Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
There is much literature on problem-based learning (PBL), both within and outside medical education. The literature addresses such questions as what is PBL and how does it work, and many examples are given; yet it is often difficult to determine from these descriptions whether the educational approach being described is actually PBL. The goal of this article is to provide planners and/or assessors of PBL curricula with a framework that would facilitate analyses of this educational approach. We propose to categorize educational activities as PBL or non-PBL according to three core principles: (1) the problem acts as a stimulus for learning; (2) it is an educational approach, not an isolated instructional technique, and (3) it is a student-centered approach, and four criteria concerning their effect on student learning: (1) active processing of information; (2) activation of prior knowledge; (3) meaningful context; and (4) opportunities for elaboration/organization of knowledge). Beyond this, PBL curricula vary along a set of dimensions that is useful to analyze, to describe and to compare different PBL practices. The usefulness of this analytical framework is illustrated with examples from three different schools.
BERNARD CHARLIN KAREN MANN PENNY HANSEN (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: