Problem Based Learning (PBL): A Novel and Effective Tool of Teaching and Learning

Abstract

Recently a surge has been witnessed in number of new academic pharmacy institution establishing concern with quality of graduates passing out. Survey has also established the poor understanding of the health education among the students. Developed countries have formulated and successfully implemented new strategies to impart education to the current generation. Problem Based Learning (PBL) is one of the novel technique used in majority of health universities in US, UK and Asian countries. This has led to tremendous development in the quality of health science graduates. The process allows a group of student to discuss and solve a real life situation though discussion. It involves exposing a group of students to a trigger/case/problem asking the student to solve the trigger within a specified time through a defined process facilitated by a tutor. The student are allowed to go for self-study based on their discussion and allowed to meet again for second session after a week to solve the trigger. The student capability can be measured by the facilitator using a designed rubrics or any other evaluation strategies. This process have proved to enhance the soft skill, cognitive, metacognitive, problem solving and critical thinking skills among the students. The strategy also helps the students to work in group and develop a democratic attitude and to judge a problem based on consensus. Indian pharmacy colleges should adopt the system to install critical thinking ability among the students.

Full text

258 Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research | Vol 49 | Issue 4 | Oct-Dec, 2015
Pharmaceucal Educaon
www.ijper.org
Problem Based Learning (PBL): A Novel and Effective
Tool of Teaching and Learning
Mohammed Tahir Ansari*, Santibuana Abd Rahman, Vishal Bhagwan Badgujar, Farheen Sami and
Mohd Syaq Abdullah
Faculty of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Universiti Kuala Lumpur-Royal College of Medicine Perak, Ipoh.
ABSTRACT
Recently a surge has been witnessed in number of new academic pharmacy institution establishing concern with
quality of graduates passing out. Survey has also established the poor understanding of the health education
among the students. Developed countries have formulated and successfully implemented new strategies to impart
education to the current generation. Problem Based Learning (PBL) is one of the novel technique used in majority
of health universities in US, UK and Asian countries. This has led to tremendous development in the quality of
health science graduates. The process allows a group of student to discuss and solve a real life situation though
discussion. It involves exposing a group of students to a trigger/case/problem asking the student to solve the
trigger within a specified time through a defined process facilitated by a tutor. The student are allowed to go
for self-study based on their discussion and allowed to meet again for second session after a week to solve the
trigger. The student capability can be measured by the facilitator using a designed rubrics or any other evaluation
strategies. This process have proved to enhance the soft skill, cognitive, metacognitive, problem solving and
critical thinking skills among the students. The strategy also helps the students to work in group and develop
a democratic attitude and to judge a problem based on consensus. Indian pharmacy colleges should adopt the
system to install critical thinking ability among the students.
Key words: Cognitive, Critical thinking, Facilitator, Problem Based Learning, Trigger.
DOI: 10.5530/ijper.49.4.3
Correspondence Address
Mr Mohammed Tahir
Ansari
Department of Pharmaceuti-
cal Sciences
Faculty of Pharmacy and
Health Science
Universiti Kuala Lumpur
Royal College of Medi-
cine Perak, No.24, Lebuh
Perusahaan Kelbang 1, IGB
Industrial Park, Jalan Kuala
Kangsar, Tasek, Ipoh 30010
Perak, Malaysia.
E-mail: md.a.tahir@gmail.
com
INTRODUCTION
The last decade has witnessed a signicant
surge in new pharmacy academic estab-
lishment pan Asian nation including India,
inicting concern regarding low levels of
skilled education among graduates. Several
reasons can be cited like inadequate school,
inadequate workplace facilities, ancient mas-
ter and apprentice model and less hands
on trainings. This could seriously replicate
negatively on the standards of professional
graduates. Traditional didactic lectures are
teacher oriented, providing static informa-
tion and cannot enhance the professional
qualities of the scholars. Moreover, if the
scholars are explored and examined on their
critical parameters than the results will not
be very encouraging. New and innovative
methods have been explored to enhance the
quality of graduates among the competitive
world. Problem Based Learning (PBL) is one
Submission Date : 11-03-2015
Revision Date : 23-04-2015
Accepted Date : 25-05-2015
of the novel techniques which has been suc-
cessfully implanted in majority of the health
schools and colleges in developed countries.
