Number of Survey Respondents: 19

 

Rated Items:

1. Please rate the following items in terms of how helpful they were for you personally in developing your case problem, your course logistics, and in understanding PBL.

 

c. Jigsaw Institute meeting: "All About Groups" theme

d. Peer feedback on your case problem drafts

e. Facilitator feedback on your case problem draft

b. The amount I feel I have learned about PBL methods and pedagogy is:

c.  The amount I feel I have learned about teaching methods and pedagogy in general is:

5. How would you rate the Institute overall as a learning experience?

Written Comments:

1 a. The Institute folder: articles, readings, "What is PBL?" summary, etc.

Some of the articles and readings were very helpful. Many others (I have to admit) I did not read. Perhaps they would have been helpful had I read them. Having a broad array, however, allowed me to pick and choose those that most relevant. I suspect those that worked best for me were a different subset than for others.

A paragraph summary of each would have been helpful.

Only read the one on my discipline.

Some of the information explaining the exact nature of a case project could have been a little clearer.

I found some of the material repetitive. It might be possible also to filter out some [of] the materials that were discipline-specific and not relevant.

I would have liked more discipline-specific readings.

Initial brief descriptions helpful. Quantity of readings overwhelming at beginning, of course. I haven’t reviewed yet, though I may when I actually design course.

I knew nothing beforehand, yet afterward I felt prepared to begin.

High level of repetition; low level of specificity in dealing with operationalization of a PBL regime.

 

1b. Campus visit by Deborah Allen

I only saw the talk on Friday (and it didn’t get too beyond PBL basics before I left). With more time to talk, I’m sure I would have gotten more from the visit.

Good ideas—would have liked to spend more time discussing development of problems. How about first asking faculty to develop many potential problems—brainstorm—before fixing on one? Could then evaluate this list in light of criteria for "good" problems.

I liked her comments about practical application. It would have been helpful for her to spend some time assessing our projects. The group work was informative.

Deborah’s presentation should be a mainstay of this institute. There is a certain benefit to seeing the successful implementation of PBL and having the evangelical speech to motivate.

I found the colloquy very useful. I was disappointed that the institute meeting repeated so much of the colloquy presentation.

Slides were wonderful, but many aspects of that project were so specific to that field that it was difficult to apply this to my project.

Very informative with regards to how it is actually being applied.

I would have appreciated more individual project feedback rather than simply a regurgitation of the course reading materials.

Interesting but rushed, her presentation wasn’t timed for period available and little hands-on questions.

Listening to her perspective provided a greater understanding of what PBL is. The practice "problem" was also helpful.

It would have been more helpful if she went more into depth.

Low-level in academic quality.

I found this visit one of the most helpful parts of the program because it gave me a real feeling for actual PBL cases, their design and their use. I suspect I was particularly influenced by her visit because we’re in the same filed so her examples were directly relevant.

 

1c. Jigsaw Institute meeting: "All About Groups" theme

In much of the group work I had the feeling that a lot of time was taken relative to what was accomplished.

It helped me to have this experience trying out some of the technique and experiencing many of the problems students will face (e.g., groups with fixed searing). However, we had problems in the room even with lots of extra space—so I’m less sanguine about doing this in a larger, more crowded room.

Actually experiencing the model enhances understanding how it functions.

Got lots of helpful ideas and felt I interacted with both groups in a constructive way.

Great hands-on approach.

It’s always helpful to work with your peers in different combinations so that you can compare different perspectives.

I still am not sure how this would work in a large class, but the experience gave one a clearer sense of liabilities and possibilities.

Was unable to attend.

It gave a real sense of how groups might operate in a classroom lecture hall setting. The ideas generated were very useful.

Successful for this discussion topic; helpful to see "in action". Detailed list of roles not necessary.

Group logistics need to be discussed.

 

1d. Peer feedback on your case problem drafts.

Having someone really read our paper well and give feedback was very useful.

Good ideas. Specify desired format of feedback—written? oral?

This exercise taught me the importance of clear writing and clear instructions.

This was probably the most useful. In principle, we were exercising PBL skills. It does [raise] the question, though… Our students may not be as motivated toward cooperation as we. Some discussion of student motivation and motivational techniques would be useful as a topic to be covered.

I very much appreciated the engagement with my work/ideas from both workshop leaders.

