Preparing faculty to develop problem oriented approach to teaching &
learning : our experience at Pramukhswami Medical College, India
Himanshu Pandya
Sarmishtha Ghosh
Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Gujarat
INTRODUCTION
• Globally medical education has adopted an integrated, student centered and problem based approach.
• Medical Council of India recommends integrated and problem based learning approach.
• Switching to PBL requires training of the trainers who are mostly conversant with didactic mode of teaching
• Faculty development should aim at creating awareness regarding concepts of PBL, role of teacher as facilitator, group dynamics and designing of case scenarios.
OBJECTIVES• Medical Education Unit [MEU] of Pramukhswami Medical College
at Karamsad, Gujarat decided to expose its academic staff to the concepts of PBL and allied teaching strategies supporting adult learning on the lines of recommendations by MCI
This paper reports data collected from two faculty development workshops :
Workshop I - Principles and methodology of PBL in the form of student experience
Workshop II -Techniques of writing and refining case scenarios for PBL sessions
METHODOLOGYWORKSHOP- I
[PBL]WORKSHOP- II [Case Writing]
Selection of faculty
2 faculty per department, irrespective of experience,
nominated by Head
StrategyFormation of Core group with experienced in house faculty. External expert from CMC, Vellore. Demonstration, small group discussions & large group interaction.
Schedule 2 days; morning- 4 hours
39Number registered
1 faculty per department, interested faculty invited
External expert from IIM-A. In house coordinators
Didactic lecture, small group discussion & large group
interaction
1day; 5 hours
25
Workshop I; Morning session : 4 hours, DAY 1
Didactic interactive lecture on PBL
Demonstration of a PBL session
Pre workshop testWhat is PBL
Roles & Responsibilities
of facilitator
7 steps of PBL
Question-Answer Session
STUDENT EXPERIENCE
Session- I
6-7 members/group, 1 facilitator; 6 groups
Small group activity
Large group presentation by group
representative
Case given
Morning session : 4 hours, DAY 2
STUDENT EXPERIENCE
Session- II
Small group activity contd
2nd page of Case revealed
Large group presentation
Question-Answer Session
Post Test & Evaluation of Workshop
1 hour
1 hour
Morning session : 4 hours, DAY 1
Case Writing Workshop
Afternoon Session- 2 hoursMorning Session - 3 hours
Small group activity
Introduction by External & Internal Experts
Small group activity
One real scenario designed differently
Case 1, groups 1,2,3
Case 2, groups 4,5,6
1 hour
Large Group Presentation
6 Preframed scenario
1 hour
Large Group Presentation
Evaluation with questionnaire
Proportion of faculty trained at Workshop I
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Professor Addl.Professor
AssociateProfessor
AssistantProfessor
Lecturer/tutor
TotalParticipated
RESULTS - WORKSHOP I
33%6%
33%
28.6%
34.8%
Distribution of Faculty Participants according to their designation, N=39
Professor20%
Addl. Professor3%
Associate Professor
21%Assistant Professor
35%
Lecturer/ tutor21%
Improvement in the perception of faculty regarding Problem Based Learning before and after Workshop
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1 2 3 4 5
Items in the Prestest and post test questionnaire
Perc
en
tag
e o
f re
sp
on
ses f
rom
Part
icip
an
ts
Pretest N=37 [100%]Post test N=26 [70.3%]
1. What is PBL?
2. PBL is same as CBL, PBL, PSL, Inquiry Driven Learning, None
3. Role of faculty in PBL
4. Responsibility of student in PBL
5. Characteristics of an effective tutor
Evaluation of PBL Workshop
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
understandingwhat is PBL
exploring howPBL works
understandingthe steps
involved in PBL
Items in Questionnaire
Nu
mb
er
of
resp
on
ses
Slightly Agreed
Strongly Agreed
Slightly Disagreed
Strongly Disagreed
Evaluation of PBL Workshop [contd.]
02468
1012141618
understanding thegroup dynamics in
PBL
understanding theresponsibilities of
students
understanding therole of good PBL
fcailitator
Items in Questionnaire
NU
mbe
r of
Res
pons
es
Slightly Agreed
Strongly Agreed
Slightly Disagreed
Strongly Disagreed
Proportion of faculty trained in Case Writing, N=135
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Prof Addl Prof Assoc Prof Assist Prof Lect/Tutor
Designation
Num
ber of
Par
ticip
ants
TotalPartcipated
Distribution of faculty participants according to Designation at Case Writing Workshop; N=25
Professor32%
Addl. Prof4%
Associate Prof28%
Assistant Prof36%
RESULTS - WORKSHOP -II
Evaluation of Case Writing Workshop; N=25, Responses elicited 21 [84%]
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
understandingrelevance of a case
scenario in PBL
exploring how PBLcase scenario can
be developed
exploring the skillsnecessary to refine
a PBL case
Items in Questionnaire
Nu
mb
er o
f R
esp
on
ses
Slightly Agreed
Strongly Agreed
Slightly Disagreed
Strongly Disagreed
Workshop I Workshop II
Valuable Aspects Integrated groupdiscussion and role playPractical demonstrationand understanding ofPBL concept as a newway of teaching,
Group dynamics,Integrated self learningBrain storming sessionsand Exchange of views
Clarification Needed Role and qualificationsof a facilitatorDesigning a casescenario
Quality of a facilitator,Ways to develop a casescenario by defininglearning objectives fordifferent standards oflearners
Suggestions forImprovement
Frequent workshopswith longer sessionsand video clips ofrecording of asuccessful standardPBL session
More frequentworkshops,Providewebsites where suchcasess would beavailable, formation ofa core group pooledfrom all specialties
Conclusion• Comprehensive faculty development programs
are essential for initiating curricular change• High satisfaction and considerable change in
attitude was observed amongst faculty members
• Some faculty expressed concern regarding implementation of PBL in present setting and the assessment of the same
• Further workshop involving more faculty need to be conducted on a regular basis.
Acknowledgement• CMCL-FAIMER Regional Institute• Mr. Sandeep Desai, CEO, H M Patel Centre for Med Care & Edu• Dr. H. H. Agravat, Dean, Pramukhswami Medical College• Dr. Rashmi Vyas, Christian Medical College, Vellore• Dr. Dileep Mavlankar, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad• Core faculty of Pramukhswami Medical College- Dr. Barna
Ganguly, Dr. Suman Singh, Dr. Praveen Singh, Dr. Anuradha Joshi
• Medical Education Unit,Pramukhswami Medical College• Participant faculty at Workshop I & II.
1. Physicians for the twenty First century: Report of the panel on the General Professional Education of the Physicians and College preparation for medicine, Association of American Medical Colleges, Washington, 1984.
2. Schmidt H: Problem based Learning: rationale and Description, Med Educ 1983; 17: 11-16.
3. Medical Council of India. Salient features of Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 Available http://www.mciindia.org/know/rules/rules_mbbs.htm, accessed Oct 08, 2007
4. Wood, DF (2003): ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: Problem based learning, BMJ 326; 328-330. Available at http://bmj.com.cgi.content/full/326/7384/328, accessed on 11.10.2007
5. Barrows HS, Peters MJ: How To Begin Reforming The Medical Curriculum, Southern Illinois School of Medicine, Springfield. Ill. 1984: 21-27
6. Des Marchais JE, Jean P, Delorme P: basic training program in medical pedagogy: a 1- year program for medical faculty. Can Med Assoc J 1990; 142: 734-740
References