It has been dened as a learning method, a
unique approach which uses real practice sit-
uation problems as a starting point working,
as a stimulus or trigger for the acquisition
and integration of new knowledge.1 A more
accurate title for the technique has been
suggested like ‘‘Student-centered, problem
based, inquiry-based, integrated, collabora-
tive, reiterative, learning”.2-6
Problem based learning have been proved
to be a success in the enhancement and
development of critical thinking ability,
leadership qualities, self-directed learning,
professional and interpersonal skills, team
working skills, management skills, collab-
orative learning,English speaking qualities,
practicing empathy and many more.7-9

Mohammed Tahir Ansari et al., Problem based learning (PBL)
Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research | Vol 49 | Issue 4 | Oct-Dec, 2015 259
Literature has outlined the importance and effective-
ness of PBL over the traditional method of teaching. A
survey was conducted for graduates of 4 baccalaureate
degrees respiratory therapy programs in the southeast-
ern and south central United States to compare PBL
with the traditional approach of teaching. The result
envisaged substantial satisfaction of students exposed
to PBL,which was additionally evident from student’s
performance in writing registered respiratory thera-
pist examination.10 PBL implemented into the dental
curriculum at the Harvard school of dental medicine-
showed a signicant improvement in communication
with patients, critical thinking, independent learning
and substantive improvement in small group settings,
self-assessment and teamwork.11 A study was also con-
ducted to compare the effect of PBL and lecture-based
learning (LBL) on the satisfaction and learning progress
among undergraduate midwifery students. The study
resulted in a strong suggestion of implementing PBL in
the curricula owing to its superlative student satisfaction
and improved application of a theory lesson in clinical
practice.12 PBL is suggested as a constrictive student-
centered and problem-based novel teaching approach
in medical education.13 It is geared to facilitate knowl-
edge retention and application while fostering the skills
desired in physicians, such as clinical reasoning, critical
thinking and self directed learning.1 The PBL approach
has been found to improve physician competency in the
social and cognitive domains.14
Owing to its effectiveness many leading universities
have integrated PBL in its curriculum.The University
of New Mexico medical school offered a PBL curricu-
lum as an alternative track.15 Over the last two decades,
established schools like Harvard,16 UTM Malaysia,17 12
of 32 medical schools in UK18 have used PBL as teach-
ing tool. According to a survey of 123 medical schools
in the United States, 70% of the medical schools use
PBL especially during the preclinical years.19 PBL
pedagogy has been successfully implemented in medi-
cine,20-26 Dentistry,27-28 Nursing,29-32 Engineering,33-34
Pharmacy35-37 and Mathematics.38
PBL PEDAGOGY AND REQUIREMENT
Facilitator
The tutor/teacher should be a facilitator for PBL ses-
sion. Barrows have claimed that the task of the tutor in
a problem based tutorial group should be to facilitate
the learning of students rather than to convey knowl-
edge.1 It would not be necessary, but possibly benecial
if the facilitator knows the subject as PBL facilitator, he/
she may employ knowledge of the subject to support
the processes of cognitive or metacognitive develop-
ment and/or enculturation. The session can be assisted
by playing a role of a learner by staying silent, creator
by probing questionsdirect or by reecting questions,
evaluator by positing in the group and/or modeler by
stimulating interest.39-40 It is required for the tutor to be
impasse and laconic as much during the session. This is
not an easy tutors vocation, but it is symbolic to cogent
PBL pedagogy. It is apparent that tutors experienced
in a traditional tutor centered concept of teaching with
a subject based curriculum may nd themselves under
quagmire during a problem based pedagogy session.
The teacher’s role is to facilitate collaborative knowledge
construction. Studies have focussed on assessing goals
of a facilitator. Primarily facilitator(s) should be capable
Problem based learning process
Pictorial Abstract

Mohammed Tahir Ansari et al., Problem based learning (PBL)
260 Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research | Vol 49 | Issue 4 | Oct-Dec, 2015
of understanding less vocal students among the group
and involvement of them in the discourse should be
undertaken. The facilitator can and should change the
ow of the discussion from being temporarily stalled
to being more focused, so it can easethe learning pro-
cess on track. The tutor/facilitator should also make the
student’s thoughts and their depth of understanding
apparent and encourage students to become self-reliant
for direction and information.41 It is envisaged and also
supported by studies that PBL session should be facili-
tated by a tutor as priorities for tutorless groups dif-
fers as the concerning issues may be frustrated because
not everyone appears to do their fair share of the work,
attendance, building trust, reliability and personal differ-
ences in learning.42
A study to investigate the relevance of the background
of the facilitator was done and it was evident that quali-
ed clinical tutors classied better in establishing and
maintaining an environment of cooperation within
their PBL groups than non-clinical tutors in facilitat-
ing a group of medical students.43 Schmidt et al have
also concluded that tutor/facilitator tutoring, skill and
content knowledge seemed to be necessary and closely
related conditions for effective tutoring. His analysis
resulted in students guided by content experts in a PBL
session achieved better scores and spent more time on
self-led learning.44
PBL student groups
As dened earlier PBL is a student centered approach
in which students learn about a subject by working in
groups to solve an open ended problem. Group learn-
ing facilitates not only the acquisition of knowledge, but
also several other desirable attributes such as communi-
cation skills, teamwork, problem solving, independent
responsibility for learning, sharing information, and
respect for others. PBL can therefore be thought of as
a small group teaching method that combines the acqui-
sition of knowledge with the development of generic
skills and attitudes.25,45
The PBL group are briey identied to facilitate the
process of learning, fostering of self-directed learning
initiatives, engaging lifelong learning qualities and devel-
oping social skills that may enhance professional rela-
tions. These goals may only be reached by systematic
and procient work with the group processes in PBL.46
Student’s supports small PBL group work as a method
of learning and those groups that work cooperatively
are perceived as facilitating the most motivating learning
environment.47 The students in the PBL class had more
positive attitudes toward their learning environment on
the subscales for enthusiasm and authoritarianism. The
learners during the session themselves have to clarify
their understanding and identify further learning needs
which are considered important for formulating, syn-
thesizing and evaluating knowledge.48-49
Students in the PBL group build up meta-cognitive skills
and self-directed learning considered important for the
student’s development into independent, lifelong learn-
ers, responsible for their own learning. Schraw describes
two aspects of metacognition that he claims are neces-
sary for self-directed learning; the knowledge of cogni-
tion and the regulation of cognition.50 These skills are
teachable, he argues, and emphasizes that instructional
strategies should promote the construction and acquisi-
tion of meta-cognitive awareness. Self-directed learning
comprises the ability to formulate learning goals, iden-
tify resources for learning, choose relevant and appro-
priate strategies for learning, and evaluate the learning
outcomes.51-52
PBL student groups are characterized by 5 or 9 individ-
uals entrusted to work symbiotically and cooperative-
lyin a self-directed way on a delineated learning needs.
