Garí CMA, Iputo JE

Language: English
References: 34
Page: 13-17
PDF size: 91.25 Kb.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION Problem-based learning harmonized with education in and for the community is the cornerstone of the curriculum for the undergraduate medical degree at Walter Sisulu University, Mthatha, South Africa. In tutorials, students construct knowledge and learn to work collaboratively while interacting with one another in their search for solutions to a pedagogically modeled health issue based on a patient. Problems cover students’ needs defined by the learning cycle of the second year medical curriculum, organized into four learning blocks.
OBJECTIVE Determine student perspectives on which factors affect tutorial group functioning and detect the reported presence of these factors in the four learning blocks comprising the second year of medical studies at Walter Sisulu University.
METHODS Twenty second-year medical students were chosen by stratified random sampling and assigned to two focus groups. One group discussed factors that foster smooth functioning of the tutorial group; the other focused on factors hindering effective group work. Later, in a joint session, 17 items previously identified by both groups were selected and included in a survey given to all 97 students at the end of second year. The survey assessed presence of each item in 0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 of the learning blocks.
RESULTS Survey response was 93.8%. Mean reported presence of factors that influenced tutorials in the four learning blocks was 2.71 (SD 0.31) for the social dimension, 3.02 for motivational (SD 0.02), 3.00 for cognitive (SD 0.42), and 2.22 for self-directed learning (SD 0.79).
CONCLUSIONS Tutorial group performance at Walter Sisulu University is positively influenced more by motivational and cognitive factors than by social and self-directed learning factors. Social dimensions should be prioritized when training tutors and self-directed learning stressed for students. The poor productivity of extra-tutorial group discussions suggests the need for a critical evaluation of this activity.

REFERENCES

1. Walter Sisulu University Faculty of Health Sciences. Prospectus 2014. Mthatha (ZA): Walter Sisulu University; 2014. p. 34.

2. Harden RM, Sowden S, Dunn WR. Educational strategies in curriculum development: the SPICES model. Med Educ. 1984 Jul;18(4):284–97.

3. Iputo JE, Nganwa-Bagumah AB. The innovative medical curriculum of the University of Transkei Medical School. Part I. Problem-based learning. S Afr Med J. 1996 Jun;86(6):649–51.

4. Iputo JE, Nganwa Bagumah AB. The innovative medical curriculum of the University of Transkei Medical School. Part II: Community-based education. S Afr Med J. 1996 Jun;86(6):651–2.

5. Loyens SMM, Magda J, Rikers RM. Self-directed learning in problem based learning and its relationship with self-regulated learning. Educ Psychol Rev. 2008 Dec;20(4):411–27.

6. Perkins DN, Salomon G. Teaching for transfer. Educ Leadership [Internet]. 1988 Sep [cited 2014 Jan 10];46:22–32. Available from: www.ascd .org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_198809_per kins.pdf

7. McGrath JE, Arrow H, Berdahl JL. The study of groups: past, present and future. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2000 Feb;4(1):95–105.

8. Keyton J, Beck SJ. Team attributes, processes, and values: a pedagogical framework. BPCQ [Internet]. 2008 Dec [cited 2013 Nov 26];71 (4):488–504. Available from: http://bcq.sagepub .com/content/71/4/488.abstract

9. Slavin RE. Research for the future. Research on cooperative learning and achievement: what we know, what we need to know. Contemp Educ Psychol. 1996 Jan;21(1):43–69.

10. De Grave WS, Dolmans DH, Van Der Vleuten CP. Students’ perspectives on critical incidents in the tutorial group. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2002;7(3):201–9.

11. Johnson DW, Johnson RT. Making cooperative learning work. Theory into Practice. 1999 Spring;38(2):67–73.

12. Gijbels D, van de Watering G, Dochy F, van den Bossche P. New learning environments and constructivism: the students’ perspective. Instructional Sci. 2006;34(3):213–26.

13. Chi MTH, Siler SA, Jeong H, Yamauchi T, Haussman RG. Learning from human tutoring. Cognitive Sci [Internet]. 2001 Jul [cited 2014 Jan 20];25(4):471–533. Available from: onlinelibrary .wiley.com/doi/10.1207/s15516709cog2504_1/pdf

14. De Grave WS, Dolmans DH, van der Vleuten CP. Students’ perceptions about the occurrence of critical incidents in tutorial groups. Med Teach. 2001 Jan;23(1):49–54.

