MPBL: equipping the African university lecturer.

Abstract

Modified Problem-Based Learning (mPBL) can be useful to the African university because it enables the lecturer to transmit to the African learner critical skills needed to work with others in groups, organizations and communities to solve the problems they will face beyond the classroom. Thus, while mPBL has the same goals as PBL it differs from this pure form by incorporating critical elements such as collaborative team-based learning, Triple-Jump Competency learning and empowerment principles and practices.

Introduction

In many ways, the 21st Century African university is facing some of the same challenges universities in the United States and in other parts of the world are facing. In the U.S., for example, universities are facing a paradigm shift in higher education. That is, the classroom lecturer is moving away from traditional methods of teaching to methods which are more student and learning-centered. This includes methods which seek to connect classroom learning with real world problems such as the PBL model. In the non-traditional classroom, PBL incorporates the components of cooperative and service-based learning. Since the 21st Century African learner is steeped in a culture which is fraught with problems (i.e., hunger, violence, genocide, sickness and homelessness) on the one hand and ascribes to the principle of working together for a common future on the other hand, the 21st Century African lecturer needs to be equipped with the resources that can enable him or her to develop the African learner with (1) critical and independent thinking skills and (2) the ability to apply content knowledge while working in collaboration for the solution of complex problems.

The PBL Model is recognized by lecturers in the United States and throughout the world as an instructional strategy that challenges students to develop critical thinking and problem-solving abilities (Savin-Baden, 2000). It is especially suitable for lecturers in Africa because research shows that many African lecturers are now finding that the traditional lecture format is not always suitable for preparing students for life beyond the classroom (Quinn & Voster, 2004). Not unlike many lecturers in the United States the African lecturer is also aware that life situations beyond the classroom seldom parallel those structured problems provided in the classroom. So the learner's ability to solve neatly packaged traditional school-based problems does little, if anything, to develop the relevant, critical thinking skills he or she will need to interact with life beyond the classroom (Jones, 1996; Brockbank & McGill, 1998).

PBL is also suitable to the African learning context because it empowers students to work together to solve problems in their community. During a 1996-97 Fulbright tour, the writer got the opportunity to see the dedication of African communities to the principle of working together (i.e., unbunto or tiriasano). That is, one got to see this principle in action as the people from all types of communities and backgrounds were observed working together to solve community and national problems. This seemed to me a way of life for them. Working together is a life-long principle that is modeled from the top down to the grassroots and vice versa. It was no more unusual to see, then, President Nelson Mandela become involved in straat (street) children's homes or community development projects in the townships than to see him at social functions for prime ministers and ambassadors. This sense of community- service and involvement was also seen at the universities I visited. The purpose of this paper, therefore, is to present the "new" lecturer with a modified version of Problem-Based Learning.

Modified Problem-Based Learning

The goals of mPBL are the same as those which define the "pure" form of PBL However, the mPBL approach incorporates the essential elements of collaborative team-based learning (Michaelson & Black, 1994), Triple-Jump Competency learning (Zoppi, ct. al, 2003) and empowerment evaluation principles and practices (Fetterman, Abraham & Millett, 2004). Therefore, when used together with a mutually supportive course design, the mPBL approach allows, first, for new lecturer roles and responsibilities and new student roles and responsibilities. For instance, the lecturer's role changes from that of primary dispenser of information to that of facilitator, coach or critical friend. While he or she may have sole responsibility for the course design, the learning that takes place in the classroom becomes a shared responsibility. In this new and non-traditional learning environment, the learner's role also changes. Learners are now empowered to be more responsible for their own learning. Learners are given the means to study independently, to be more self-determined and the capacity to build life-long learning skills. They are, therefore, no longer perceived as passive receivers of information but are empowered to use all the resources--intellectual, emotional and spiritual--they bring to the classroom. When learners are able to use their own resources they are able to (Mierson, 1998) ask the critical questions, to identify what they need to know to answer their own questions, where to go to find them (p. 16) and how to apply these to real-life problems in the community and the society at large.

When these mPBL strategies are combined with a supportive course design, instructors are able to harness the power of problem-based learning in higher education. In the United States, universities such as the University of Delaware, Stanford University, San Diego State University, California State University, Yale University and the University of Oklahoma, professors take faculty development workshops that help them incorporate TBL and PBL strategies into their course design.

Course Design

The writer learned to incorporate many of these methods into her course, A Modified Problem-Based Learning Course in Transcultural Human Relations (TC/HR), after completing a faculty development workshop in team- based and problem-based learning at the University of Oklahoma. This workshop provided a framework which enables the creation of a set of mutually supportive course components including the desired educational outcomes, course content and empowerment evaluation practices and tools (Michaelson & Black, 1994; Fetterman, 2004; Zoppi, et. al. 2003). See issue website http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/spr2006.htm The framework of this course is shown in Figure 1. As shown, it allows the instructor to answer five key course design questions. Each question is concerned with one of the courses essential operational components.

1. The first question asks about the desired educational outcomes: What do 'T' want students to be able to do when they complete my TC/HR course? This question helps me determine the type of learning that will be implemented in the course. As a result (Fetterman, 2004), I must state the course objectives very clearly, making sure they support the accomplishment of the course goal and can be measured.

2. The second question asks: What will the learners have to know to achieve the course outcome stated in question number one? It helps to ensure that the student prepares before class to be able to apply the TC/HR problem-based learning content and materials in-class to loosely structured, ill-defined real-life problems developed from various sources (i.e., textbooks, journal articles, annual reports of service- or community based agencies, internet, newsprints, documentaries, films and movies).

3. The third question asks: How can "I" tell whether or not the learners know the TC/HR content well enough to accomplish the course outcomes stated in question number one? This question guides the readiness assurance process in which the lecturer uses a combination of empowerment tools (Fetterman, 2004; Michaelson, 1994) designed to evaluate the student's preparedness for the application of the TC/HR content to real world problems.

4. Whereas questions two and three are concerned with the learning of the course content, question four asks: How can the lecturer tell whether or not the learners can do what they have learned in the course? This question gets at activities that help students apply the course content. These include: 1) writing critical analyses and applying TC/HR content and concepts to real world problems (RWP), 2) presenting and discussing analyses of real world problems in groups and whole class discussions, 3) demonstrating TC/HR problem-based learning in a Service-Based Learning (SBL) agency, or via wireless computer technological communities, [1] 4) demonstrating responsibility and role recognition, 5) demonstrating moral reasoning and ethical judgment, 6) completing a major culminating real world (RW) research project, and 7) demonstrating life-long learning in PBL.

5. Question five asks: How can I assess the student's level of competence in applying the PBL learning in question #4? To assess the student's competence in this area, the lecturer can use adaptations of the Empowerment and Triple Jump Competence Evaluation scales (Callin & Kaliska, 1983; Hansen & Roberts, 1994).

mPBL Empowerment Activity Sequence

The modified problem-based classroom empowers the instructor and student not only by transforming their roles and responsibilities, but through an empowerment activity sequence (EAS) that makes it possible for the instructor to help the student "learn how to learn". Also, instead of using the lecture method to manage students, the instructor uses EAS to manage class time, class activities, and student performance. See issue website http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/spr2006.htm As shown in Figure 2, the EAS is composed of three major parts: individual preparation, empowerment evaluation principles and activities and the application of course concepts to real world problems. Each part consists of one or more steps. Unlike the traditional lecture method that simply teaches students how to learn the course theories and concepts, each part of the EAS makes it possible to focus most of the class time on helping students apply the course concepts to real world problems.