The group should be characterized by a group leader/
chairperson supported by a scriber. The teams may be
organized as vertical teams in which group leader/chair-
person makes crucial decisions if the team is unable to
reach a consensus or horizontal teams in which crucial
decisions are made by majority vote. The dynamics
of the group can be predened or may be optimized
based on the subjects or topics.53 PBL students small
groups attempt to resolve a real-life clinical problem by
using their existing knowledge to generate hypotheses
and then actively nding the cross-disciplinary knowl-
edge they need to fully understand the problem.54 It is
evenly conceivable that students who have signicant
deciencies in critical thinking, speaking ability, deci-
sion making, leadership qualities are more likely to drop
out of any institution of higher learning, but they are
even more likely to be unsuccessful in a PBL program,
which requires the ability to process and discuss ideas
and learn independently.55-56
Designing Triggers/Problems/Tasks
PBL triggers are utilized to stimulate the student’s inter-
est in resolving the problem scenarios presented to
them. Designing of PBL triggers/problems or task is
very critical as badly designed trigger will not be able
to cover the learning needs and the students discussion
may go haywire. PBL triggers are integrated with the
PBL problems, but the material is not taught in the same
tutorials or by the tutors. PBL trigger should be con-
ceptual and based on authors experience and literature
studytriggers can be classied under the following three
categories:

Mohammed Tahir Ansari et al., Problem based learning (PBL)
Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research | Vol 49 | Issue 4 | Oct-Dec, 2015 261
• Open type trigger: The students know the subject
and the topic to be covered in PBL session.
• Single blind type trigger: The students knows the
subject but the topic to be discussed is unknown.
• Double blind type trigger: The students remains
unknown for the subject and the topic of PBL session.
Student learning process through PBL is largely based
on the quality of the cases / trigger presented to the stu-
dents. Dolmans concluded that the following attributes
are essential to formulate an effective trigger or a case
for PBL.57
• Prior knowledge
• Elaboration
• Relevant context
• Integration of knowledge
• Self-directed learning
• Interest in the subject matter
• Faculty objectives
PBL Session
PBL delivery should be conducted in two sessions. Each
session can be of 1-2 hrs. depending on the content
and scope of the subject. Clinical subjects should not be
covered in less than 2 hours per session.
INTRODUCTORY SESSION 1
This session should be characterized by the following
features:
Introduction
In this session the group members will introduce and
greet each other. They should be advised by the facilita-
tor to choose among them the chairperson of the group
for the session. It is important that everyone has a
chance to be a chairperson and experience the challenge
of leading a group. Accordingly the chairperson should
be rotated between group members on a per-problem
basis or per session. This means that each student
should have the chance of being a chairperson at least
once a term. The skills developed from chairing a group
at this early stage ineducation could be invaluable.58 The
Chairperson is responsible for agreeing group processes,
introducing the case to the group, inviting participation
and ensuring all members are contributing. They also
ensure that all areas are covered and oversee timekeep-
ing. In addition, it is their role to monitor and comment
on performance at the end of the session and promote
discussion regarding any problems. The session should
extend for maximum of 10 minutes.59
Clarication of terms
Davis conducted a psychometric analysis to determine
strategies and step for acquiring better comprehension
skills, he listed nine potential component skills of com-
prehension word meanings, word meanings in context,
follow passage organization, main thought, answers spe-
cic text-based questions, text-based questions with para-
phrase, draw inferences about content, literary devices,
author’s purpose.60 This step should be integrated with
PBL session as students need to associate visual patterns
of letters with their phonemic pronunciations. The con-
sequence may help the students decode progresses from
hesitant, deliberate to uent actions.61
The purpose of the rst step is to agree on the mean-
ing of the various words and terms and on the situ-
ation described in the problem. Use can be made of
the knowledge possessed by the group members or
retrieved from a dictionary.62 The process can effectively
be extended for 10 to 15 minutes.
Facts and ideas
After the chairman is entrusted that the group has fully
understood difcult terms and the context of it appear-
ing in the problem or trigger, he should read the trigger
loud and clear. Other members may repeat the process.
Reading the trigger loud may carry specic advantages.
It may help chairperson or the facilitator to diagnose
dis-uency and the lack of prociency among the stu-
dents and may also be a strategy promote the students to
be active in the group. It is imperative for the group to
read the trigger aloud specially among those for whom
english is not the native language.63 Duursma have also
suggested that reading aloud emphasizes better phono-
logical awareness and comprehension of the subject.64
The group after better comprehension of the prob-
lem should visualize for facts and ideas in the trigger.
Scriber should be asked to write down all the related
ideas on the board for better understanding. If a PBL
is conducted for a disease, then the group should be
able to list all the symptoms leading to the disease in a
Table 1: Method to solve a problem for PBL
Ideas Facts Learning Issues Action Plan
Students conjectures
regardingthe problem or trigger
may involve causation effect,
possible resolution and so on.
A growing synthesis of
information abstracted through
inquiry as important to the
hypothesis to be generated.
Students list of what they need
to know or understand in order
to complete the problem task.
Things that need to be done
in order to complete the
problem task.

Mohammed Tahir Ansari et al., Problem based learning (PBL)
262 Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research | Vol 49 | Issue 4 | Oct-Dec, 2015
patient.65 Duffy suggested a chart to negotiate a design
for addressing an issue related to the trigger (Table 1).66
After the discussion and identifying signs and symptoms
of the problem the students should be able to list the
cues and key points. The process will certainly enhance
the thinking ability and develop a positive problem solving
approach. The session can be extended for 20 minutes.
Brainstorming (Generation of hypotheses)
This stage will help in activating existing knowledge
to understand the phenomenon and promotes reason-
ing skills in generating an explanation (hypothesis). It
involves active discussion and exchange of knowledge
and information. It is important to ensure that all mem-
bers of the group feel free and uninhibited to express
themselves. The chairperson would lead the discussion
with functional and non-functional questions related to
the trigger. It should include an exhaustive discussion
among the members to address the issue. The session
should be actively assisted by the scriber to record all
generated hypothesis during the process.67 The facilita-
tor should discourage the group to generate hypothesis
which cannot address the learning needs.65 The brain-
storming session should be followed after creating cer-
tain facts for the research to achieve the best conclusion
or else the result would not be as good.68-69 Since, stu-
dent may come up with a variety of hypotheses during
the session, the process may ventilate innovative prac-
tices and critical thinking ability.70
Learning needs (Learning outcomes)
Students are not exposed to the learning needs, but they
are supposed to transform all the generated hypothesis
into learning needs as desired by the syllabus.71 They-
can be simplied by raising some questions such as,
If a trigger has been devoted to diabetes, the students
should be able to ask.
What would be the physiological conditions of the body
during diabetes?
What should be the treatment for diabetes?
What are the dos and don’ts for treating diabetes?72
The facilitator should be assertive in his approach to
guide the students if required, as the students tend to
diverge from the capturing learning needs. The role of
facilitator is very important to assert that the students
achieve the required outcome. The session may be
extended for 10 minutes.
Debrieng I
After the completion of the session the facilitator must
address the group about their outcome with compli-
ments and encouraging remarks so as to infuse the habit
of critical thinking and problem solving.
After completing session 1, students are responsible
to do independent and self-directed learning. Students
gather information and ideas from reliable sources. Use
the full range of useful resources available, organize
responses to each learning outcome, making summa-
rized notes. They would be allowed to reassemble and
discus their nding after a week in session 2.
CLOSING SESSION 2: DISCUSSION AND DEBRIEFING
Review of trigger
After the students are allowed to go for self- directed
learning using academic resources they are allowed to
meet again for closing session (session 2) of PBL peda-
gogy. The students shall now be equipped with newly
acquired knowledge, the group reconvenes to discuss
the case. The discussion includes an explanation of
the central concepts and mechanisms, analysis of the
material and evaluation of its validity and importance.73
Theprocess may develop a democratic attitude among
students and will also develop the decision making by
consensus.74 This discussion is not a debate and it is not
for the purpose of winning. Discussion during the PBL
session is a skill that makes the thought processes vis-
ible, allows assumptions to surface and be challenged,
and exposes the sources of disagreement. Effective dis-
cussion should focus on issues, not personalities.75 Facil-
itators must be careful not to interject their ideas, but
rather, focus on promoting student interaction and dis-
cussion toward a decision. Tutors, for example, must be
careful not to practice facilitation by manipulation. The
facilitator may take a more passiverole in allowing the
students to lead, but taking into cognizance the path-
way of the discussion. The facilitator may help students
where they lack information, but should be cautious in
moving their team to their view point.76 It is imperative
that PBL pedagogy will empirically inculcate the quality
of leadership and management among the students as
they would be allowed to lead a session.77 The session-
may be extended for 80-90 minutes.