15. Hendry GD, Ryan G, Harris J. Group problems in problem-based learning. Med Teach. 2003 Nov;25(6):609–16.

16. Hammar Chiriac E. A scheme for understanding group processes in problem based learning. Higher Educ. 2008 May;55(5):505–18.

17. Kindler P, Grant C, Kulla S, Poole G, Godolphin W. Diffi cult incidents and tutor interventions in problem based learning. Med Educ. 2009 Sep;43(9):866–73.

18. Hendry GD, Frommer M, Walker RA. Constructivism and problem-based learning. J Further Higher Educ. [Internet]. 1999 [cited 2013 Dec 23];23(3):369–71. Available from: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ abs/10.1080/0309877990230306

19. Holen A. The PBL group: self-refl ections and feedback for improved learning and growth. Med Teach. 2000;22(5):485–8.

20. Hitchcock MA, Anderson AS. Dealing with dysfunctional tutorial groups. Teach Learn Med. 1997 Jan;9(1):19–24.

21. Singaram VS, van der Vleuten CP, Stevens F, Dolmans DH. “For most of us Africans, we don’t just speak”: a qualitative investigation into collaborative heterogeneous PBL group learning. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2011 Aug;16(3):297–310.

22. Zimmerman BJ. Self-Effi cacy: an essential motive to learn. Contemp Educ Psychol. 2000 Jan;25(1):82–91.

23. Blanco EV. Students’ perceptions of the role and utility of formative assessment feed-back in PBL tutorials [dissertation] [Internet]. [Stellenbosch (ZA)]: Stellenbosch University (ZA); 2013 [cited 2014 Jan 13]. Available from: http://hdl.handle .net/10019.1/85691

24. Dolmans DH, Schmidt HG. What do we know about cognitive and motivational effects of small group tutorials in problem based learning? Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2006 Nov;11(4):321–36.

25. Ryan RM, Deci EL. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic defi nitions and new directions. Contemp Educ Psychol. 2000 Jan;25(1):54–67.

26. Dolmans DH, Wolfhagen IH, van der Vleuten CP, Wijnen WH. Solving problems with group work in problem-based learning: hold on to the philosophy. Med Educ. 2001 Sep;35(9):884–9.

27. Barrows HS, Tamblyn RM. Problem-based learning: rationale and defi nition. In: Jonas S, editor. Problem-based learning: an approach to medical education. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 1980 Mar 15. 1–18.

28. Dolmans DH, Gijselaers WH, Schmidt HG, van der Meer SB. Problem effectiveness in a course using problem-based learning. Acad Med. 1993 Mar;68(3):207–13.

29. Schmidt HG. Commentaries: assumptions underlying self-directed learning may be false. Med Educ. 2000 Apr;34(4):243–5.

30. Othtsubo Y. Should information be redundantly distributed among group members? Effective use of group memory in collaborative problem solving. Appl Cognitive Psychol. 2005 Dec;19(9):1219–33.

31. Schmidt HG, Moust JH. What makes a tutor effective? A structural-equations modelling approach to learning in problem-based curricula. Acad Med. 1995 Aug;70(8):708–14.

32. Efklides A. Metacognition. Defi ning its facets and levels of functioning in relation to self-regulation and co-regulation. European Psychol. 2008 Jan;13(4):277–87.

33. Iputo JE. Facilitating the integrated small-group tutorial in a medical programme —the University of Transkei (Unitra) experience. S Afr Med J. 2005 Dec;95(12):959–62.

34. Gari Calzada M, Rivera Michelena NM. Las acciones del tutor en el aprendizaje basado en la solución de problemas en una universidad rural de África del Sur. Rev Docencia Universitaria [Internet]. 2013 May–Aug [cited 2013 Oct 15];11(2):153–71. Available from: http://m .redined.mecd.gob.es/xmlui/bitstream/han dle/11162/107038/gari_rivera.pdf?sequence=1. Spanish.