Experiencias de Profesores
El Modelo Educativo del ITESM tiene como característica esencial de su proceso el enfoque hacia el aprendizaje más que hacia la enseñanza. Bajo este modelo, se trata de apoyar al alumno para que éste desarrolle su capacidad de aprendizaje autodirigido, proceso en el cual el profesor actúa como facilitador.
A lo largo del proceso de implantación del método de casos, la cual ha sido documentada como parte de los talleres de capacitación de facilitadores, se realizan de manera formal y programada intercambios de experiencias, los cuales se promueve también entre los profesores que dizaje motivadoralos profesores han ido aprendiendo de su experiencia.
Reflections on the use of problem-based learning
Using problem-based learning to teach constitutional and administrative law
Problem-based learning in legal education
Video profiles problem-based learning leader
1:05 p.m., Feb. 28, 2005--George Watson, associate dean of arts and sciences and Unidel Professor of Physics and Astronomy, discusses the significance of problem-based learning in a new installment of the University's Windows on The Green video profiles series, posted at [ www.udel.edu/PR/windows/ ].
The video features Watson talking about the growth of problem-based learning at the University--supplementing traditional learning methods with groups of students who work cooperatively to find solutions to real-world problems.
Watson has been a leader in promoting active-learning strategies and the use of technology in undergraduate education.
He joins seven other named professors thus far profiled in The Windows on The Green series, which presents video snapshots of this elite group of faculty members. Producer is Bob DiIorio of the Information Technologies-University Media Services unit working in cooperation with the Office of Public Relations.
The Windows on The Green series marks the endowment of UD's 100th named professorship last year. An endowed chair is one of the highest honors a faculty member can receive and one of the most important gifts a donor can make to the University.
Problem-Based Learning and Mayville State University
In 2002 Mayville State was finishing a three-year faculty development program for critical thinking across the curriculum. Eligible for a continuing faculty development grant, this former normal school of 750 students, located on the eastern edge of North Dakota, requested and was awarded a three-year grant for Problem Based Learning. In this paper, the authors, four faculty members who serve as the governance committee for faculty development, outline some of the strategies used to encourage participation by a large number of faculty across the campus.
First, use school traditions. Mayville State has a strong tradition of faculty development. Teaching remains the primary criterion (70%) for promotion and tenure, and faculty are generally interested in effective teaching strategies. Previous faculty development projects in cooperative learning (1992-95) and critical thinking (1999-2002) attracted 80% faculty participation. When polled, 75% of faculty voted for PBL as the direction they would like to see faculty development take.
Second, locate funding. Regrettably, Mayville State is a school with a very minimal faculty development budget, so the Governance Committee must also serve as a grant writing committee. The Bush Foundation of St. Paul has funded all three of the major faculty development programs. The present PBL grant is funded in the amount of $150,000 for three years.
Third, train a core group. In June, 2002 Mayville State sent nine faculty leaders representing all academic divisions, to the University of Delaware's PBL workshop in Baltimore. These faculty then constituted a core group, trained in PBL fundamentals, who could be advocates for PBL and serve as mentors and guides for colleagues.
Fourth, build a base. Mayville State was awarded the PBL grant in November of 2002, too late in the academic year to sponsor an introductory PBL workshop for all faculty. Since the core group-and others-were starting to develop rudimentary problems in classes they taught, these faculty used CTAAC News, our faculty development newsletter, to share these problems with the entire faculty. Some problems were from general education courses in composition, economics, and chemistry; others were from advanced courses in library science, physical education, business administration, sociology, and early childhood. Some problems were as short as a week in duration; others were semester-length projects. Some were used as a means of mastering content; others were used primarily as assessment tools.
Fifth, bring a nationally known presenter to campus. The success of earlier faculty development grants was largely the result of the quality of presenters we were able to attract. Neil Davidson, Karl Smith, Barbara Millis, Phil Cottell and Susan Prescott came to Mayville to do workshops in Cooperative Learning. Gerry Nosich and Richard Paul came for Critical Thinking, Toby Fulweiler for Journals, and Tony Gregorc for Learning Styles. In August of 2003 we were able to bring Claire Major from the University of Alabama to Mayville. 34 of our 42 faculty attended the two-day workshop and came away with a great deal of enthusiasm for the possibilities of PBL.
Sixth, provide stipend for faculty who develop and implement PBL activities in classes. One session of Dr. Major's workshop provided time for faculty to germinate ideas for problems in their classes. Following the workshop, all faculty were provided stipends for each problem implemented in their classes. To receive the $100 stipend, faculty provided a description of the assignment and filled out an assessment sheet telling what happened during implementation and how well the problem worked. To date, thirteen faculty have submitted twenty problems actually taught in class.
Finally, develop problems for all majors and minors. One goal of the grant was that every graduate of Mayville State would have at least one major problem-based learning experience in his/her major and minor. In February 2004 Carol Dean from Samford University came to campus to work with the Teacher Education faculty to develop problems in Early Childhood Education, in Elementary Education and in Psychology. Those problems were team drafted and will be implemented in the appropriate classes in the 2004-2005 academic year. In April, 2004 Eric Fournier, also from Samford University, came to campus to work with English and Social Sciences faculty. In the 2004-2005 academic year faculty responsible for Young Adult Literature, for Drug Awareness and for Argumentation and Debate will begin to implement problems. Similar workshops are scheduled for the Business Division, for the Physical Education division, and for the Science/Math division in the coming year. Funding is budgeted not only for writing and implementing problems, but also for developing an assessment plan for measuring the project.