Summary
After the discussion has been done the chairman should
summarize the data, valid points and cross check if the
learning needs have been addressed effectively. The
chairman may also consult among the group and once
satised with the academic aspects should announce for
the closure of the session.
Debrieng II
After the student chairman announces the closure of
the session the facilitator should take charge and sum-
marize the events in a constructive manner with mostly

Mohammed Tahir Ansari et al., Problem based learning (PBL)
Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research | Vol 49 | Issue 4 | Oct-Dec, 2015 263
positive reections of students to provide encourage-
ment, interest, and they should also evaluate the session
based on the learning needs accomplished. He should
associate negative feedbacks for a student’s very politely
so that it doesn’t discourage students in taking part in
PBL. The debrieng should be highly motivating, espe-
ciallyin communication and presentation skills. Students
should also be asked to give viewpoints in respect of
their own performance and that of their peers.76,79,80
Evaluation
Many dimensions of PBL evaluation have been
addressed in literature81 An effective assessment and
evaluation program can insure that students are deriv-
ing the maximum benets from PBL and the process is
being conducted effectively for the given environment.
Das et al have suggested the evaluation of students
based on the following parameters using a Likert scale.82
• Responsibility
• Information processing
• Communication
• Critical Analysis
• Self awareness.
Rosemaria has also conducted a research on the evalua-
tion criteria for evaluating students for PBL session. A
24 reliable identication fundamental component rating
scale was developed to assess student performance dur-
ing tutorial sessions in PBL. It proved to be effective
and a conducive method to evaluate students.83 Process
assessment which contains of self reection, peer’s
evaluation and task completion reports allow to iden-
tify student progress and deciencies and making them
independent learners.84
CONCLUSION
PBL should be implemented to achieve critical thinking,
scientic thinking, leadership qualities and managerial
skills among students. The technique has already been a
proven success in majority of the developed countries.
The technique may prove to infuse the missing vital quali-
ties to become a professional student. It should be tried
and included specially subject dealing with disease and
drugs to initiate vigorous thinking among students which
may install all related information for a particular disease.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Faculty Members of
Department of Pharmacy, UniKL–RCMP for their
contribution in writing this article.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
To the best of our knowledge, no conict of interest,
nancial or other, exists.
ABBREVIATION USED
PBL: Problem based learning
LBL: Lecture based learning
SUMMARY
• An innovative and a novel method for teaching and learning.
• It will enhance the cognitive, metacognitive, team spirit, soft skills of the students.
• Critical thinking and problem solving skills of the students are enhanced and students develop technique to
address critical real life issues effectively.
Mohammed Tahir Ansari: Presently working as an
Assistant professor/Senior lecturer in the Department
of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Faculty of Pharmacy
and Health Sciences, Universiti Kuala Lumpur-Royal
College of Medicine Perak, Ipoh, Malaysia. Ex-Faculty
Amity University Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow and NIPER,
Raebareli (UP). He has over 20 papers in journal of
national and international repute.
About Authors
Prof.Dr. Mohamad Syafiq Abdullah: Working as Dean,
Faculty of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Universiti
Kuala Lumpur-Royal College of Medicine Perak, Ipoh,
Malaysia. He is the one of the pioneer in introducing
the PBL pedagogy in University Malaya, Malaysia. He
has given many lecturers on the implementation of PBL.
REFERENCES
1. Barrows HS, Tamlyn RM. Problem-based learning: Rationale and denition.
In: Problem based learning: an approach to medical education. 1st Edition
New York: Springer Publishing Company; 1980. 1-18.
2. Barrows HS. Problem based learning applied to medical education. 2nd
Edition. Southern Illinois University School of Medicine; 1999.
3. Knowles MS. The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to
andragogy. 2nd ed. Chicago: Follet; 1980.
4. Cleverley D. Implementing inquiry based learning in nursing. Routledge:
London; 2003
5. Margetson D. What counts as problem based learning. Education health
1998; 11(2): 193–201.
6. Savin Baden M. Problem based learning in higher education: untold stories.
Buckingham, UK: Society for Research in Higher Education/Open University
Press; 2000.

Mohammed Tahir Ansari et al., Problem based learning (PBL)
264 Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research | Vol 49 | Issue 4 | Oct-Dec, 2015
7. Dolmans D, Schmidt H. What directs self-directed learning in a problem
based curriculum. In: Evensen D, Hmelo C, editors. Problem based learning:
a research perspective on learning interactions. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum; 2000. 251–62.
8. Woods DR. Problem based learning: helping your students gain the most
from PBL. Hamilton, CA: DR. Woods; 1995.