Therefore, each part and the steps within each part are designed for mutual empowerment and support. For example, individual preparation and tutoring ensure that the students are exposed to the course concepts before class through assigned readings and homework assignments (Michaelson & Black, 1994). Students use study questions and study skills which help them analyze, compare, contrast, criticize, define, describe, discuss, evaluate, illustrate, outline, prove, state and summarize the course content and concepts (Milhouse, 2004-5). Students also receive tutoring in the form of individualized conferences. These one-on-one tutorials happen outside of class and can coincide with the instructor's office hours.

The empowerment evaluation principles and activities allow for individual evaluations, group evaluations, team trouble shooting and instructor feedback. The purpose of the individual evaluations is to help students help themselves through improvement and self-determination to master the course concepts. This evaluation also helps the instructor know if students are prepared for the application activities that make up the remaining class time. The individual empowerment evaluation is composed of several questions (multiple choice or short answer) over the assigned TC/HR content. Since one of the biggest complaints students have about working in groups is some team-mates do not carry their share of the workload, the group evaluation helps to avoid this problem. Its purpose is to ensure group accountability and peer-teaching. The group evaluation consists of the same set of questions that make up the individual evaluation. Groups complete their evaluation before receiving the scores from the individual evaluation. The group evaluation should be assessed by the instructor immediately so trouble shooting and instructor feedback can take place (Michaelson & Black, 1994).

The trouble shooting process is one that engages the group's curiosity. In other words, the group is able to use 'missed questions' as an opportunity to have a focused review over potentially difficult course concepts (Michaelson & Black, 1994). This process also allows for instructor feedback and input. The application part of the EAS involves seven steps. Each step allows the students to apply a different but interrelated TC/HR skill (i.e., communication, social competence, sell-discipline, ethics and life-long learning) to the solution of real world problems. This part of EAS also allows the instructor to assess the students' ability to apply the TC/HR skills with mutually supportive Empowerment Triple Jump Performance Scales (Hansen & Roberts, 1994; Zoppi, et. al., 2003).

Guidelines for Group Composition

Michaelson & Black (1994) presents several key principles that are important for group formation. [2] The first principle concerns the distribution of student assets. The authors recommend that instructors ask themselves: What would make a difference in how groups are formed? In my class, students are grouped according to a number of different but relevant assets. When the makeup of the class allows for it, the group composition usually consists of a balance of students from different cultural backgrounds, gender, work experience, prior education or courses in the subject area and travel abroad experiences. See //rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/spr2006.htm Another principle concerns the barriers to group cohesiveness. Sometimes the biggest barrier to group cohesiveness can be caused by previously established relationships between subsets of members in the group (e.g. boyfriend/girl friend, fraternity bothers, sorority sisters, subsets of the same gender and race). Already established relations can form the basis for a cohesive subgroup within a group which can cause some members to feel excluded and isolated. Such disconnection within the group can ensure the disruption of the group's harmony throughout the semester (Flecthner & Davis, 1985; Michaelson & Black, 1994).

Instructors should help students understand the group formation process. If students feel that there is an ulterior motive for the way the instructor assigned them to their groups, they may be hesitant about becoming fully integrated within the group initially. Michaelson & Black (1994) suggest that an effective and practical approach to forming groups should be based on the information gathered about the students' background on the dimensions important to group success during the introductory phase of the class such as: (1) deciding on the total number of groups you want to form (usually 6 to 7 people per group), (2) asking students possessing a specific asset to stand (taking the rarest and or most important category first), and (3) having those standing "count-off' by the total number of groups and repeating steps #2 and #3 with different categories of students until everyone in the class has been assigned to a group (pp. 23). The group formation guidelines can equip the "new" lecturer in the 21st century South African university with the "know how" to prepare students to work together in groups and teams as required by the 1996 Qualification Authority Act.

Guidelines for Developing Real World Problems

Research indicates that the best guidelines for developing real world problems are those which encourage unorganized, ill-structured, and open-ended problems. Because these allow for student processing and the utilization of all of the resources they bring to the classroom with them (intellectual, emotional, spiritual). According Jones (1996) and Albanese & Mitchell (1993), strategies the lecturer can use to enhance the development of these types of problems include relevancy, coverage and complexity.

