1
ELSEVIER Biochemical Education 27 (1999) 14 Biochemical Education Features Section Problem-based learning PBL and research projects Lloyd-Jones, Margetson and Bligh have described the conference recently held at Brunel University, London, entitled Changing to PBL [1]. It appears from their report that although problem-based learning (PBL) is often defined as learning which is the result of working towards the understanding or resolution of a problem [2], PBL is, in fact, a rather broad church and covers a number of diverse educational approaches. The partici- pants from many countries and specialists in a range of disciplines who attended the conference give their own interpretations of PBL and described enthusiastically their different strategies for its implication. However, this variety of approaches clouds comparisons of PBL in different institutions and is an unfortunate handicap in any evaluation (see, for example, Refs. [3, 4]) of the effectiveness of PBL as an educational tool. In Barrows' taxonomy of PBL [5], reiterative or closed loop problem-based learning emerged as the high- est scoring variant. Thus, although PBL may take one of several forms particularly that of students' learning through the literature, the contention of Lloyd-Jones et al. [1] is that PBL is the practice of learning through research. It seems to this author, that the tool most likely to instil research attributes into undergraduate students of biochemistry is the final year research project. This may occupy a quarter or one-third of a student's time in the final year and contribute a similar amount to the final grade. In British universities the student joins a laboratory for between 10 and 20 weeks, and carries out a small research project and produces a report. However, this item is the most costly, in terms of staff time, consumables, laboratory space and equip- ment, in the degree curriculum. In the UK at least, anecdotal evidence indicates some institutions would like to see it dropped from the undergraduate experience on these grounds. A recent symposium, Does Biochemistry have a Core?, organized by the Education Group of the British Biochemical Society did, however, indicate that in some European universities, biochemistry students al- ready take a much longer time over their research project than their UK counterparts [6]. The Biochemical Society's Working Party on the Core Content of Biochemistry First Degrees [7, copies available from the editorial office] was strongly in favour of the laboratory-based project: The working party re- garded project work as an essential element in the educa- tion of a professional biochemist since open-ended activities of this kind develop essential high level career skills. Pro- jects can be laboratory based or theoretical (i.e. literary search type) but the former should normally be the practice. We recognise the problems of providing individual lab projects for all students, especially with increased class size. The pressure of numbers makes it difficult in a typical department to supervise a meaningful experimental project for every final year student. Nevertheless, if the curriculum does not contain such an element, then it will be for the department to demonstrate by what alternative means stu- dents will be helped to obtain such skills. Thus any attacks on the final year undergraduate research project, an important PBL approach which should help engender in students the skills for life-long learning, need to be repulsed. This issue of Biochemical Education continues the vein Professor Whiteley started [8], and which was introduc- ed earlier [9], of using nonstandard graphical analyses to investigate enzyme kinetic mechanisms. As always, teachers in the biochemical sciences can adopt these approaches to suit their own needs. Once again, my usual style of termination! The Prob- lem-based Learning Page is always pleased to hear any views and approaches related to the topic. C.A. Smith Editor The Manchester Metropolitan University, UK References [1] G. Lloyd-Jones, D. Margetson, J.G. Bligh, Med. Educ. 32 (1998) 492 494. [-2] H.S. Barrows, R.M. Tambling, Problem-based Learning: An Approach to Medical Education, Springer, New York, 1980. [3] M.A. Albanese, S. Mitchell, Acad. Med. 68 (1993) 52 81. [4] D.T.A. Vernon, R.L. Blake, Acad. Med. 68 (1993) 55(~563. [5] H.S. Burrows, Med. Educ. 20 (1986) 48-486. [6] C.A. Smith, The Biochemist, 1999, in preparation. [7] J. Wrigglesworth, The Biochemist, 18(3)(1996) 8 11. [8] C.G. Whiteley, Biochem. Educ. 25 (1997) 144 146. [-9] C.A. Smith, Biochem. Educ. 25 (1997) 143. 0307-4412/99/$19.00 © 1999 IUBMB. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Pll: S0307-44 12(98)00283-0

Problem-based learning: PBL and research projects

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Problem-based learning: PBL and research projects

E L S E V I E R Biochemical Education 27 (1999) 14

Biochemical Education

F e a t u r e s S e c t i o n

Problem-based learning

PBL and research projects

Lloyd-Jones, Margetson and Bligh have described the conference recently held at Brunel University, London, entitled Changing to PBL [1]. It appears from their report that although problem-based learning (PBL) is often defined as learning which is the result of working towards the understanding or resolution of a problem [2], PBL is, in fact, a rather broad church and covers a number of diverse educational approaches. The partici- pants from many countries and specialists in a range of disciplines who attended the conference give their own interpretations of PBL and described enthusiastically their different strategies for its implication. However, this variety of approaches clouds comparisons of PBL in different institutions and is an unfortunate handicap in any evaluation (see, for example, Refs. [3, 4]) of the effectiveness of PBL as an educational tool.

In Barrows' taxonomy of PBL [5], reiterative or closed loop problem-based learning emerged as the high- est scoring variant. Thus, although PBL may take one of several forms particularly that of students' learning through the literature, the contention of Lloyd-Jones et al. [1] is that PBL is the practice of learning through research. It seems to this author, that the tool most likely to instil research attributes into undergraduate students of biochemistry is the final year research project. This may occupy a quarter or one-third of a student's time in the final year and contribute a similar amount to the final grade. In British universities the student joins a laboratory for between 10 and 20 weeks, and carries out a small research project and produces a report. However, this item is the most costly, in terms of staff time, consumables, laboratory space and equip- ment, in the degree curriculum. In the UK at least, anecdotal evidence indicates some institutions would like to see it dropped from the undergraduate experience on these grounds. A recent symposium, Does Biochemistry have a Core?, organized by the Education Group of the British Biochemical Society did, however, indicate that in some European universities, biochemistry students al- ready take a much longer time over their research project than their UK counterparts [6].

The Biochemical Society's Working Party on the Core Content of Biochemistry First Degrees [7, copies

available from the editorial office] was strongly in favour of the laboratory-based project: The working party re- garded project work as an essential element in the educa- tion of a professional biochemist since open-ended activities of this kind develop essential high level career skills. Pro- jects can be laboratory based or theoretical (i.e. literary search type) but the former should normally be the practice. We recognise the problems of providing individual lab projects for all students, especially with increased class size. The pressure of numbers makes it difficult in a typical department to supervise a meaningful experimental project for every final year student. Nevertheless, if the curriculum does not contain such an element, then it will be for the department to demonstrate by what alternative means stu- dents will be helped to obtain such skills. Thus any attacks on the final year undergraduate research project, an important PBL approach which should help engender in students the skills for life-long learning, need to be repulsed.

This issue of Biochemical Education continues the vein Professor Whiteley started [8], and which was introduc- ed earlier [9], of using nonstandard graphical analyses to investigate enzyme kinetic mechanisms. As always, teachers in the biochemical sciences can adopt these approaches to suit their own needs.

Once again, my usual style of termination! The Prob- lem-based Learning Page is always pleased to hear any views and approaches related to the topic.

C.A. Smith Editor

The Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

References

[1] G. Lloyd-Jones, D. Margetson, J.G. Bligh, Med. Educ. 32 (1998) 492 494.

[-2] H.S. Barrows, R.M. Tambling, Problem-based Learning: An Approach to Medical Education, Springer, New York, 1980.

[3] M.A. Albanese, S. Mitchell, Acad. Med. 68 (1993) 52 81. [4] D.T.A. Vernon, R.L. Blake, Acad. Med. 68 (1993) 55(~563. [5] H.S. Burrows, Med. Educ. 20 (1986) 48-486. [6] C.A. Smith, The Biochemist, 1999, in preparation. [7] J. Wrigglesworth, The Biochemist, 18(3) (1996) 8 11. [8] C.G. Whiteley, Biochem. Educ. 25 (1997) 144 146. [-9] C.A. Smith, Biochem. Educ. 25 (1997) 143.

0307-4412/99/$19.00 © 1999 IUBMB. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Pll: S0307-44 12(98)00283-0