9. Engel CE. Not just a method but a way of learning. In: Boud D, Feletti GP.
Editors. The challenge of problem-based learning. London: Kogan Page;
1991. 22–33.
10. Beachey WD. A comparison of problem-based learning and traditional
curricula in baccalaureate respiratory therapy education. Respiratory Care.
2007 Nov; 52(11): 1497-506.
11. Thammasitboon K, Sukotjo C, Howell H, Karimbux N. Problem-based
learning at the Harvard school of dental medicine: self-assessment of
performance in postdoctoral training. J Dent Educ. 2007 Aug; 71(8): 1080-9.
12. Gita S, Mahnaz K. Comparison of problem-based learning and lecture-based
learning in midwifery. Nurse Education Today 2013; 33(8): 791-5.
13. Savery JR, Duffy TM. Problem based learning: an instructional model and
its constructivist framework. In Constructivist learning environments: case
studies in instructional design. Wilson BG, Editor. New Jersey: Educational
Technology Publications 1996; 35(5): 135-50.
14. Koh GCH, Khoo HE, Wong ML, Koh D. The effects of problem-based learning
during medical school on physician competency: a systematic review. CMAJ.
2008; 178(1): 34-41.
15. Donner RS, Bickley HB. Problem-based learning in American medical
education: an overview. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1993; 81(3): 294-8.
16. Elizabeth Armstrong G. A Hybrid Model of Problem-based Learning. In: Boud
D. and Feletti G. Editors. The Challenge of Problem based Learning. 2nd Ed.
London: Kogan Page; 1997. 137-50.
17. Mohamad Termizi Borhan. Problem based learning (PBL) in malaysian
higher education: a review of research on learners experience and issues of
implementations. Asean journal of engineering education 2012; 1(1): 48-53.
18. McKendree J. Experiences of problem-based learning in the UK. Clin Teach.
2010; 7(4): 262-5.
19. Kinkade S. A snapshot of the status of problem-based learning in U. S.
medical schools, 2003-04. Acad Med. 2005; 80(3): 300-1
20. Bligh J. Problem-based learning in medicine: an introduction. Postgrad Med
J. 1995; 71(836): 323–6.
21. Gerald CHK, Hoon EK, MeeLian W, David K. The effects of problem-based
learning during medical school on physician competency: a systematic
review. CMAJ. 2008; 178(1): 34–41.
22. Schmidt HG, Vermeulen L, Van der Molen HT. Long term effects of problem-
based learning: a comparison of competencies acquired by graduates of a
problem-based and a conventional medical school. Med Educ. 2006; 40(6):
562-7.
23. Xiaojie Ding et al. Assessing the effectiveness of problem-based learning of
preventive medicine education in china. Scientic Reports 4, Article number:
5126, 2004.
24. Cindy Hmelo E, GeraldGotterer S, John Bransford D. A theory-driven
approach to assessing the cognitive effects of PBL. Instructional Science
1997; 25(6): 387–408.
25. Diana Wood F. Clinical Review. ABC of learning and teaching in medicine,
Problem based learning. BMJ. 2003; 326(7384): 328-30.
26. Martin Bland J. Teaching statistics to medical students using problem-based
learning: the Australian experience. BMC Medical Education 2004; 4(1): 31.
27. Bassir SH, Sadr-Eshkevari P, Amirikhorheh S, Karimbux NY. Problem-based
learning in dental education: a systematic review of the literature. J Dent
Educ. 2014 Jan; 78(1): 98-109.
28. Matsuka Y, Nakajima R, Miki H, Kimura A, Kanyama M, Minakuchi H, et
al. A problem-based learning tutorial for dental students regarding elderly
residents in a nursing home in Japan. J Dent Educ. 2012; 76(12): 1580-8.
29. Choi E, Lindquist R, Song Y. Effects of problem-based learning vs. traditional
lecture on Korean nursing students’ critical thinking, problem-solving, and
self-directed learning. Nurse Edu. Today. 2014; 34(1): 52-6.
30. Tiwari A, Lai P, So M, Yuen K. A comparison of the effects of problem-based
learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Med
Educ. 2006 Jun; 40(6): 547-54.
31. In-Soo Shin, Jung-Hee Kim. The effect of problem-based learning in nursing
education: a meta-analysis. Advances in Health Sciences Education 2013:
18(5): 1103-20.
32. Weihua Zhang. Problem based learning in nursing education. Advances in
Nursing 2014; (2014): 1-5.
33. Yusof M, Tasir Z, Haron J, Syed Ahmad Helmi Syed Hassan. Promoting
problem-based learning in engineering courses at UniversitiTeknologi
Malaysia KhairiyahIn: Asia Pasic Forum on Engineering and Technology
Education September 2005; 1(5): 26-9.
34. Polanco R, Calderon P, Delgado F. Problem based learning in engineering
students: Its effects on academic and attitudinal outcomes. In: The power
of problem-based learning. Little P., Kandlbinder P. Editors; 2001. 111–25.
