) and there are also traditional tutorials integrated into the design to allow for learning through cognitive apprenticeship and repetitive exercises. Although cognitive apprenticeship is not typically associated with the problem-based learning model, it was thought to be important to integrate these elements into the course (Bowe & Cowan 2004).

The first year physics syllabus is covered by approximately 30 problems (see Appendix B for example) which are “real”, engaging, place the group in a “professional” role, require the students to make assumption, approximations, and deal with omitted information (Bowe & Cowan 2004). In the following section a description of a typical problem-based learning week in the DIT model of problem-based learning is provided.

All the problem-based learning physics problems are put online immediately before the students encounter them in class. The students bring in a print out of the problem and one student normally reads it out aloud to their group. A discussion occurs in which the students attempt to discover the underlying process or principles of the problem. They use a system called the ‘four columns’. The four columns is a method where students place four sheets of A3 paper on the walls of the class with the following headings: Ideas, Facts, Learning Issues and Actions. The students attempt to fill these columns with information they can obtain from the problem itself or through prior knowledge. After the students complete the four columns they would usually try to generate a plan and discover what issues need more study. These issues become the learning issues and are assigned to individual students or the group as a whole. The first session ends and the students go prepare for the next session using additional resources to study the issues they have been assigned. In the second session, students’ return to the group process and discuss findings and difficulties with their fellow students in the tutorial group and formulate a method to solve the problem and obtain a clear understanding of the underlying physics concepts of the problem. The problem-based learning groups are guided by the tutors in both sessions and the tutors examine students understanding of the physics concepts contained within the problem.

104

Assessment has an important role in driving learning in any course design and the assessment strategy in a problem-based learning course has to help students develop as learners and as individuals within a group. As previously referred to, assessment has a role in influencing the approaches to learning adopted by a student in a course. One of the key research questions of this thesis is what approaches to learning do students have within the context of problem-based learning. In order to answer this question, it is important to outline the assessment strategy of the problem-based learning course in question. The DIT design team of the problem-based learning course state in Bowe’s chapter (Bowe 2005) on assessing problem-based learning, that they were aware that the previous design of summative tests, laboratory practice and examinations at the end of the academic year were encouraging surface and strategic approaches to learning and that they wished to move away from this: “it was envisaged the problem-based learning approach would encourage students to adopt a deep approach to learning” (Bowe 2005 p.103) and it was designed so that it would be constructively aligned with the learning outcomes as confirmed by Cowan (Bowe & Cowan 2004). It was important that the assessment strategy also required students to take this approach.

The DIT design team also stated that the assessment strategy aimed to:  Examine conceptual understanding and problem solving skills  Encourage and reward individual contribution to the group process  Support and evaluate the development of group, communication and

presentation skills

 Identify problem and areas of potential improvement  Monitor progress

Focusing on the above aims, it is important to focus on how the individual contribution to the group process was assessed, as this assessment practice may have had a significant impact on how students behaved in a problem-based learning session and from session to session which is one of the main research questions for this thesis. From the same paper Bowe outlines the reasoning behind the individual assessment and this particular aspect of the assessment strategy

105

“A greater challenge arose from the aspiration to assess individual contribution to the group process. It was felt that the assessment strategy should reward those students who work hard in the group process and endeavour to contribute constructively to the process. In this way the strategy should also penalise those students who do not make an effort to contribute to the group process. For the purpose of formative assessment, it was felt that the feedback should be individualised to help each learner and this required assessing each student’s contribution to both the process and the products. To overcome some of the problems associated with assessing individual contribution to both the process and the product, it was necessary to involve the students in the assessment process through the use of self and peer assessment.”(p.105)

Self and peer assessment is a critical element of this course design as it encourages students to become self directed learners which is one of the theoretical underpinnings of a problem- based learning course design and it encourages students to develop meta-cognitive skills. However, the self and peer assessment element of the course is not implemented until the second semester of the course, after the students have been assessed and given feedback by the tutors for the first semester. This research study is based primarily in the first semester. It should be noted that the rationale for each assessment method, along with the criteria, are discussed with the students in the induction process as well as at various intervals throughout the academic year and a copy of the assessment of contribution to the group process table can be found in Appendix D. Initially, there were two separate assessment tables one for the group process and then an individual one for the chair of the group. However, as discussed above, the chair element of the course design had been removed and so the assessment for the chair has not been included in this thesis. The assessment for the continuous assessment mark was broken down into two areas. 85% of the mark for continuous assessment was calculated from the mark out of 10 that the students were given after every problem. The remaining 15% is taken from the students results on their written reports that the students completed after every problem.