Deep and surface learning in problem-based learning: a review of the literature

In problem-based learning (PBL), implemented worldwide, students learn by discussing professionally relevant problems enhancing application and integration of knowledge, which is assumed to encourage students towards a deep learning approach in which students are intrinsically interested and try to understand what is being studied. This review investigates: (1) the effects of PBL on students’ deep and surface approaches to learning, (2) whether and why these effects do differ across (a) the context of the learning environment (single vs. curriculum wide implementation), and (b) study quality. Studies were searched dealing with PBL and students’ approaches to learning. Twenty-one studies were included. The results indicate that PBL does enhance deep learning with a small positive average effect size of .11 and a positive effect in eleven of the 21 studies. Four studies show a decrease in deep learning and six studies show no effect. PBL does not seem to have an effect on surface learning as indicated by a very small average effect size (.08) and eleven studies showing no increase in the surface approach. Six studies demonstrate a decrease and four an increase in surface learning. It is concluded that PBL does seem to enhance deep learning and has little effect on surface learning, although more longitudinal research using high quality measurement instruments is needed to support this conclusion with stronger evidence. Differences cannot be explained by the study quality but a curriculum wide implementation of PBL has a more positive impact on the deep approach (effect size .18) compared to an implementation within a single course (effect size of −.05). PBL is assumed to enhance active learning and students’ intrinsic motivation, which enhances deep learning. A high perceived workload and assessment that is perceived as not rewarding deep learning are assumed to enhance surface learning

The effect of midterm peer feedback on student functioning in problem-based tutorials

Within Problem-Based Learning successful learning depends on the quality of cognitive, social and motivational contributions students make to the tutorial group. But at the same time, not all students in PBL automatically contribute in a high quality manner, which might impede successful group functioning. This study investigated whether peer process feedback combined with goal setting can be used to improve the quality of students' individual contributions. A mixed-methods explanatory design, in which 74 second-year Health Sciences students participated, combined a pre- and posttest with a focus group. The results indicated that the quality of the contributions only increased for students with a below average score on the pre-test. The qualitative data confirmed that the impact of the feedback could be increased by combining individual reflection by means of goal setting with face-to-face discussion. Another suggestion is to investigate whether midterm peer process feedback is more effective for first year students, because they are still developing their tutorial behavior, as opposed to second year students

Assessing students in community settings: the role of peer evaluation

The assessment of students in community settings faces unique difficulties. Since students are usually posted in small groups in different community settings and since the learning (largely) takes place outside the classroom, assessing student performance becomes an intrinsically complex endeavor. In this article, the proposition is made and tested that peers may be used to accurately assess particular aspects of performance, in particular those which need extensive and close observation. Examples are: Effort displayed while working in a community, quality of the interaction with that community, display of leadership, and subject-matter contributions

Design and evaluation of a clinical competency committee

Introduction In postgraduate medical education, group decision-making has emerged as an essential too

What drives the student in problem-based learning?

In problem-based learning, the development of self-directed learning skills is encouraged through confronting students with (professional) problems. However, several other elements of a problem-based curriculum, such as general teaching objectives, lectures and tutors, may have an impact on students' actual learning activities. The present study focuses on the extent to which various elements of a problem-based curriculum influence students' decisions on what to study. First, interviews were conducted to obtain qualitative data about what actually takes place when students initiate learning activities during self-study. Based on the findings of the

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