35. Sato A, Morone M, Azuma Y. Effects of implementation of problem-based
learning tutorials on fth-year pharmacy students and future issues.
Yakugaku Zasshi. 2011; 131(9): 1369-82.
36. Tahir Mehmood K, Mohamed Azmi H, Sahibzada Tasleem R. A study
assessing the impact of different teaching modalities for pharmacy students
in a Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) course. Saudi Pharmaceutical
Journal 2013; 21(4): 375–8.
37. Usoa Busto, Kathryn Knight, Eva Janecek, Pearl Isaac and Karen Parker.
A problem-based learning course for pharmacy students on alcohol
and psychoactive substance abuse disorders. American Journal of
Pharmaceutical Education 1994; 8(1): 55-60.
38. Nur IzzatiAbdullaha, Rohani Ahmad Tarmizia, Rosini Abub. The effects of
problem based learning on mathematics performance and affective attributes
in learning statistics at form four secondary level. International conference on
mathematics education research 2010 (ICMER 2010) procedia-social and
behavioral sciences 2010; 8(1): 370–6.
39. Newman M. Problem based learning: an introduction and overview of the key
features of the approach. Journal of veterinary 2005; 32(1): 12-20
40. Wolff A. Problem based learning. The role of the tutor: A resource guide for
faculty. Vancouver: Wolff Consulting; 2000.
41. Cindy E, Hmelo-Silver chmelosi, Howard Barrows S. Goals and strategies of
a problem-based learning facilitator. IJPBL. 2006; 1(1): 21-39.
42. Woods DR, Hall FL, Eyles CH, Hrymak AN, Duncan-Hewitt WC. Tutored
versus tutorless groups in problem-based learning. American journal of
pharmaceutical education 1999; 60(3): 231-8.
43. Groves M, Rego PO, Rourke P. Tutoring in problem-based learning medical
curricula: the inuence of tutor background and style on effectiveness. BMC
Med Educ. 2005; 5(1): 20.
44. Schmidt HG, Van der arend A, Moust JH, Kokx I, Boon L. Inuence of tutors’
subject-matter expertise on student effort and achievement in problem-based
learning. Acad Med. 1993; 68(10): 784-91.
45. Wun YT, Tse EY, Lam TP, Lam CL. PBL curriculum improves medical students’
participation in small-group tutorials. Med Teach. 2007 Sep; 29(6): 198-203.
46. Holen A. The PBL group: self-reections and feedback for improved learning
and growth. 2000; 22(5): 485-8.
47. Willis SC, Jones A, Bundy C, Burdett K, Whitehouse CR, O’Neill PA.
Small-group work and assessment in a PBL curriculum: a qualitative and
quantitative evaluation of student perceptions of the process of working in
small groups and its assessment. Medical Teacher 2002; 24(5): 495-501.
48. Tipping J, Freeman RF, Rachlis AR. Using faculty and student perceptions
of group dynamics to develop recommendations for PBL training. Acad Med.
1995; 70(11): 1050-2.
49. Abrandt Dahlgren M, Dahlgren LO. Portraits of PBL. students’ experiences
of the characteristics of problem-based learning in physiotherapy, computer
engineering and psychology. Instructional Science 2002; 30(1): 111–27.
50. Schraw G. Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional
Science 1998; 26(1-2): 113–25.
51. Knowles MS. Self directed learning: a guide for learners and teachers. New
York, Cambridge adult education; 1975.
52. Zimmerman BJ. Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An
overview. Educational Psychologist 1990; 25(1): 3–17.
53. Barrows HS. Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief
overview. New directions for teaching and learning 1996; 1996(68): 3–12.
54. Barrett T. Understanding problem-based learning. In: Handbook of enquiry
and problem-based learning. Barrett T., Labhrainn IM., Fallon H. Galway.
Editors. Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching, NUI Galway; 2005:
13-25.
55. Larisa Ivo´n Carrera, Toma´s Eduardo Tellez and Alberto Enrique D’Ottavio.
Implementing a problem-based learning curriculum in an Argentinean
medical school: Implications for developing countries. Academic medicine
2003; 78(8): 798-01.

Mohammed Tahir Ansari et al., Problem based learning (PBL)
Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research | Vol 49 | Issue 4 | Oct-Dec, 2015 265
56. Cesolari JAM, D’Ottavio AE, Zapata GO, Rossi AR, Villar IJ, Merli SA.
Factors with potential inuence on early attrition during the rst year of the
medical career. Compensatory proposals. Medicina y Sociedad (Argentina).
1991; 14: 31–35.
57. Diana Dolmans HJM, HettySnellen Balendong, InekeWolfhagen HAP, Cess
Van Der Vleuten PM. Seven principles of effective case design for a problem
based curriculum. Medical teacher 1997; 3(19): 185-9.
58. Guide to problem-based learning - University of York. Available online from
https://www.york.ac.uk/media/law/documents/pbl_guide.pdf.
59. Introduction to PBL at Hull York Medical School – Transcript. Available online
from http://www.hyms.ac.uk/documents/UG/transcript.pdf.
60. Davis FB. Fundamental factors of comprehension of reading. Psychometrika.
1944; 9(3): 185–97.
61. Peter Aferbach, David Pearson P, Scott Paris G. Clarifying differences
between reading skills and reading strategies. The reading teacher 2008;
61(5): 364-73.
62. DejanBokonjic, MladenMimica, NurkaPranjic, VanjaFilipovic,
SladanaCosovic, Hans-Martin Bosse, et al. Problem based learning. In.
Manual of teaching and learning in medicine. Steiner T. and Sonntag HG.,
D. Bokonjic Editors. Available online from http://www.bhmed-emanual.org/
chapter_7_problem_based_learning.
63. Taiseer zaid kailani. Reading aloud in EFL revisited. Reading in foreign
language1998; 12(1): 281-94.
64. Duursma E, Augustn M, Zuckerman B. Reading aloud to children: the
evidence. Arch Dis Child. 2008; 93(7): 554-557.
65. UdenBeumont. Appendix 7 A. PBL Case: Requirement analysis technology
and problem-based learning. In: Technology and problem based learning.
Ed. Uden L. Information science publishing. Hershey PA; 2008: 147-8.
66. Savery JR., Duffy TM. Problem based learning: An instructional model and
its constructivist framework. Educational Technology 1994; 34(8): 135-150
67. Pamela Pastirik J. Using problem-based learning in a large classroom. Nurse
Education in Practice. 2006; 6(5): 261–7.
68. Willie Yip. Students’ perceptions of the technological supports for problem-
based learning. Education and Information Technologies 2002; 7(4): 303–12.
69. 69. Hideyuki Kanematsu, Yoshimi Fukumura, Dana Barry M, So Young Sohn,
Ryosuke Taguchi, Nunez Rattia Rodrigo Arturo. Conversation analysis of
PBL in metaverse for students from the USA, Korea and Japan. International
Conference on Engineering Education ICEE-2010. July 18–22, 2010,
Gliwice, Poland . 1-5
70. Jill Riley, Ruth Matheson. Problem based learning in health and social care.
In: Promoting creative thinking and innovative practice through the use of
problem-based learning. Ed. Teena J. Clouston, Lyn Westcott, Steven
Whitcombe W., Jill Riley, Ruth Matheson. 2010. Wiley Blackwell. 125-38.
71. Larmer John, John Mergendoller R. Seven essentials for project-based
learning giving students meaningful work. Giving students meaningful work
2010; 68(1): 34-7.
72. Charles Harris l, GulGuner A, James Arbogast, Lisa Salati B, James Shumway
M. Integrated problem based learning for rst year medical students: does it
teach biochemical principles?. Biochemical education 1997; 25(3): 146-50.
73. Kinnunen Palvi, MalmiLauri. Problems in problem-based learning –
experiences, analysis and lessons learned on an introductory programming
course. Informatics in Education 2005; 4(2): 193–214.
74. Donovan G, Cluer J. 100 Lessons from self managed work teams. Perth,
Australia: SMWTGN; 1994.
75. Kindler HS. Understanding Conict management. In: Managing disagreement
constructively. Los Altos, Canada: Crisp publications; 1988. 2-22.
76. Michael Peterson. Skills to enhance problem-based learning. Med Educ
Online; 1997. 2,3. Available from: URL http://www.utmb.edu/meo/
77. Edwin Bridges, Phillip Hallinger. Using problem based learning to prepare
educational leaders. Pedagogy journal of education 1997; 72(2): 131-46.
78. Peterson M. A team-based approach to problem based learning: An
evaluation of structured team problem solving. Journal on Excellence in
College Teaching 1996; 7(3): 129-53.
79. Peterson M. Effectiveness of a team-based approach among students in
a teacher preparation course. University of Delaware, Center for teaching
effectiveness 1997; 40(6): 1369-97.
80. Sheive L, Metivier LG. A participant’s guide to STePS. EDITORS. 4th ed.
Baldwinsville, NY: STePS Associates; 1994.
81. Nevo D. The conceptualization of educational evaluation: an analytical
review of the literature. In: New Directions in Educational Evaluation. House
ER Editors 1986, Palmer Press, Lewes. 15- 29.
82. Das M, Mpofu D, Dunn E, Lanphear JH. Self and tutor evaluations in problem
based learning tutorials: is there a relationship?. Medical education 1998;
32(4): 411-8.
83. Rosamaria Valle, lleana Petra, Adrian Martinez Gonzalez, Jose Antonio
Rojas-Ramirez, Sara Morales-Lopez, Beatriz Pina-Garza. Assessment of
student performance in problem-based learning tutorial sessions. Medical
education 1999; 33(11): 818-22.
84. Tai, Gillian Xiao-Lian and Yuen, May Chan. Authentic assessment strategies
in problem based learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore; 2007. 983-93.