Relevancy: Why is relevancy important to developing real world problems? According to PBL researchers (Hoffman, et. al., 1996; Ostwald, Chen, Varnam & McGeorge, 1992), relevancy is important because it helps students see how their problem-based assignments relate to the objectives or educational outcomes of the course. Further, this makes it less likely for students to lose interest while working on the problems. Moreover, problem-based learning can take an extended period of time to complete. But the more relevant problems are the less likely the students are to be bored with them. In other words, when students understand the relevancy of their class work, their level of interest in and motivation toward it is increased. Another reason why relevancy is important is it can help the lecturer tell whether or not the student is able to apply the PBL skills learned in class to real world problems outside the classroom. Therefore, Hoffman, et. al., (1996) and others suggest that the relevancy of the problem can be increased if it is developed to focus on "current events, student lives, or relationships to actual occurrences at the local, national, or international level" (p. 8).

Coverage: One of the major criticisms of problem based learning is it does not cover the same amount of course content as the traditional learning method. It is, therefore, important that the guidelines for developing real world problems be based on the desired educational outcomes. When the educational outcomes are supportive of the accomplishment of the course's overall goals, they ensure coverage of a substantial amount of the course content. This, in turn, helps the student see the big picture and grasp major concepts and the main ideas the lecturer wants him or her to learn (Hoffman, et. al. 1996).

Complexity: The third and final variable that the lecturer should consider when developing real world problems is complexity. Complex problems, when properly developed (i. e., unorganized, ill-structured, open-ended) ensure that the conditions in the classroom reflect that of life in the real world (Hoffman, et. al., 1996). They also help to ensure that there is no "one right" answer. Classroom discussions are likely to be more stimulating and animated if there is the possibility for many different answers and because the problem can be examined from different perspectives. Also, ill-structured or open-ended problems allow for the integration of interdisciplinary solutions. Furthermore, complex problems are preferred over simple problems because learners get to apply the skills they learn in class about problem-solving--critical thinking and analytical skills, written and oral communication skills and responsibility and role recognition (Albanese & Mitchell, 1993; Hoffman, et. al., 1996). When used in conjunction with the specific needs of the African learner, these features of the mPBL approach can equip the "new" lecturer with guidelines for developing real world problems for use in his or her classroom.

Concluding Remarks

This paper has presented a modified problem-based learning approach for the new lecturer in the 21st Century African university, It has attempted to show how this approach can be used to facilitate the African learner's (1) critical and independent thinking skills and (2) ability to apply content knowledge while working in collaboration for the solution of complex problems. Because of its focus on collaboration (or working together) as a means of solving complex problems, the writer believes it is useful to the African learner and in particularly learners living in some parts of sub-Saharan Africa. For instance, one of the biggest needs (i.e., real life problem) South Africans have today is direction for teaching within integrated schools and living successfully in an integrated society. And the South African Department of Education believes a part of this direction must come from the schools. In fact, the Qualifications Authority Act of 1996 specified several critical outcomes that administrators and lecturers must consider when designing programs and instructional plans for South African schools and universities. One of the critical outcomes, specified by this act, is students must know how to "work effectively with others in a team, group, organization and community" when they leave the classroom for the real world.

This implies that when programs adhere to the principle of working together, they can help the learner develop skills that can be used in an integrated society including the skills of civic mindedness, tolerance for differences within society and the appreciation of the importance of making a positive contribution to the community and society at large (DOE, 2001). Therefore, the mPBL learning approach--which focuses on working together and solving real world problems--can equip the "new" lecturer with the tools she or he will need to teach the learner to live successfully in an integrated South African society, It equips "new" lecturers with tools to design their course(s) so that they may model what South Africa would look like if it worked together for a common future. For example, when forming groups in the classroom, the lecturer can follow the key principles for group formation provided above; that is, ensure an even distribution of student assets in each group and avoid barriers to group cohesiveness. Another way the mPBL can help lecturers model their classrooms to reflect the South African society is by using appropriate guidelines for developing complex real-world problems (i.e., racial, ethnic, discrimination against people with HIV/AIDS, homelessness, etc.). Finally, since African learners are allowed to use all of their resources (intellectual, emotional, spiritual) in the classroom, the mPBL approach can be used as a tool that helps "new" lecturers bring forth these learner resources in the African classroom. This is, perhaps, one of the greatest benefits of the mPBL approach over the traditional lecture method; that is, its capacity to encourage students to use all of the resources they bring to the classroom (i.e., intellectual, emotional and spiritual).

