Comparing problem-based learning with case-based learning

Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions

Malathi Srinivasan, Michael S Wilkes, Frazier Stevenson, Thuan Nguyen, Stuart Slavin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

181 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: Problem-based learning (PBL) is now used at many medical schools to promote lifelong learning, open inquiry, teamwork, and critical thinking. PBL has not been compared with other forms of discussion-based small-group learning. Case-based learning (CBL) uses a guided inquiry method and provides more structure during small-group sessions. In this study, we compared faculty and medical students' perceptions of traditional PBL with CBL after a curricular shift at two institutions. METHOD: Over periods of three years, the medical schools at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and the University of California, Davis (UCD) changed first-, second-, and third-year Doctoring courses from PBL to CBL formats. Ten months after the shift (2001 at UCLA and 2004 at UCD), students and faculty who had participated in both curricula completed a 24-item questionnaire about their PBL and CBL perceptions and the perceived advantages of each format RESULTS: A total of 286 students (86%-97%) and 31 faculty (92%-100%) completed questionnaires. CBL was preferred by students (255; 89%) and faculty (26; 84%) across schools and learner levels.The few students preferring PBL (11%) felt it encouraged self-directed learning (26%) and valued its greater opportunities for participation (32%). From logistic regression, students preferred CBL because of fewer unfocused tangents (59%, odds ration [OR] 4.10, P = .01), less busy-work (80%, OR 3.97, P = .01), and more opportunities for clinical skills application (52%, OR 25.6, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Learners and faculty at two major academic medical centers overwhelmingly preferred CBL (guided inquiry) over PBL (open inquiry). Given the dense medical curriculum and need for efficient use of student and faculty time, CBL offers an alternative model to traditional PBL small-group teaching. This study could not assess which method produces better practicing physicians.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)74-82
Number of pages9
JournalAcademic Medicine
Volume82
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2007

Fingerprint

Problem-Based Learning
learning success
Learning
learning
Students
Los Angeles
Medical Schools
Curriculum
small group
student
Clinical Competence
Medical Students
school
Teaching
open learning
curriculum
Logistic Models
questionnaire
lifelong learning
teamwork

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Education

Cite this

Comparing problem-based learning with case-based learning : Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions. / Srinivasan, Malathi; Wilkes, Michael S; Stevenson, Frazier; Nguyen, Thuan; Slavin, Stuart.

In: Academic Medicine, Vol. 82, No. 1, 01.2007, p. 74-82.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{fdf73b3e8de447fdb3b378c91eba90c6,
title = "Comparing problem-based learning with case-based learning: Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions",
abstract = "PURPOSE: Problem-based learning (PBL) is now used at many medical schools to promote lifelong learning, open inquiry, teamwork, and critical thinking. PBL has not been compared with other forms of discussion-based small-group learning. Case-based learning (CBL) uses a guided inquiry method and provides more structure during small-group sessions. In this study, we compared faculty and medical students' perceptions of traditional PBL with CBL after a curricular shift at two institutions. METHOD: Over periods of three years, the medical schools at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and the University of California, Davis (UCD) changed first-, second-, and third-year Doctoring courses from PBL to CBL formats. Ten months after the shift (2001 at UCLA and 2004 at UCD), students and faculty who had participated in both curricula completed a 24-item questionnaire about their PBL and CBL perceptions and the perceived advantages of each format RESULTS: A total of 286 students (86{\%}-97{\%}) and 31 faculty (92{\%}-100{\%}) completed questionnaires. CBL was preferred by students (255; 89{\%}) and faculty (26; 84{\%}) across schools and learner levels.The few students preferring PBL (11{\%}) felt it encouraged self-directed learning (26{\%}) and valued its greater opportunities for participation (32{\%}). From logistic regression, students preferred CBL because of fewer unfocused tangents (59{\%}, odds ration [OR] 4.10, P = .01), less busy-work (80{\%}, OR 3.97, P = .01), and more opportunities for clinical skills application (52{\%}, OR 25.6, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Learners and faculty at two major academic medical centers overwhelmingly preferred CBL (guided inquiry) over PBL (open inquiry). Given the dense medical curriculum and need for efficient use of student and faculty time, CBL offers an alternative model to traditional PBL small-group teaching. This study could not assess which method produces better practicing physicians.",
author = "Malathi Srinivasan and Wilkes, {Michael S} and Frazier Stevenson and Thuan Nguyen and Stuart Slavin",
year = "2007",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1097/01.ACM.0000249963.93776.aa",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "82",
pages = "74--82",
journal = "Academic Medicine",
issn = "1040-2446",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing problem-based learning with case-based learning