Everyone had excellent ideas and produced very constructive criticism. I think this portion of the class is critical to maintain perspective.

Haven’t finished drafts yet.

Group put time and effort into feedback and had good informal discussion.

They saw things I had overlooked; they suggested alternative ways to do things.

My groups were all very insightful and creative with their feedback.

Non-attendance,

I didn’t find the first feedback section particularly helpful re my own case development since the case used was so vague and not closely related to case we ended up using. That part was frustrating. I would have appreciated being told in advance the way the case was to be presented and given and opportunity for feedback. Last week: the feedback from our partners was extremely helpful. Having people outside my field try to work through the case helped me to see its strengths and weaknesses. One reviewer had several excellent, specific suggestions for modification.

Concrete, specific feedback about our actual case was the most useful part of the course after we got the initial idea of what PBL consists of.

 

1e. Facilitator feedback on your case problem drafts.

Same as above. The comments were great.

Cynthia’s and De’s comments were quite helpful, especially when they made specific suggestions. I would have liked to have had to turn in our second drafts (after initial comments before the institute) and to have gotten some feedback on them at the beginning of the institute. As it was, we outlined a problem (or several), got some initial feedback and then there was a big hiatus until we came back to our own problem.

De and Cynthia were not only timely with their responses, but very thorough.

Initially, on my first draft, I had only a vague idea of what a PBL problem was.

In both cases individualized feedback is always helpful. This was very helpful on identifying those areas that were in need of ellaboration [sic] and that might have confused students otherwise.

Very useful in identifying weaknesses, highlighting strengths.

Having the perspective of the "professional" is always valuable. Integration with peer feedback would also be beneficial.

I learned to distinguish between content goals and skill goals. Once again I was challenged to re-think my commitment to lecturing.

Specific, detailed comment very useful, challenging.

Useful in reminding us how much needed to get spelled out.

 

2a. After participating in the Institute, I feel ________ about my ability to implement PBL in my chosen course.

I’m a TA, so "future course". I’m now a PBL proponent, but determining how much content learning should come only from PBL (and determining if students can handle teaching themselves) still is uncertain.

Of course implementing these ideas will be an experiment, and one for which I cannot predict the outcome. But I am convinced it is important to move in this direction.

I am cautiously optimistic because so much depends on the attitude and willingness of the students.

Confidence will come with experience!

As a TA I feel confident helping to impliment [sic] it.

However, it works better (easier) in small upper-div courses.

I am leaning more and more to using PBL for the first time in a smaller course (still for non-majors’ breadth) that would follow the class originally proposed and would fulfill the 3^rd quarter of the breadth requirement. This would be a small course on issues in modern biology taught entirely using PBL.

I’m looking forward to it. I think the students will enjoy the problem and I’m interested to find out if the learning gains will be worth the time expended. They very well may be.

 

2b. The amount I feel I have learned about PBL methods and pedagogy is…

I knew very little when I began!

The concepts seem really straightforward.

I think I’ve learned a lot and will incorporate it—even if not truly PBL—into my sections.

Considering I had very little to begin with.

I think some aspects remain slightly unclear, but I think we have the flexibility necessary to compensate for this.

Many questions remain about how most effectively to translate methods developed for small groups into a larger enrollment classroom, but I came away with a range of strategies.

While we have been working in an ad hoc PBL environment for some time, I feel we may be able to fine tune the classroom interactions a great deal.

In general, I feel I have learned a lot about the basic ideas and principles behind PBL. I would like to learn more about how others in my discipline have used these ideas.

More discussion initially, of pedagogy (and even debate?) would be helpful for getting buy in. Can’t assume all faculty come to Institute having decided PBL is the answer to our teaching ‘problems’—assume a somewhat skeptical faculty and allow debate/education on merits of PBL—could be first "problem".

I wasn’t aware of it. Now I am.

 

2c. The amount I feel I learned about teaching methods and pedagogy in general is…

I think it built very well upon my previous training.

I would shift balance to spend somewhat more time on development of overall class structure to accommodate PBL and development of cases; less time discussing groups.

As I mentioned above, this class has challenged me to re-think my commitment to lecturing.

This could be 5 if I hadn’t already benefited from De’s thoughtfulness and assistance for about a decade now.

