LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Koschmann, Timothy; Glenn, Phillip; Conlee, Melinda (1997)
Publisher: Co-Action Publishing
Journal: Medical Education Online
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:

Classified by OpenAIRE into

ACM Ref: ComputingMilieux_COMPUTERSANDEDUCATION
Though much has been published concerning the intended or realized benefits of participating in a Problem-Based curriculum, we know little about what participants (faculty and students) actually do when they say they are doing Problem-Based Learning (PBL). The current paper is part of an ongoing to effort to apply methods borrowed from studies of discourse to understanding PBL as a form of enacted practice. In particular, the paper provides a description of the interaction within a PBL tutorial meeting leading to the generation of a Learning Issue (LI). We introduce the term Knowledge Assessment Segment (KAS) for important stretches of interaction during which participants identify learning issues. We present a detailed analysis of a selected segment. Specific features discussed include: how the group's perspective on a topic changes over the course of the discussion, the tutor's role in providing "scaffolding" for student reasoning, and the group's incorporation of "thinking about thinking." The purpose of descriptive studies of this sort is to enhance our understanding of what it means to do Problem-Based Learning.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Barrows, HS, Tamblyn, learning: An approach to New York: Springer; 1980.
    • Barrows, HS. The tutorial process 2nd ed.
    • Springfield (IL): Southern Illinois University School of Medicine; 1992.
    • Barrows, HS. Practice-Based Learning: Problem-Based Learning applied to medical education. Springfield, (IL): Southern Illinois University School of Medicine; 1994.
    • Norman G, Schmidt H. The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Acad Med, 1992;6:557-65.
    • Koschmann T, Kelson AC, Feltovich PJ, Barrows HS. Computer-Supported ProblemBased Learning: A principled approach to the use of computers in collaborative learning. In: Koschmann TD Editor, CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm.. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1996 p. 83-124.
    • Albanese M, Mitchell S. Problem-based Learning: A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Acad Med, 1993;68:52-81.
    • conventional and problem-based curricula on problem solving. Acad 1991;66:380-9.
    • Vernon D, Blake R. (1993). Does problembased learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluative research. Acad Med 1993;68:550- 63.
    • Conlee, M, Koschmann T. Representations of Clinical Reasoning in a PBL Meeting: The Inquiry Trace. Teaching Learning Med, 1997;9:51-5.
    • Glenn P, Koschmann T, Conlee M. (1995, October). Theory sequences in a problembased learning group: A case study.
    • Proceedings of CSCL; 1995 Oct Bloomington, IN;1995. P.139-142.
    • Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press; 1884.
    • Dolmans D, Schmidt H., Gijselaers W. The relationship between student-generated learning issues and self-study in problem-based learning Instructional Sci, 1994; 22:251-67.
    • Fox B. (1993). The human tutorial dialogue project. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum; 1993.
    • Heritage J, Greatbatch D. On the institutional character of institutional talk: The case of news interviews. In Boden D, Zimmerman DH. Editors, Talk and social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 1978 p. 93-137.
    • Schön DA. Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1987.
    • Goodwin C. Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic Press; 1981.
    • Criteria for an ethnographically adequate description of concerted activities and their contexts. Semiotica 1978;24:245-75.
    • J Pragmatics 1984; 8:607-25.
    • Language 1977;53:361-82.
    • Woods D, Bruner JS, Ross G. The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 1976;17: 89-100.
    • Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1996 p. 25- 44.
    • Olson, D., & Astington, J. Thinking about thinking; Learning how to take statements and hold beliefs. Educ Psychol 1993;28:7-23.
    • Schegloff E. Analyzing single episodes of interaction: An exercise in Conversation Analysis. Social Psychol Quarterly 1987;50:101-14.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article

Collected from