References

Albanese, M. & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of the literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine. 68(1), 52-81.

Brockbank, A. & McGill, I. (1998). Facilitating reflective learning in higher education, SRHE and OUP, Buckingham.

Callin, M., and D. Ciliska. (1983). Revitalising problem solving with triple jump. Canada Nurse, 79: 41-44.

Fetterman, D. M. & Wandersman, A. (2004). Empowerment Evaluation Principles in Practice: Fullerton, California: Sage Publication, 2004.

Fiechtner, S. B. & Davis, E. A. (1985). Why groups fail: A survey of student experiences with learning groups. The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 9 (4), 58-73.

Hansen, P. A., and Roberts, K. B. (1994). The triple jump exam: combining learning and assessment in physiology (Abstract). FASEB J. 8: A563.

Hoffman, B. (1996). Distributed Course Delivery for Problem-Based Learning. On-site Workshop at SDSU.

Jones, D. (1996). Advantages of BL. Learning Resource. DCDPBL Faculty Development Institute Forum.

Michaelson, L. K. & Black, R. H. (1994). Building learning teams: The key to harnessing the power of small groups in higher education. Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education, Vol. 2. State College, PA: National Center for Teaching, Learning and Assessment.

Milhouse, V. H. (2004-5). A Modified Problem-Based Learning Course in Transcultural Human Relations. A graduate and undergraduate course at the University of Oklahoma.

Mierson, S. (1998). A Problem-Based Learning Course in Physiology for Undergraduate and Graduate Basic Science Students. Advances in Physiology Education, Vol. 20 (1).

Ostwald, M. J., Chen, S. E., Varnam, B., & McGeorge, W. D. (1992). The application of problem-based learning to distance education. Paper presented at the World Conference of the International Council for Distance Education, Bangkok, Thailand.

Quinn, L., & J. Voster (2004). Transforming teachers' conceptions of teaching And learning in a post graduate certificate in higher education and training course. South African Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 18 (1). South African Journal of Higher Education, Ritchie, D. (1996). Distributed Course Delivery for Problem-Based Learning. On-site Workshop at SDSU.

Savin-Baden, M. (2002). Problem-based learning in higher education: Untold stories. SRHE and Open university Press.

South African Department of Education. (1996). Educating for Our Common Future: Building Schools for an Integrated Society. A Guidebook for Principals and Teachers.

Zoppi, K., Engum, S., Thurston, V. C., Brahmi, F., Butler, N., Keener, P., Gaffney, M., Bankston, P., Frankel, M. (2003). Triple-Jump Evaluation Criteria. Competency Curriculum Fort Wayne Center for Medical Education.

Virginia Milhouse, University of Oklahoma, OK

Notes

[1] Wireless Technology for Collaborative Learning Website (http://.udel.edu/pbl/wireless/).

[2] This cartoon represents an appropriate team formation. From the amount of observable interaction among the team members, we can assume that the principles for team formation (i.e., distribution of assets and the removal of barriers to cohesiveness) have been met. The original source of this cartoon is the University of Oklahoma's Instructional Development Program TBL Website (http://www.ou.edu/idp/teamlearning/cartoons.htm). The Cartoon was created by Sue Clancy.

Milhouse, Ph.D., is Associate and Fulbright Professor of Human Relations