I have benefited a great deal from hearing the perspective and comments from other instructors who have employed a wide variety of methods.

It was a great experience for me as a TA and future prof to be exposed to methods of teaching. Not just those of PBL, but from hearing from other profs how they currently lecture.

Reminded me there are many models for teaching, and that the implementation of several during course may be most effective.

I more carefully construct my lesson plans now—getting away from purely didactic techniques as much as possible.

 

2d. I would characterize my attitude toward my students’ probable ability to perform well on the PBL assignment I designed as…

Somewhat doubtful if done in large class; somewhat confident if done as small course entirely taught by PBL.

You never know!

They will get better as the PBL project continues.

I’d need to see it in action and amend as needed based on real experiences.

I think/hope they will rise to the occasion.

There’s no way to tell yet.

The proof of the pudding will be in the eating.

Our students have been in training for the past 2 quarters for just such an assignment. This will be the test of not only our students but of our preparation in getting our students to this point.

The assignments require them to take more responsibility for located [sic] and assessing sources—and that concerns me a little. But I hope the excitement of the project will motive [sic] them.

But do they really need ~1/2 a quarter of ‘training" (how to research, work in groups, do PBL, etc.) to be successful?

 

2e. The amount of time and amount of work required for participation was…

I expected to spend full-on huge amounts of time. In reality, after reading about PBL, the assignments were very reasonable, even designing the problem wasn’t too bad [if] you just [had] an idea of what PBL is.

It is hard to fit this in with other normal responsibilities—but I do not think less work could have been required.

I think I would have put in more time—fully drafting the specifics of the course and the PBL assignment—if I didn’t know that I’ll be unable to offer the course until fall 2001.

I could not take my course release in the winter, but will in the spring. I plan to develop my problems further then.

Seemed a lot on profs in particular. TA’s can’t be expected to do too much b/c of other commitments etc.

Sections of the course felt repetitive.

I could not have handled any more on top of my regular teaching load! Thanks for keeping the load realistic.

 

3a. What new things did you learn, if any, about student collaborative learning…?

I gained some ideas concerning logistics from the groups. Much less than the time expended was worth however. I’m not sure what format would have been more effective. Example, in the group where we discussed initial problem prompts we could gotten this experience of ‘"being a student confused about what we supposed to do" in 5 minutes. It didn’t require 2 hours.

I learned firsthand about some of the frustrations of group work—uncooperative group members, off target group work, dominating members, etc. I also experienced very effective and collaborative group work. I don’t know how to reconcile these—i.e., turn groups like the first one into those like the second one. My sense was that it’s extremely personality dependent. I really enjoyed collaborating with my TA.

The cooperative learning procedures.

Methodology: how collaborative learning occurs.

Creative ways of dealing w/big groups. Other dept’s experiences. To distinguish—carefully delineate—the goals—skill & content that I want students to gain.

They need to be: energized about the problem; accountable for results (grade). They have a short attention span. Learned how it must feel for the students (or was reminded).

Learned that organization is key to getting them to run. Learned that I need to be aware of problem students so others aren’t always burdened by them.

How to implement w/large class. How to structure problems. When to form groups. How to organize groups. How to better evaluate performance.

Group dynamics and how to set up the groups to facilitate appropriate interaction. Importance of keeping students accountable for their work.

Just about the inherent struggles of group work.

It’s necessary to assign group roles up front & essentially at random.

I had never used jigsaw groups before. I thought that this form of collaborative learning was quite effective as well as fun. I implemented this group format several times in section and found that the students enjoyed it. I also thought the meta-narrative of the institute was helpful, though obviously a little misleading. We learned firsthand about group dynamics, but we aren’t typical undergraduates. I am still undecided about logistics. Perhaps the next institute can place more emphasis on logistics.

I did reflect a lot on how students might respond to groups, but the high level of participant involvement, the intrepidness of workshop participants distinguished this kind of group from what I’d expect of students.

Motivation of students will be a problem. Several comments were helpful in addressing this issue. Also the logistical problem was a worry, but I think the variety of solutions for group organization will be extremely useful.

I feel that I learned a lot about the potential benefits of collaborative learning.

Lots about logistics, specific techniques—both from the PBL instructor team & from other faculty, examples (more examples of various developed cases, early on—before picking a problem—would be informative & motivational).

