Cultivating problem‐solving skills through problem‐based approaches to professional development

Abstract

Abstract An extensive literature review was conducted of four problem‐based approaches to professional development: (1) case study, (2) goal‐based scenario, (3) problem‐based learning, and (4) action learning. The review comparatively analyzed the training designs of these four approaches and found key differences in the nature of their case problems and training strategies. Specifically, the analysis found that case problems are ill structured in action learning and problem‐based learning, are moderately structured in a goal‐based scenario, and are fairly well structured in the case study approach. In addition, it was found that prototypical problems are used to a much greater extent in the problem‐based learning and goal‐based scenario approaches than they are in the other two approaches. Furthermore, the analysis found that the case study approach uses the most expert‐oriented training strategy, the goal‐based scenario approach uses a more learner‐oriented strategy than the case study approach, and the problem‐based learning and action learning approaches use strongly learner‐oriented strategies. These design differences suggest that the case study and goal‐based scenario approaches are more likely to result in single‐loop learning and to foster the ability to solve well‐structured problems, whereas the problem‐based learning and action learning approaches are more likely to lead to double‐loop learning and to promote the ability to solve ill‐structured problems. Implications of these findings for the design and research of problem‐based approaches to professional development are discussed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 72 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.