D J Steele1, J D Medder, P Turner. 1. Department of Family Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-3075, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare learning outcomes and perceptions of facilitator behaviours and small-group process in problem-based learning (PBL) groups led by students and those led by faculty. DESIGN: A prospective, Latin-square cross-over design was employed. Second-year medical students participated in 11 PBL cases over the course of the academic year. For each case, half the student groups were led by faculty and the other half by a student group member selected randomly to serve in the facilitator role. Learning outcomes were assessed by performance on objective examinations covering factual materials pertinent to the case. Perceptions of facilitator behaviours and of group functioning were assessed with a questionnaire completed at the end of each individual case. Focus-group discussions were held to gain more in-depth information about student perceptions and experience. Student-led sessions were observed at random by the investigators. SETTING: A state-supported, US medical school with a hybrid lecture-based and problem-based curriculum. SUBJECTS:One hundred and twenty-seven second-year medical students and 30 basic science and clinical faculty. RESULTS: No differences were detected in student performance on the objective evaluation based on whether the facilitator was a faculty member or peer group member, nor were there any differences in the perceptions of group process. Students gave peer facilitators slightly higher ratings in the second semester of the experiment. In the focus-group discussions, students voiced a general preference for student-led groups because they felt they were more efficient. Observation and focus-group reports suggest that groups led by students sometimes took short cuts in the PBL process. CONCLUSION: In a hybrid lecture- and PBL-based curriculum, student performance on objective examinations covering PBL materials is unaffected by the status of the facilitator (student vs. faculty). However, in peer-facilitated groups, students sometimes took short cuts in the PBL process that may undermine some of the intended goals of PBL.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To compare learning outcomes and perceptions of facilitator behaviours and small-group process in problem-based learning (PBL) groups led by students and those led by faculty. DESIGN: A prospective, Latin-square cross-over design was employed. Second-year medical students participated in 11 PBL cases over the course of the academic year. For each case, half the student groups were led by faculty and the other half by a student group member selected randomly to serve in the facilitator role. Learning outcomes were assessed by performance on objective examinations covering factual materials pertinent to the case. Perceptions of facilitator behaviours and of group functioning were assessed with a questionnaire completed at the end of each individual case. Focus-group discussions were held to gain more in-depth information about student perceptions and experience. Student-led sessions were observed at random by the investigators. SETTING: A state-supported, US medical school with a hybrid lecture-based and problem-based curriculum. SUBJECTS: One hundred and twenty-seven second-year medical students and 30 basic science and clinical faculty. RESULTS: No differences were detected in student performance on the objective evaluation based on whether the facilitator was a faculty member or peer group member, nor were there any differences in the perceptions of group process. Students gave peer facilitators slightly higher ratings in the second semester of the experiment. In the focus-group discussions, students voiced a general preference for student-led groups because they felt they were more efficient. Observation and focus-group reports suggest that groups led by students sometimes took short cuts in the PBL process. CONCLUSION: In a hybrid lecture- and PBL-based curriculum, student performance on objective examinations covering PBL materials is unaffected by the status of the facilitator (student vs. faculty). However, in peer-facilitated groups, students sometimes took short cuts in the PBL process that may undermine some of the intended goals of PBL.
Authors: Diane B Wayne; Farzad Moazed; Elaine R Cohen; Rashmi K Sharma; William C McGaghie; Eytan Szmuilowicz Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2012-10-09 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Daniel Huhn; Wolfgang Eckart; Kianush Karimian-Jazi; Ali Amr; Wolfgang Herzog; Christoph Nikendei Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2015-06-18 Impact factor: 2.463
Authors: Markus Krautter; Sven Andreesen; Nadja Köhl-Hackert; Katja Hoffmann; Wolfgang Herzog; Christoph Nikendei Journal: Adv Med Educ Pract Date: 2014-09-23
Authors: Adam D Peets; Sylvain Coderre; Bruce Wright; Deirdre Jenkins; Kelly Burak; Shannon Leskosky; Kevin McLaughlin Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2009-08-25 Impact factor: 2.463