A lot of people want to control group diversity—in labs I always just let students choose groups. I’m now wondering about the benefits of both strategies.

Ideas for coordinating groups based on time availability out of class. Flags.

 

3b. What new things did you learn, if any, about assessing student learning and process?

I learned to be realistic and remember that students will want control over their own grade. Therefore you have to made sure that indiv work is a part of the course design.

Forced me to think much more critically about what I want to teach & why. This was very helpful & a rare opportunity!

I am still reluctant to assign group grades, but I did learn ways that would be possible to do so.

The problem of ensuring that all students were learning was not well thought out. But I think the ideas about student progress reports, etc. will solve these problems.

I came away aware of how much more didactic I should be about learning goals and the intentions that lie behind any assignment. I also learned a lot about how to provide small group with instructions on how to proceed.

I am not sure whether or not students learn better in groups, but I think the processing of information is made easier in groups.

It’s difficult to assign credit to individual students when they work in groups. I learned a good method is to have both a group and individual component to an assignment.

PBL offered a different perspective on what could be considered important in the learning process—namely, collaboration.

How to assess group learning & individual learning as part of the PBL process.

To use peer leaders.

I got some good ideas about new ways to try it, but would want to compliment [sic] to see if they’re useful.

Evaluate as group & as individual.

Creative ways of distinguishing group vs. individual work.

How to judge when students are learning.

To emphasize process as much as outcome and some good suggestions for how to do so.

How PBL attempts to do such things.

That I need to give it more thought—especially re: PBL.

Many useful ideas about how to promote discussion in group which will be especially applicable in smaller seminars that I will teach.

 

3c. What new things did you learn, if any, about group dynamics from working collaboratively in your participant groups?

Not much. Assignment of roles was a new idea for me and a very useful one.

None.

How to effectively use roles to facilitate more interest and discussion.

How groups form, interactions.

I think we spent too much time of group roles.

Room matters. Size of group needs consideration. Fixed groups have +s and –s.

Good to assign roles. Leadership is very important. Teamwork skills can be learned by just about everybody, even faculty.

Regardless of role assignment, a group will always have the outspoken and the shy individuals that are going to make it challenging to perform the roles consistently. However, this is not always a bad thing.

Questions posed in assignments must be very carefully worded and constructed so as to avoid too much [time] spent discussing the assignment itself.

To add to part a, groups can be very effective but personality differences can be a problem. One concern about groups is that undergraduates can be inordinately influenced by an outspoken classmate. I am concerned that if one student has a bad attitude it will influence the performance of the group.

I still am not sure what to do with "problem students", though I think the "rules of conduct" Amy developed offer excellent guidelines.

Small groups are best (but small groups mean more groups). In order to ensure that all students are collaborating on an equal footing the role system seems to be best and it will promote the assignment of group roles.

I learned that collaborative work with motivated group members can be extremely rewarding. I enjoyed the exchange of ideas and methods,

Most enjoyable! Not sure that this exercise is very comparable to students’ experience since we may be much more comfortable. (As an aside, simply assuming role of student was also instructive—I gained many insights about what may/may not motivate students, success of various forms of communication, e-mails, etc.

There are a lot of nice people at UCI, not just in my own academic unit

 

4. (…) How much do you feel that you have made new connections with fellow faculty and learned about other areas of campus and other disciplines?

A highlight of the Institute!

I have some connections, but whether or not they will continue to be resources is unclear.

This was one of the nicest and most rewarding parts of the process.

However, I think in some cases even more diversity would be useful when organizing peer groups.

This was a terrific aspect of the course. I really enjoyed learning how things are done elsewhere. I was heartened to see such high levels in UG education, and not surprisingly a group of people so interested in teaching were nice, decent, smart, compassionate people.

I only got to hear a lot about the work one other faculty/TA did, but the posters at the end of the Institute were helpful in this regard.

Great goal. I find disciplinary boundaries to be a disservice to us all, and this experience offered a unique opportunity to meet with other members of the university "community".

I meet many new people & had positive interactions w/them.

Everyone was great. The diversity of topic matters was usually fantastic.

I thought this was an extremely valuable part of the institute.

It’s been a pleasure.