One of the disadvantages of being a small campus is that all campus activities affect every faculty member. For example, a visit from a national accrediting body such as NCATE or NCA involves nearly everyone and cuts into the energy of the campus. But as a result of the above strategies, most Mayville State faculty are becoming aware of PBL; many are taking advantage of grant activities; and some are trying problems in their classes.
Problem-Based Learning and Southern Illinois University
The application of PBL at Southern Illinois University is seen in the Problem-Based Learning Curriculum of the medical school and in the Physician Assistant Program.
Problem-Based Learning in the University of New Mexico School of Medicine
In the 1970s, a group of innovation-minded faculty embarked on a journey to create a problem-based learning curriculum at UNM SOM, modeled after McMasters in Canada, the first medical school in North America to use problem-based learning. From 1979-1993, the UNM SOM curriculum consisted of parallel tracks for years 1 and 2--one track for the Primary Care Curriculum (PCC) and and the other a traditional model of education. The PCC introduced student-centered, small-group, problem-based learning; early clinical skills; community-based learning; and self-directed learning.
In 1988, a major strategic planning effort was initiated in preparation for the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) accreditation visit. The effort reviewed the strengths and weaknesses of previous educational innovations and resulted in, among others, the recommendation to increase problem-based learning throughout the curriculum.
A Brief History of Problem-Based Learning at the University of Delaware
In answering the call of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990) that "science should be taught as science is practiced at it's best," instructors and institutions across the country have systematically begun to lower the barriers to students' active engagement in learning science by introducing new strategies into their classrooms. For a nucleus of science faculty at the University of Delaware, problem-based learning (PBL) allowed us to join in this reform by directing our skills as scientists to finding solutions for our dissatisfaction with "business as usual" in our classrooms.
Problem-based learning (PBL) arrived at the University of Delaware in 1992 when the University's Center for Teaching Effectiveness sponsored a workshop featuring a medical school model of PBL (Kaufman et al, 1989) for faculty about to teach in a new Medical Scholars Program. Sophomore and junior students worked through a graduate-level biology problem in fishbowl fashion, demonstrating the process and their reactions to it for workshop participants.
A History of Problem-Based Learning at the University of Cincinnati
As is the case with most curricular change, there are significant challenges that research institutions must address when adopting PBL on a sizeable scale. Problem-Based Learning, when compared to lecture-based teaching, requires considerably more time, training and commitment on the part of interested faculty and administrators who are asked to undergo a significant transformation in how they view the teaching and learning process. Additionally, these faculty and administrators must address issues related to promotion and tenure, sustainability and funding, and the need to bridge long-standing discipline, department, and college boundaries (Cavanaugh, 2001; Ching & Gallow, 2000; Conway & Little, 2000; The Boyer Commission, 1998;).
The University of Cincinnati is a large, diverse, multi-site university with relatively autonomous liberal arts, technical, and professional programs and multiple levels of degree programs (associate's, bachelor's, master's, doctoral, and terminal professional degrees). With 5 major campuses and 33,000 students, any concerted academic change process requires adoption across numerous interest groups and adaptations to meet diverse student and curriculum needs.
In spite of these challenges, UC has the potential to support widespread application of problem-based learning in that we provide the historical, philosophical and structural frameworks for this effort. Cooperative (co-op) education was founded at UC 98 years ago, and we have the largest co-op program of any public post-secondary school in the United States ( http://www.uc.edu/propractice/ ). This ongoing commitment to active, experiential learning is evident, not only in our extensive co-op, internship and work-based programs, but in our institutional philosophy as well.
Our Provost's institutional goals have prioritized the need to focus on student engagement in learning. One of the strategies identified to help us reach this goal has been the infusion of inquiry-based pedagogies, including PBL, throughout the curriculum. As part of this commitment to curricular change, the Provost created the Center for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning (CET&L) to coordinate a variety of pedagogical initiatives including PBL, learning communities, service learning, distance learning, interdisciplinary studies, the first year experience, and global studies ( http://www.uc.edu/cetl ).
It is within this institutional context that the PBL initiative at UC was established through administrative action. The Provost's office issued a call to all full-time faculty requesting applications for membership on a UC Problem-Based Learning Steering Committee. It was stated the goal of this group was to examine various aspects of PBL and to determine its potential for adoption on our campus. Applicants were required to submit a narrative discussing their interest in PBL and why they were seeking membership on the university-wide team.
The membership of the new multidisciplinary, multi-college PBL Steering Committee represented eight disciplines (art history, biology, business ethics, counseling, education, engineering, English, medicine), six colleges and four campuses. Additionally, the team was comprised of seven faculty members and four administrators (Vice Provost, Dean, two Associate Deans).
The group began meeting immediately and developed quickly into an effective team committed to introducing PBL to University of Cincinnati administrators, faculty and students. Our first year was dedicated to research and planning. During this first year, we attended an international PBL conference, visited a medical school where "pure" PBL was practiced, brought a nationally recognized PBL expert to campus for a two-day workshop and attended a five-day PBL Institute.