T2 - Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions

AU - Srinivasan, Malathi

AU - Wilkes, Michael S

AU - Stevenson, Frazier

AU - Nguyen, Thuan

AU - Slavin, Stuart

PY - 2007/1

Y1 - 2007/1

N2 - PURPOSE: Problem-based learning (PBL) is now used at many medical schools to promote lifelong learning, open inquiry, teamwork, and critical thinking. PBL has not been compared with other forms of discussion-based small-group learning. Case-based learning (CBL) uses a guided inquiry method and provides more structure during small-group sessions. In this study, we compared faculty and medical students' perceptions of traditional PBL with CBL after a curricular shift at two institutions. METHOD: Over periods of three years, the medical schools at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and the University of California, Davis (UCD) changed first-, second-, and third-year Doctoring courses from PBL to CBL formats. Ten months after the shift (2001 at UCLA and 2004 at UCD), students and faculty who had participated in both curricula completed a 24-item questionnaire about their PBL and CBL perceptions and the perceived advantages of each format RESULTS: A total of 286 students (86%-97%) and 31 faculty (92%-100%) completed questionnaires. CBL was preferred by students (255; 89%) and faculty (26; 84%) across schools and learner levels.The few students preferring PBL (11%) felt it encouraged self-directed learning (26%) and valued its greater opportunities for participation (32%). From logistic regression, students preferred CBL because of fewer unfocused tangents (59%, odds ration [OR] 4.10, P = .01), less busy-work (80%, OR 3.97, P = .01), and more opportunities for clinical skills application (52%, OR 25.6, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Learners and faculty at two major academic medical centers overwhelmingly preferred CBL (guided inquiry) over PBL (open inquiry). Given the dense medical curriculum and need for efficient use of student and faculty time, CBL offers an alternative model to traditional PBL small-group teaching. This study could not assess which method produces better practicing physicians.

AB - PURPOSE: Problem-based learning (PBL) is now used at many medical schools to promote lifelong learning, open inquiry, teamwork, and critical thinking. PBL has not been compared with other forms of discussion-based small-group learning. Case-based learning (CBL) uses a guided inquiry method and provides more structure during small-group sessions. In this study, we compared faculty and medical students' perceptions of traditional PBL with CBL after a curricular shift at two institutions. METHOD: Over periods of three years, the medical schools at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and the University of California, Davis (UCD) changed first-, second-, and third-year Doctoring courses from PBL to CBL formats. Ten months after the shift (2001 at UCLA and 2004 at UCD), students and faculty who had participated in both curricula completed a 24-item questionnaire about their PBL and CBL perceptions and the perceived advantages of each format RESULTS: A total of 286 students (86%-97%) and 31 faculty (92%-100%) completed questionnaires. CBL was preferred by students (255; 89%) and faculty (26; 84%) across schools and learner levels.The few students preferring PBL (11%) felt it encouraged self-directed learning (26%) and valued its greater opportunities for participation (32%). From logistic regression, students preferred CBL because of fewer unfocused tangents (59%, odds ration [OR] 4.10, P = .01), less busy-work (80%, OR 3.97, P = .01), and more opportunities for clinical skills application (52%, OR 25.6, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Learners and faculty at two major academic medical centers overwhelmingly preferred CBL (guided inquiry) over PBL (open inquiry). Given the dense medical curriculum and need for efficient use of student and faculty time, CBL offers an alternative model to traditional PBL small-group teaching. This study could not assess which method produces better practicing physicians.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33845969201&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33845969201&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.ACM.0000249963.93776.aa

DO - 10.1097/01.ACM.0000249963.93776.aa

M3 - Article

VL - 82

SP - 74

EP - 82

JO - Academic Medicine

JF - Academic Medicine

SN - 1040-2446

IS - 1

ER -