Measuring the Effectiveness of Faculty Facilitation Training in Problem-Based Learning in a Medical School

DOI: 10.4236/ce.2014.54025   PDF   HTML     5,343 Downloads   7,561 Views   Citations


This study examined the effectiveness of a faculty training program for problem-based learning (PBL) facilitation. A multi-level approach was used, following Kirkpatrick’s levels for assessing training effectiveness. Data were obtained from (1) tutor training workshop evaluations, (2) a survey of tutors’ attitudes and beliefs, (3) changes in tutors’ perceptions of their teaching styles through pre- and post-testing using the Teaching Styles Inventory (TSI), (4) changes in student attitudes and self-perceptions of their learning styles through pre- and post-testing using the Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) and the revised Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ). The authors contend that measures were obtained for Kirkpatrick levels 1, 2, and 4 (Reaction, Learning, and Results, respectively) but that no measure of Kirkpatrick level 3 was completed. Overall, it was concluded that the training program was successful as measured at Kirkpatrick level 1 but was equivocally successful as assessed at higher levels in Kirkpatrick’s model. In addition to drawing conclusions regarding the training program for facilitators in PBL, limitations and challenges associated with assessment at each level are highlighted.

Share and Cite:

Paslawski, T. , Kearney, R. and White, J. (2014) Measuring the Effectiveness of Faculty Facilitation Training in Problem-Based Learning in a Medical School. Creative Education, 5, 164-170. doi: 10.4236/ce.2014.54025.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Barrows, H. S. (1988). The Tutorial Process. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.
[2] Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2001). The Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133-149.
[3] Bonham, L. A. (1991). Guglielmino’s Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale: What Does It Mean? Adult Education Quarterly, 41, 92-99.
[4] DesMarchais, J. E. (1993). A Student-Centred, Problem-Based Curriculum: 5 Years’ Experience. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 148, 1567-1572.
[5] Dinsmore, D. L., & Alexander, P. A. (2012). A Critical Discussion of Deep and Surface Processing: What It Means, How It Is Measured, the Role of Context, and Model Specification. Educational Psychology Review, 24, 499-567.
[6] Dolmans, D., Wolfhagen, I., Schmidt, H. G., & Van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (1994). A Rating Scale for Tutor Evaluation in a Problem-Based Curriculum: Validity and Reliability. Medical Education, 28, 550-558.
[7] Farmer, E. A. (2004). Faculty Development for Problem-Based Learning. European Journal of Dental Education, 8, 59-66.
[8] Fisher, M., King, J., & Tague, G. (2001). Development of a Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale for Nursing Education. Nurse Education Today, 21, 516-525.
[9] Guglielmino, L. M. (1978). Development of the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale. Dissertation, University of Georgia. Dissertation Abstracts International, 38, 6467.
[10] Hitchcock, M. A., & Mylona, Z.-H. (2000). Teaching Faculty to Conduct Problem-Based Learning. Teaching and Learning in Medicine: An International Journal, 12, 52-57.
[11] Hoban, J. D., Lawson, S. R., Mazmanian, P. E., Best, A. M., & Seibel, H. R. (2005). The Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale: A Factor Analysis Study. Medical Education, 39, 370-379.
[12] Immekus, J. C., & Imbrie, P. K. (2010). A Test and Cross-Validation of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire Factor Structure among Western University Students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70, 495-510.
[13] Kanter, S. (2008). Toward Better Descriptions of Innovations. Academic Medicine, 83, 703-704.
[14] Kirkpatrick, D. (1996). Great Ideas Revisited: Revisiting Kirkpatrick’s Four-Level Model. Training & Development, 50, 54-57.
[15] Leung, K. K., Lue, B. H., & Lee M. B. (2003). Development of a Teaching Style Inventory for Tutor Evaluation in ProblemBased Learning. Medical Education, 37, 410-416.
[16] Litzinger, T. A., Wise, J. C., & Lee, S. H. (2005). Self-Directed Learning Readiness among Engineering Students. Journal of Engineering Education, 94, 215-221.
[17] Mann, K. V., & Kaufman D. (1995). Skills and Attitudes in Self-Directed Learning: The Impact of a Problem-Based Curriculum. In A. I. Rothman, & R. Cohen (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth Ottawa Conference on Medical Education (pp. 607-609). Toronto: University of Toronto Bookstore Custom Publishing.
[18] Miflin, B. M., Campbell, C. B., & Price, D. A. (1999). A Lesson from the Introduction of a Problem-Based, Graduate Entry Course: The Effects of Different Views of Self-Direction. Medical Education, 33, 801-807.
[19] Newble, D., & Clarke, R. M. (1986). The Approaches to Learning of Students in a Traditional and in a Problem-Based Medical School. Medical Education, 20, 267-273.
[20] Shokar, G. S., Navkiran, K. S., Romero, C. M., & Bulik, R. J. (2002). Self-Directed Learning: Looking at Outcomes with Medical Students. Family Medicine, 34, 197-200.
[21] Steinert, Y. (2005). Learning Together to Teach Together: Interprofessional Education and Faculty Development. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19, 60-75.
[22] Stes, A., De Maeyer, S., Gijbels, D., & Van Petegem, P. (2013). Effects of Teachers’ Instructional Development on Students’ Study Approaches in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education, 38, 2-19.
[23] White, J., Paslawski, T., & Kearney, R. (2013). “Discovery Learning”: An Account of Rapid Curriculum Change in Response to Accreditation. Medical Teacher, 35, e1319-e1326.

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.