Fri, Nov 22, 2024
[Archive]
Volume 16, Issue 52 (2024)
JMED 2024, 16(52): 17-26 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: MSU-RMC-02/FR01/07/L1/050
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ansari R, Nordin N, Abdul Hamid N A. Enhancing and impeding factors of problem-based learning in undergraduate medical education: A qualitative study. JMED 2024; 16 (52) :17-26
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-1939-en.html
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-1939-en.html
MAHSA University
Abstract: (831 Views)
Background & Objective: With student-centered teaching-learning making the forefront in medical education, this qualitative study was set out to investigate the perceptions of students on the factors that enable or impede the outcome achievement of problem-based method of teaching-learning.
Materials & Methods: Ten students embarking their year 2 Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) study in a private university in Malaysia agreed to participate in this study. The students were subjected to semi-structured, in-depth, one-to-one interviews following their consent. The interview protocol was prepared following guidelines, objectives of the study and from the available literature. The data thus collected was subjected to thematic analysis using NVivo.
Results: Analysis revealed emergence of codes such as student characteristics and perception, facilitators, team factors, content and conduct of problem-based learning. These codes were then collapsed into themes. The major themes or factors that enabled or impeded the outcomes of PBL were student factors, facilitator factors and factors related to the learning environment.
Conclusion: The study concluded that among the various factors that enable or impede PBL teaching-learning method, there are pros and cons among the student, facilitators and learning environment that may facilitate or impede the realisation of PBL outcomes. This study would shed light into the students’ perception of PBL and enable facilitators to ensure that PBLs are student-friendly.
Materials & Methods: Ten students embarking their year 2 Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) study in a private university in Malaysia agreed to participate in this study. The students were subjected to semi-structured, in-depth, one-to-one interviews following their consent. The interview protocol was prepared following guidelines, objectives of the study and from the available literature. The data thus collected was subjected to thematic analysis using NVivo.
Results: Analysis revealed emergence of codes such as student characteristics and perception, facilitators, team factors, content and conduct of problem-based learning. These codes were then collapsed into themes. The major themes or factors that enabled or impeded the outcomes of PBL were student factors, facilitator factors and factors related to the learning environment.
Conclusion: The study concluded that among the various factors that enable or impede PBL teaching-learning method, there are pros and cons among the student, facilitators and learning environment that may facilitate or impede the realisation of PBL outcomes. This study would shed light into the students’ perception of PBL and enable facilitators to ensure that PBLs are student-friendly.
Article Type : Orginal Research |
Subject:
Medical Education
Received: 2023/05/14 | Accepted: 2023/08/15 | Published: 2024/03/16
Received: 2023/05/14 | Accepted: 2023/08/15 | Published: 2024/03/16
References
1. Klegeris A, Hurren H. Impact of problem-based learning in a large classroom setting: student perception and problem-solving skills. Advances in Physiology Education. 2011 Dec; 35(4): 408-15. [DOI]
2. Qin Y, Wang Y, Floden RE. The effect of problem-based learning on improvement of the medical educational environment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Principles and Practice. 2016; 25(6): 525-32. [DOI]
3. Shimizu I, Nakazawa H, Sato Y, et al. Does blended problem-based learning make Asian medical students active learners?: a prospective comparative study. BMC Medical Education. 2019 Dec; 19(1): 1-9. [DOI]
4. Amoako-Sakyi D, Amonoo-Kuofi H. Problem-based learning in resource-poor settings: lessons from a medical school in Ghana. BMC Medical Education. 2015 Dec; 15: 1-8. [DOI]
5. Haghparast N, Sedghizadeh PP, Shuler CF, et al. Evaluation of student and faculty perceptions of the PBL curriculum at two dental schools from a student perspective: a cross‐sectional survey. European Journal of Dental Education. 2007 Feb; 11(1): 14-22. [DOI]
6. Chang BJ. Problem-based learning in medical school: A student's perspective. Annals of Medicine and Surgery. 2016 Dec 1;12:88-9. [DOI]
7. Dring JC. Problem-based learning–Experiencing and understanding the prominence during medical school: Perspective. Annals of Medicine and Surgery. 2019 Nov 1; 47: 27-8. [DOI]
8. Kwan CY & Tam L. Commentary: hybrid PBL- what is in a name? Journal of Medical Education. 2009 13, 157–165. [DOI]
9. Ginzburg SB, Schwartz J, Gerber R, et al. Assessment of medical students’ leadership traits in a problem/case-based learning program. Medical Education Online. 2018 Jan 1; 23(1): 1542923. [DOI]
10. Fan C, Jiang B, Shi X et al. Update on research and application of problem‐based learning in medical science education. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education. 2018 Mar; 46(2): 186-94. [DOI]
11. Niwa M, Saiki T, Fujisaki K et al. The Effects of Problem-Based-Learning on the Academic Achievements of Medical Students in One Japanese Medical School, Over a Twenty-Year Period. Health Professions Education. 2016 Jun 1; 2(1): 3-9. [DOI]
12. Emerald NM, Aung PP, Han TZ, et al. Students’ perception of problem-based learning conducted in phase1 medical program, UCSI University, Malaysia. South East Asian Journal of Medical Education. 2013 Dec 21; 7(2): 45-8.
13. Al-Drees AA, Khalil MS, Irshad M, Abdulghani HM. Students’ perception towards the problem-based learning tutorial session in a system-based hybrid curriculum. Saudi Medical Journal. 2015; 36(3): 341. [DOI]
14. Lim WK. Dysfunctional problem-based learning curricula: resolving the problem. BMC Medical Education. 2012 Dec; 12(1): 1-7. [DOI]
15. Ary D, Jacobs LC, Irvine CK, Walker D. Introduction to Research in Education. Cengage Learning; 2018.
16. Kallio H, Pietilä AM, Johnson M, Kangasniemi M. Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi‐structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2016 Dec; 72(12): 2954-65. [DOI]
17. Shawer SF. Classroom-level curriculum development: EFL teachers as curriculum-developers, curriculum-makers and curriculum-transmitters. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2010 Feb 1; 26(2): 173-84. [DOI]
18. Streefkerk R. Qualitative vs. Quantitative research. (Updated June 5, 2020) Downloaded from [Article]
19. Saldaña J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 2021: 1-440.
20. Cohen D, Crabtree B. Qualitative Research Guidelines Project. 2006 Retrieved from [Article]
21. Yadav SA, Poudel S, Pandey O, et al. Performance and preference of problem-based learning (PBL) and lecture-based classes among medical students of Nepal. F1000 Research. 2022 Feb 14; 11(183): 183. [DOI]
22. Nagraj S, Miles S, Bryant P, Holland R. Medical students’ views about having different types of problem-based learning tutors. Medical Science Educator. 2019 Mar 15; 29: 93-100. [DOI]
23. Trullàs JC, Blay C, Sarri E, Pujol R. Effectiveness of problem-based learning methodology in undergraduate medical education: a scoping review. 2022 BMC Medical Education. 22(1); 1-12. [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