 

5. How would you rate the Institute overall as a learning experience?

If the PBL enriches the course, I’d switch that [rating] to a 4 or 5. I’m still waiting to see if/how it will work. In any case, I’ve learned skills that will generalize to many courses and it was a joy to get time/resources to think seriously about teaching—usually non-existent at this university!

Thanks! I’m very glad I had the opportunity to participate.

Learned what types of issues/topics in my field would work better as PBL and which type would be more difficult to adapt.

If nothing else the Institute inspired creative thinking about teaching methods and learning.

I think this is definitely a worthwhile endeavor.

Since I am a TA much of this was new to me.

I have never been paid to spend time with people who are experts in pedagogy & a range of faculty and TA’s who are experts in various subject matters. I am delighted that I was invited to participate in the group, and I found it a very useful experience.

I learned a lot and have been challenged to re-think old teaching methods.

Will become even more valuable as I get closer to actual implementation. For me, this is a ways off, which limits my desire to invest a tremendous amt. of time in the institute right now—a reality of busy lives/competing priorities, more than a reflection on the institute.

Without the Institute prodding me to do this, it may have been easy to just keep doing things that are more like my "usual" activities in class (plus it gave me another type of activity to do). The Institute made me focus & and bear down to create something I wanted to create, but may not have done (or at least put off for a while).

 

6. How would you recommend this Institute to fellow colleagues?

Future participants will definitely have a new weapon in their arsenal by the time the Institute finishes.

I think almost any faculty member would benefit from this process.

Same reasoning as question 5.

Just getting De and Cynthia’s feedback & support was a great benefit.

I would be very positive with a select few colleagues—but wouldn’t recommend it to most. That’s a comment on my colleagues rather than the institute.

 

7. Please offer any suggestions you have for future improvement of the Institute in 2001.

Have people prepare their cases after an initial introduction to PBL. Have people present their cases (the actual cases, not just a sentence or two) to faculty to critique. Perhaps taking 2 class sessions with each person (pair of faculty & TA that is) taking a half hour. During that half hour, they explain PBL assignment to group. Groups asks questions and gives feedback.

See [comments for] 1d. Add in: turn in 2^nd draft at beginning of Institute & get facilitation feedback.

More one-on-one meetings between instructors and participants.

More seminars!

I think that we could have sufficiently covered the material in less time—the concepts were very accessible.

Follow-up assistance with implementation and feedback would be very useful. Will there be an organized process that faculty can quickly & easily access for this assistance?

Focus more on the individual PBL projects! The most beneficial session to me was when we worked in groups with our partners. Most of the other sessions, while helpful, seemed to include a lot of material that we could have just read. I would recommend spending one long session doing group assignment, assessment strategies, and all the other background/logistical stuff, and then spend the rest of the time working in pairs (different each week) on developing the individual PBL project.

I think it would [be] beneficial to have a "field trip" to a class where this was being implemented. As well I think it would also have been helpful to have had some time spent in class discussing why PBL vs. other methods? Although mentioned in readings—having more evidence presented on its effectiveness compared to other methods.

I wouldn’t necessarily have people develop case projects before the Institute. I would focus primarily on having participants develop their project after & during absorbing the material in our sessions.

I would like to see more focus on group basics: what are more ways to divide students into groups, if a group is dysfunctional what are some of the ways to help, etc.

I think it would be good to get to analysis of problems earlier. The team review of assignment seminar was great. It might have come earlier & it could have been followed by another seminar in which we were teamed with another dyad to get a second set of responses.

Clip boards for the evaluations!

I would have liked to have concrete work/criticism/group discussion of our projects sooner in the quarter. In general, this was a positive and inspiring learning experience.

Another day (1 more), earlier of partner & peer review. A quick discussion of how much can you stray from PBL while still being true to the ideals, is that important?, are we getting/correcting problems that actually do more than typical problems or assignments.

The PBL Institute raises may questions about overall structure of my course, which will take time to rethink. I don’t think this component can be built into institute, but until I do this, can’t go further w/my case study. Perhaps 1-2 wks of intense "retrial" learning might be more successful than longer, less "intense" experience? A personal note: the multiple handouts, e-mails, reminders, etc. was somewhat distracting/too much—can these be limited & focused? Overall, a good experience. I much appreciate your hard work & valuable insights, De & Cynthia. Congratulations & thank you!

Begin with the practical side of things & present the many helpful suggestions accumulated throughout the course of this institute.