Advertisement

Getting on with Each Other: PBL Group Dynamics and Function

  • Vicki Skinner
  • Annette Braunack-Mayer
  • Tracey Winning
Chapter
Part of the Innovation and Change in Professional Education book series (ICPE, volume 8)

Abstract

Problem-based learning (PBL) group dynamics are important because they underpin the collaborative learning and teamwork that prepares students for clinical practice. The constructivist and collaborative theoretical foundations of PBL provide criteria for effective group dynamics. However, research has demonstrated that PBL group dynamics are often inconsistent with the theoretical ideal of a professional learning team. This chapter reports on an ethnographic study of PBL group dynamics in two dental schools, in Australia and Ireland. The results show the PBL group was predominantly a social unit that subsequently became a work unit. Students operated with understandings of group dynamics that were inconsistent with the theoretical principles of PBL. The authors conclude that students need explicit support to develop professional working relationships and teams.

Keywords

Group Dynamic Group Climate Team Spirit Irish Student Blue Group 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would sincerely like to thank the students and staff of the participating dental schools, whose willing participation made the project possible. We would also like to thank the following organisations for their funding support: The University of Adelaide (Faculty of Health Sciences Divisional Scholarship; Faculty of Health Sciences Postgraduate Travelling Fellowship; Research Abroad Scholarship), The Australian Federation of University Women, South Australia (Winifred E. Preedy Postgraduate Bursary) and The Australian Dental Research Foundation (Research grants). Thanks also to Assoc. Prof. Gerry Mullins, The University of Adelaide, and Assoc. Prof. Ray Peterson, The University of Queensland, for contributing to the supervision of this project.

References

  1. Barrows, H. S. (1988). The tutorial process. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University.Google Scholar
  2. Barrows, H. S. (2000). Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University.Google Scholar
  3. Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  4. Boud, D., & Feletti, G. I. (1991). Introduction. In D. Boud & G. I. Feletti (Eds.), The challenge of problem-based learning (pp. 13–20). London: Kogan Page Limited.Google Scholar
  5. Cockrell, K., Caplow, J. A., & Donaldson, J. F. (2000). A context for learning: Collaborative groups in the problem-based learning environment. The Review of Higher Education, 23(3), 347–363.Google Scholar
  6. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  7. de Grave, W. S., Dolmans, D. H. J. M., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2001). Student perceptions about the occurrence of critical incidents in the tutorial group. Medical Teacher, 23(1), 49–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dolmans, D. H. J. M., de Grave, W. S., Wolfhagen, I. H. A. P., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2005). Problem-based learning: Future challenges for educational practice and research. Medical Education, 39(7), 732–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dolmans, D. H. J. M., & Schmidt, H. G. (2006). What do we know about cognitive and motivational effects of small group tutorials in problem-based learning? Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11(4), 321–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duek, J. (2000). Whose group is it, anyway? Equity of student discourse in problem-based learning (PBL). In C. E. Hmelo & D. H. Evensen (Eds.), Problem-based learning: A research perspective on learning interactions (pp. 75–108). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  11. Engel, C. E., & Clarke, R. M. (1979). Medical education with a difference. Programmed Learning and Education Technology, 16(1), 70–87.Google Scholar
  12. Faidley, J., Evensen, D. H., Salisbury-Glennon, J., Glenn, J., & Hmelo, C. E. (2000). How are we doing? Methods of assessing group processing in a problem-based learning context. In C. E. Hmelo & D. H. Evensen (Eds.), Problem-based learning: A research perspective on learning interactions (pp. 109–138). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  13. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Hendry, G. D., Ryan, G., & Harris, J. (2003). Group problems in problem-based learning. Medical Teacher, 25(6), 609–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hitchcock, M. A., & Anderson, A. S. (1997). Dealing with dysfunctional tutorial groups. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 9(1), 19–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hmelo, C. E., & Evensen, D. H. (2000). Introduction. In C. E. Hmelo & D. H. Evensen (Eds.), Problem-based learning: A research perspective on learning interactions (pp. 1–18). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  17. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Houlden, R. L., Collier, C. P., Frid, P. J., John, S. L., & Pross, H. (2001). Problems identified by tutors in a hybrid problem-based learning curriculum. Academic Medicine, 76(1), 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jaques, D., & Salmon, G. (2007). Learning in groups (4th ed.). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P. (2006). Joining together (9th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  21. Liamputtong, P., & Ezzy, D. (2005). Qualitative research methods. Melbourne, VIC: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Loftus, S., & Higgs, J. (2005). Reconceptualising problem-based learning in a Vygotskian framework: Focus on health professional education. A Multi-disciplinary Journal, 7(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
  23. Maudsley, G., Williams, E. M. I., & Taylor, D. C. M. (2008). Problem-based learning at the receiving end: A ‘mixed methods’ study of junior medical students’ perspectives. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 13(4), 435–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mpofu, D. J. S., Das, M., Stewart, T., Dunn, E., & Schmidt, H. (1998). Perceptions of group dynamics in problem-based learning sessions: A time to reflect on group issues. Medical Teacher, 20(5), 421–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Poole, M. S., Hollingshead, A. B., McGrath, J. E., Moreland, R. L., & Rohrbaugh J. (2004). Interdisciplinary perspectives on small groups. Small Group Research, 35(1), 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Remedios, L., Clarke, D., & Hawthorne, L. (2008). The silent participant in small group collaborative learning contexts. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9(3), 201–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 135(5), 31–38.Google Scholar
  28. Schmidt, H. G. (1989). The rationale behind problem-based learning. In H. G. Schmidt, M. J. Lipkin, M. W. de Vries, & J. M. Greep (Eds.), New directions for medical education (pp. 105–111). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schmidt, H. G. (1993). Foundations of problem-based learning: Some explanatory notes. Medical Education, 27(5), 422–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273–285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Tipping, J., Freeman, R. F., & Rachlis, A. R. (1995). Using faculty and student perceptions of group dynamics to develop recommendations for PBL training. Academic Medicine, 70(11), 1050–1052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Virtanen, P. J., Kosunen, E. A. L., Holmberg-Marttila, D. M. H., & Virjo, I. O. (1999). What happens in PBL tutorial sessions? Analysis of medical students’ written accounts. Medical Teacher, 21(3), 270–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wilkerson, L., Hafler, J. P., & Liu, P. (1991). A case study of student-directed discussion in four problem-based tutorial groups. Academic Medicine, 66(9), S79–S81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Willis, S. C., Jones, A., Bundy, C., Burdett, K., Whitehouse, C. R., & O’Neill, P. A. (2002). Small-group work and assessment in a PBL curriculum: A qualitative and quantitative evaluation of student perceptions of the process of working in small groups and its assessment. Medical Teacher, 24(5), 495–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wittenbaum, G. M., Hollingshead, A. B., Paulus, P. B., Hirokawa, R. Y., Ancona, D. G., Peterson, R. S., Jehn, K. A., & Yoon, K. (2004). The functional perspective as a lens for understanding groups. Small Group Research, 35(1), 17–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vicki Skinner
    • 1
  • Annette Braunack-Mayer
    • 2
  • Tracey Winning
    • 1
  1. 1.School of DentistryThe University of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.School of Population Health and Clinical PracticeThe University of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations