Understanding Problem-Based Learning

The research projects have been partly funded by the Academy of

Finland, Life as Learning Research Programme (LEARN) and by
the Finnish Work Environment Fund. The book is related to
the PBL-IT-project, which is partly funded by European Union
and the State Provincial Office of Southern Finland.
UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

Edited by Esa Poikela and Anna Raija Nummenmaa

© Tampere University Press, and the authors

Sales
Bookshop TAJU
P.O. Box 617, FIN-33014 University of Tampere, Finland
tel. +358 3 3551 6055
fax +358 3 3551 7685
email [email protected]
www.uta.fi/taju
http://granum.uta.fi

Cover design
Mikko Kurkela & Iris Puusti

Layout
Sirpa Randell

ISBN 951-44-6829-5

Yliopistopaino – Juvenes Print Oy

Tampere 2006

ISBN 978-951-44-7245-9 (pdf)

 CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION
Problem-based learning as a strategy for developing
knowledge and competence in the context of education and work 9

PART I

THEORETISING THE EPISTEMOLOGICAL PREMISES OF PBL 11

Esa Poikela
KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING AND PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING
– some epistemological and ontological remarks 15

Terry Barrett
A PROBLEM AS A PROVOKER OF A SPACE BETWIXT AND
BETWEEN OLD AND NEW WAYS OF KNOWING 33

Jyri Lindén & Merja Alanko-Turunen

DECONSTRUCTING CONCEPTIONS OF PROBLEM-BASED
LEARNING 51
 PART II

CONSTRUCTING PBL CURRICULA AS A LEARNING ENVIRONMENT 65

Esa Poikela & Sari Poikela

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULA
– theory, development and design 71

Timo Portimojärvi
SYNCHRONOUS AND ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION
IN ONLINE PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 91

Marja-Leena Lähteenmäki
CONSTRUCTING THE PHYSIOTHERAPY CURRICULUM
– reflective dialogue between education and working life 105

Merja Alanko-Turunen
WORKING OUT A TEXT
– PBL tutorial participants as knowledge constructors in
international business studies 123

Helvi Kaksonen
THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION AS
RESOURCES FOR COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE
CONSTRUCTION 141

Satu Öystilä
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS IN
PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING
– experiences of PBL tutors in higher education 161
 PART III

PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING AT WORK 181

Esa Poikela & Sari Poikela

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK
– professional growth as a tutor 183

Anna Raija Nummenmaa & Kirsti Karila

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN A MULTI-PROFESSIONAL
DAY CARE CENTRE
– PBL as a strategy and a script for learning at work 209

PART IV

ASSESSING FOR LEARNING AND KNOWING 225

Esa Poikela & Sari Poikela

DEVELOPING CONTEXT-BASED ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE
FRAMEWORK OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 227

Anna Raija Nummenmaa & Kirsti Karila

& Jorma Virtanen & Helvi Kaksonen
INTERPRETATIONS OF EXPERTISE AS A FRAMEWORK FOR
THE PBL CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENT 241
 PART V

TELLING STORIES ABOUT PROBELL 257

Esa Poikela & Sari Poikela

ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH 259

Sari Poikela & Marja-Leena Lähteenmäki

MENTORING TUTOR’S PROFESSIONAL GROWTH 277

Anna Raija Nummenmaa

PROCESS-ORIENTED SUPERVISION IN DOCTORAL
EDUCATION 291

REFERENCES 303

The authors
PROBELL AND ME 331
 INTRODUCTION

Problem-based learning as a strategy for developing knowledge and

competence in the context of education and work

For over twenty years problem-based learning (PBL) has been applied in
many countries across widely varying fields of education. The first and best
known applications of PBL were in the study of medicine during the 1960s
(Barrows 1985; Barrows 1996). Since then, PBL has spread worldwide across
a range of other disciplines in higher education including business studies,
architecture, economics, engineering, mathematics and law. The first imple-
mentations of PBL in Finland were introduced in medicine (1994, University
of Tampere) and in physiotherapy (1996, Pirkanmaa Polytechnic). Two years
ago, the PBL approach was adopted in the education of kindergarten and
primary teachers at the University of Tampere. During the last few years,
PBL has been the subject of research, especially in health education and in
various other fields of vocational education. (Poikela & Poikela 1997, 2001;
Nummenmaa & Perä-Rouhu 2000; Lähteenmäki 2000, 2001; Nummenmaa
& Virtanen 2001; Virtanen 2001.)
Problem-based learning has often been understood simply as a method
of learning. Correspondingly, many kinds of pragmatically based pedagogi-
cal applications and development projects are described as PBL. Problem-
based learning has also been investigated within the context of education, al-
though the theoretical basis of problem-based learning is closely connected
with learning at work. (Poikela 1998; Karila & Nummenmaa 2001; Poikela &
Järvinen 2001; Poikela & Poikela 2001.)
A shared interest in research and in the pedagogical development of
PBL was the starting point for the research group Pro-Bell (Problem-Based
Learning in Finnish Higher Education), which was set up by researchers in-
terested in PBL in January 2001. The purpose of Pro-Bell has been to sup-
port research, development and training projects in PBL in different fields
of higher education.
The aim of this book is to present some basic results of the research and
development project called ‘Problem-based learning as a strategy for de-
veloping knowledge and competence in the context of education and work’.
The project was realised as part of the national research programme Life as
Learning conducted by the Academy of Finland.
The aim of the project was to research the theoretical basis and imple-
mentations of problem-based learning (PBL) in education and learning at
work. The specific purposes were:

• to analyse the theoretical basis of PBL (epistemological starting points)

• to study the practical applications of PBL on different levels of educa-
tion (developing the PBL curriculum and learning environment)
• to study learning at work (competence-based, multi-professional exper-
tise)
• to develop a new paradigm for evaluating learning and competencies at
work.

The content of this book has been organised according to our original re-
search tasks. These tasks are described more exactly in the introduction to
each part. The articles included in the book are, however, only examples of
the research and the development work we have undertaken in order to un-
derstand problem-based learning.
 PART I

THEORETISING
THE EPISTEMOLOGICAL PREMISES
OF PBL

The prerequisites for developing education and professional practices are

connected to general processes of change and to the educational systems in
society. Societal change and the idea of lifelong learning demand a redefini-
tion of relationships between research, education and professional practices.
Knowledge gained through education rapidly grows out of date and loses
its value for working life. When the gap between work and education be-
comes too wide, the educational system faces a difficult situation. The skills
and knowledge needed in working life cannot all be taught during formal
schooling and training. Working life requires new kinds of competencies in-
cluding independent knowledge acquisition and application, problem solv-
ing, cooperation, multidimensional professional skills and the capacity to
continue learning.
Two particular ideas are emphasised in recent research on learning in a
professional context. The first is that the concepts of knowledge, cognition
and learning are comprehended situationally and contextually. The other
is that knowing, expertise and cognition are also products of the context in
which they are presented. Knowledge acquisition and the use of knowledge
are not separate processes. Knowledge, cognition and learning are bound to
certain physical, psychological, social and cultural contexts in which they
are formed and to which they refer. The context gives a meaning to learning
and professional development in education and in work communities. At
the same time, the context is interpreted by groups who produce and share
knowledge in their communities of practice.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 11

 Research dealing with knowledge and learning is traditionally concerned
with individual learning processes and conditions. In recent research, how-
ever, the focus of learning is increasingly on groups, communities, organi-
sations and networks of professional practice. Fletcher (1996) characterises
learning as a process of participation and partnership empowering individu-
als within group and organisational processes. The main principles of this
learning partnership are a shared context of knowledge, action, reflection,
dialogue and reciprocity. Meaningful action and division of work also as-
sumes new kinds of models of working, as well as the development of multi-
professional work cultures, which appears in new combinations of tasks, in a
growing sense of shared responsibility or in a new kind of partnership with
clients. (Launis & Engeström 1999.) Developing new kinds of multi-profes-
sional work orientations and competencies demands a new way of learning
and evaluating, both in the formal context of education and in the informal
context of learning at work.
In epistemological discussions knowledge is usually divided into theory
and practice. Theory is understood as propositional knowing-what, and
practice as practical knowing-how (Ryle 1949, Eraut 1994). In a broader
sense, the relationship between knowledge (what) and knowing (how) can
be understood as a problem between Cartesian finite and Heideggerian
changing knowledge. The former reflects the modern idea of permanent
knowledge and the latter the post-modern way of understanding knowledge
as changing and dependent on the action context rather than on facts or the
truth context. In PBL, the way in which knowledge is perceived has more in
common with a post-modern than a modern a view of epistemology. (Cow-
droy 1994.)
Most classifications of knowledge do not make a distinction between an
epistemological and an ontological basis of knowledge. They assume that
theoretical knowledge is in the mind as well as in books, or knowledge in
practice is the same as experiential knowledge. It is important to answer two
simple questions: where is the knowledge or who has it? How can someone
gain, produce and apply knowledge? When the distinction between objective
and subjective knowledge is made, it is easier to clarify what part of knowl-

12 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

edge exists outside the individual and what kind of knowledge is connected
to personal experience and competence. (Poikela & Poikela 2001; Poikela &
Järvinen & Heikkilä & Mäkinen 2002.)
It is important to note that experience is not the same as practice, as is
often assumed in everyday thinking. It also describes the contextual and
chronological transition between learning and knowing. Education should
also make it possible for learners to achieve elements involved in tacit knowl-
edge. Education by itself cannot produce complete professional competence,
since professional competence incorporates more extensive dimensions of
knowledge and knowing. For this reason it is important to create similarities
between the worlds of education and working life.
Our first research task was to analyse the theoretical basis of problem-
based learning from an epistemological perspective. The questions were:

• How do we describe the different images, species, modes, resources and

dimensions of knowledge in the contexts of education and work?
• What dimensions of knowledge need to be considered in formal cur-
ricula and what can be left for learning at work?

These epistemological questions lie at the core of PBL, and will be discussed
in the articles that follow. Our understanding has also developed during the
research process. Esa Poikela offers some epistemological and ontological
remarks in his article ‘Knowledge, knowing and problem-based learning’.
A problem forms the starting point of PBL. Terry Barrett examines in
her article ‘A problem as a provoker of space betwixt and between old and
new ways of knowing’ how problems help to integrate knowledge, personal
development and professional action.
Problem-based learning as a concept is under continuous construction.
This is the main thesis in the article ‘Deconstructing conceptions of problem-
based learning’ written by Merja Alanko-Turunen and Jyri Linden.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 13

14 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 Esa Poikela
University of Lapland

KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING AND

PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING
– some epistemological and ontological remarks

The western idea of science is based on a separation between knowledge and

activity which has led, in turn, to a tradition of setting theory against prac-
tice, of practising science against practising a profession. This dichotomy is
deeply rooted in our everyday thinking and is concretised in the division
of academic and professional education or the categorising of intellectual
and physical work. If it is believed that only conceptional knowledge reveals
truth, then there is a danger of science retreating from reality. It is not possi-
ble to capture change and action perfectly because change is continuous and
real-life events seem chaotic. This is why knowledge is often felt to represent
constant truth, and certain groups such as priests, lawyers or professors take
over the role of mediating the truth.
Ordinary people live under the unstable conditions of practice and have
no certainty as to what is “right” knowledge. So, they require advice, in-
struction and guidance from someone wiser in order to cope from one day
to another under the non-scientific conditions of everyday life. Initially,
knowledge is produced for the purpose of interpreting reality, but it later
becomes a truth in itself. However, reality itself has no value as truth; only
the practical value of everyday, concrete doing which stands in opposition to

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 15

 Esa POIKELA

science. Our post-industrial society is information, knowledge and auditing

society whose functions depend on increasing knowledge which is produced
in many complicated forms. This state of affairs forces us to question the
concept of knowledge based on differentiating between theory and practice.
Knowledge does not create a basis for our society; on the contrary, such a
basis rests on reality where knowledge is produced, used and evaluated.
This article considers the basis of pedagogical knowledge creation from
the point of view of work and the work environment, not so much from the
point of view of education. It is essential to look at the professional knowl-
edge, knowing and competence needed at work. I examine the epistemo-
logical and ontological basis of problem-based pedagogy from the angle of
theoretical understanding, practical wisdom, experiential knowledge and
competence construction. The aim is to bridge the gap between work and
education by seeking a connection between professional practice and peda-
gogy.

The dilemma of correspondence between work and education

So far, the gap between work and education has been bridged with reforms
which are carried out from time to time. They have aimed at a correspond-
ence of content in the qualifications demanded by work and those produced
by education. The result of educational reform has usually been a new state
of balance which founders once more as result of societal development and
changes in working life.
An early collapse took place back in the 1800s when a two-tier educa-
tional system was created. One level was concerned with training ordinary
people, while the other was reserved for educating the upper classes. The
organisation of professional education was not given much attention because
the “lower” vocations especially were still learned at work and in workshops
supervised by masters and apprentices.

16 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING AND PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

During the construction of educational systems there emerged a model

of teaching and learning which was based on behaviour inside a classroom.
This model has been immune to all the structural reforms of education con-
ducted over the last century. The process of learning and teaching within the
frame of curricula remained unchanged despite reforms which were carried
out almost every decade (see Miettinen 1990). This was the situation until a
development which began in the 1990s offered a promise of real change.
Our society’s shift towards a post-industrial era during the 2000s is the
result of the far reaching development of information technology bringing
with it a competitive global economy and rapid social development, which
has shaken up traditional divisions in the work place. Hierarchies have been
lowered, people work more effectively together than alone, self-led teams
have became usual in production, and a highly educated work force moves
between countries and continents. The other side of this development is that
the global economy is centralised, resulting in a withdrawal of decision-
making involved in financial investment. Even profitable enterprises have
been streamlined and moved from one continent to another in search of bet-
ter profits. This has also meant that the feeling of uncertainty has increased
in work places and in everyday life as society’s social security network has
weakened.
This development has been too fast for educational institutions and the
signs of crisis are visible at all levels of education starting with the polarisa-
tion of primary schools into good schools and bad ones. The competencies
and knowing needed by society and working life are rapidly changing and
this means that the contents of curricula are already old-fashioned by the
time they are implemented. Curricular development should be studied with-
in the framework of correspondence of functions in work and education,
rather than focusing simply on correspondence of the contents. Traditional
education aims to store knowledge which can be later applied, but the idea
of creating functional correspondence between work and education aims at
creating the knowing and competence needed in our information society
through doing, acting and thinking.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 17

 Esa POIKELA

Pedagogical knowledge, knowing at work and the learning environment

One solution to bridging the gap between work and education is problem-
based pedagogy. Traditional education and teaching assumes that learning
starts when new content is delivered to the students. Problem-based learn-
ing, on the other hand, starts by dealing with problems whose origins are
embedded in the reality of working life and society. Problems cross the
borders of different fields of science and disciplines and problem solving
requires the development of diverse skills in information seeking and inde-
pendent studying. Another important factor is interacting and cooperating
within different learning environments and communities of experts. This
is the reason why the basis of pedagogy should also be explored in work
and everyday life situations, and not only in school and the temporary, part-
time reality school represents. In the following I will examine what kind of
knowledge and learning environment work offers, and how the origin of
pedagogical knowledge can be traced as a basis for producing learning and
competence.

Practical wisdom

According to Hager (1999) Aristotle distinguishes between theoretical and

practical reasoning. Theoretical reasoning (theory) concerns knowledge that
is certain (episteme), while practical reasoning (phronesis) refers to wisdom
concerned with the contingent world of action (praxis). Aristotle also iden-
tifies another type of practical knowledge related to praxis which he calls
skill knowledge (techne) and this is concerned with making things (poiesis).
While objects and artefacts are the products of activity, practical wisdom is
created for its own sake. On the basis of this reasoning, knowledge embed-
ded in artefacts is separated from knowledge embodied in the minds of in-
dividuals. In human actions these different types of knowledge dialectically
integrate praxis and practice. Praxis refers to objective reality independent

18 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING AND PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

of the individual, while practice concerns the subjective reality which forms
individual experience (cf. Freire 1972).
Hager (1999) argues that Aristotle’s identification of practical wisdom is
an early version of so-called know-how, knowing what to do in practice. In-
stead of the term know-how he suggests the concept of practical judgement
for understanding learning at work. This underlines the need to take into
account the contextual dimensions of workplace situations from the point of
view of practitioners. The contextual features of practical judgement consist
of encountering non-routine challenges, flexibility as a part of change, social
forces in a community of practice and integration of personal characteristics
involved in workplace situations.
Practical judgement often starts from problem solving and with a judge-
ment about what the problem is. It involves learning by experience, but it
does not follow that all experience of practice is effective in problem solving.
Hager discusses the features of practical judgement and refers to experiential
learning in the problem solving process, observing that doing and being are
basic to the human situation. He also notes a surplus of technical knowl-
edge at the expense of contextual knowledge. Nevertheless, he does not il-
lustrate the modes of knowing or knowledge involved in learning situations
at work.

Relational knowledge

Burnard (1987, 1991) describes the three elements of knowing: propositional

(theoretical), practical (know-how) and experiential (relational) knowledge.
Propositional knowledge involves theories and models learnt during educa-
tion. Practical knowledge is linked to learning practical skills and it can also
be nonverbal in nature (c.f. tacit knowledge). Experiential knowledge has
an individual dimension because experience is born only through personal
contact with another individual or with the content under study. The es-
sential element of experiential knowledge is knowledge through relationship
which involves encountering humans and other elements (see Figure 1). This

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 19

 Esa POIKELA

Propositional knowledge
(theoretical knowledge)

Experiential knowledge
Learning (relational knowledge)

Practical knowledge
(procedural knowledge)

FIGURE 1. The knowledge dimensions of knowing

(adapted from Burnard 1987)

means knowledge is not owned solely by an individual, it is also embedded

in the social connections between individuals (Burnard 1991).
Burnard’s description emphasises the social context in which knowledge
is gained, applied and internalised. Relational knowledge is essential be-
cause it connects experiential learning, personal knowing and tacit knowl-
edge. The merit of the model is the way in which it connects the fundamental
types of knowledge to one another, and how it views contextual relations
from the perspective of pedagogical action. However, Burnard’s model does
not express the multidimensional nature of the knowledge environment in
the context of work.

Images of knowledge

Blackler (1995) states that there should be a transition from a theory of

knowledge to a theory of knowing which emphasises the processes of gain-
ing, creating and using knowledge. His suggestion is that knowing is medi-
ated, situated, provisional, pragmatic and contested. Its focus is in the proc-

20 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING AND PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

ess of action, and the locus of knowing is praxis not theory. In these terms
the work community can be represented as a diverse contextual, functional
wholeness consisting of different sources, resources and types of knowl-
edge.
Blackler divides images of knowledge into five categories: encoded, em-
bedded, embrained, embodied and encultured knowledge. Encoded knowl-
edge is written down in the form of books, instructions and other practical
codes and is communicated with signs and symbols. Embedded knowledge
is hidden in routines and structures that are expressed in technology, roles,
formal procedures and organisational skills. Embrained knowledge is de-
pendent on cognitive abilities and conceptual skills. Embodied knowledge
is action oriented and only partly explicit because it is linked more to situ-
ation-specific knowledge (know-how) than to abstract rules or regulations.
Encultured knowledge refers to common, social processes in which under-
standing is shared. Understanding is linked to language and is therefore so-
cially constructed and open for negotiation. Language and concepts change
work and organisational culture. (Blackler 1995.)
The five images of knowledge defined by Blackler offer an epistemic
frame for understanding knowing and learning at work. Although he does
not relate the images of knowledge to theoretical, practical or experiential
knowledge this can be done using the tripod presented by Burnard (see Fig-
ure 2).
This tripod showing the images of knowledge offers an opportunity to
analyse and define the complexity of the knowledge environment in the
work place; firstly, as a relation between theory and practice; secondly, as
a dimension in the form of experiential, conceptual and bodily knowledge;
thirdly as cultural knowledge emerging on the basis of experience, practice
and theory (see Figure 2).

• Encoded knowledge is symbolic knowledge saved in a kind of source

(cf. theoretical knowledge). It can be written down in guidebooks or
as curricular text.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 21

 Esa POIKELA

Encoded knowledge
(theory)

Encultured
knowledge Embrained knowledge
Embodied knowledge
(experience)
Knowing

Embedded knowledge
(praxis/practice)

FIGURE 2. Knowing at work and the images of knowledge

• Embedded knowledge is located inside the work organisation as struc-

tures and objects, artefacts, facilities, resources, roles and routines (cf.
practical knowledge)

Encoded and embedded knowledge are, by nature, objective knowledge be-

cause they exist outside an individual and are not dependent on an indi-
vidual. For example, when an individual accepts a new job and moves to a
new work community, s/he confronts a new world of knowledge and, at the
same time, leaves a former world of knowledge behind.

• Embrained knowledge consists of propositional knowledge internal-

ised by individuals and descriptive knowledge (declarative knowing
what). These include learned facts and functional principles and also
so-called meta-cognitions.
• Embodied knowledge is know-how linked to knowing and competence
involving elements of tacit knowledge. Examples include experiences
occurring when physically present and gained through a sense of feel-
ing, or through doing and acting.

22 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING AND PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

Embrained and embodied knowledge belong to the category of subjective

knowledge (cf. knowing from experience). Both these types of knowledge
also include tacit knowledge which can be expressed in many ways such as
intuition, community spirit or house rules. When someone has “the right
touch”, they have an intuitive understanding or feeling but it is hard to ex-
press it in exact words.

• Encultured knowledge is shared knowledge and it is typically produced

in teams of various sorts. Encultured knowledge is closely linked with
other expressions of knowledge inside an organisation. It can be ei-
ther tacit or recognisable in various forms of functions and resources.
Sometimes stories or metaphors are needed to express and create tacit
knowledge. Stories and metaphors do not arise from a vacuum; their
background is one of reality but also of legend.

Encultured knowledge is a construction emerging on the basis of other types

of knowledge. It can subjective when it says something about the community
and the acting members within it. It can also be objective because its exist-
ence is not linked to a certain group or individual. For example, ancient
cultures are known through knowledge embedded in objects and encoded
in symbolic form, even though there is nobody left to speak about the com-
munity. (Poikela, E. 2004.)
Blackler has explored knowledge from the point of view of action. He
has made a distinction between theoretical knowledge located outside an
individual (encoded knowledge) and conceptual knowledge owned by an in-
dividual (embrained knowledge), but he has not separated the knowledge in
praxis or practice existing outside an individual embedded in artefacts cre-
ated by humans or in natural objects (see Figure 2). On the contrary, Black-
ler returns to the old epistemology by presenting embrained knowledge as
“knowing what” and embodied knowledge as “knowing how”. This means
that “knowing how” is simply a physical or bodily character and not linked
to thinking at all. Although he has analysed the relationships between know-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 23

 Esa POIKELA

ing and work organisation, Blackler has not defined the work community as
an environment of knowing and learning.

The ecology of knowing

Barab and Roth (2006) have developed an ecological theory of knowing

which introduces the idea of a curriculum-based ecosystem where partici-
pation is primary when compared to information acquisition. The central
starting points arise from several theories: situational learning (e.g. Lave
1988; Wenger 1998); environmental ecology (e.g. Gibson 1986); activity the-
ory (e.g. Leontjev 1978; Engeström 1987); and theories based on phenom-
enology (e.g. Schutz & Luckman 1973; Luger 2005).
According to these theories, the primary basis for learning does not lie in
internalising contents and facts. Rather, learning takes place when partici-
pating in situations and contexts, during functional activity and in individu-
als’ intentional interaction relation to their environment. Barab and Roth
(2006) also point out that their theoretical background is linked to design
theory (Barab et al. 2004), learning environments (Roth 2000) and problem-
based learning (Savery & Duffy 1996).
The ecological theory of knowing is constructed on three basic concepts:
affordance networks, effectivity sets and life-worlds. This theory’s relation
to the tripods depicted above (see Figures 1 and 2) can be described as holo-
graphic. It emphasises ontological rather than epistemological factors, and
focuses on praxis and the world of individual and collective action (Figure
3).
According to Barab and Roth (2006, 5): “An affordance network is the
collection of facts, concepts, tools, methods, practices, agendas, commit-
ments, and even people, taken with respect to an individual, that are distrib-
uted across time and space and are viewed as necessary for the satisfaction
of particular goal sets.” They argue that “understanding the network and its
nested components constitutes the minimal ontology for supporting learn-
ing”. In other words, the pedagogical core of the affordance network is to fa-

24 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING AND PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

cilitate learners’ participation by observing environmental information and

opportunities for knowledge acquisition, and by offering problems that can
convert individual experience.
When describing the concept of effectivity sets, Barab and Roth refer to
Shaffer’s (2004) discussion of an epistemic frame. Shaffer states that learners
need support to be able to adapt to an epistemic frame which would allow
them to act and think, as much as possible, like experts. Barab and Roth
define effectivity sets as properties of individual-environment transactions
out of which a new epistemic frame might emerge. They are always coupled
with particular affordance networks and particular goals. Learners need to
prepare for developing competence in their professional future.
The term life-world refers to individuals’ everyday life which is experi-
enced subjectively. The material environment may be the same, but personal
experiences are different, even contrary. Barab and Roth (2006) observe that
“the contents of any life-world are dependent both on the individual’s effec-
tivity sets and on the available affordance networks, leading to a continuous
evolution of both individual life-world and communicative patterns with
others. A core goal of education is how best to support learners in developing

Affordance networks
(experience)

Effectivity sets
(competence)
Knowing

Life-worlds
(practice)

FIGURE 3. Knowing in the ecological system

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 25

 Esa POIKELA

personal life-worlds that overlap with those socially agreed-upon life-worlds

that are engaged by more knowledgeable others. Similarly, a core challenge
of education is how to develop curricular contexts that extend themselves
meaningfully into the personal life-worlds of individuals.” (Barab & Roth
2006, 7). From the point of view of expert action, “professional life world”
practice can also be unique, subjective and even contrary when compared
with the actions of other practitioners.
Barab’s and Roth’s theory of knowing emphasises the learner’s involve-
ment and intentional action in an ecological system where learning is based
on acting in the learning environment and is constructed more around
problems than certain contents. Supporting and facilitating learners’ inten-
tional actions, problem-solving and mutual interaction in changing con-
texts such as time and place creates a solid basis for functional knowing and
competence for the future of the profession and the work place. Instead of
presenting content, curriculum-based ecosystems begin by setting up the
problem and then making available various resources and suggested activi-
ties through which learners assemble the networks required for solving the
problem. The curriculum includes the framing of the goal and contextual
information, along with the tools and resources for achieving that goal.

The contextual framework of problem-based pedagogy

In epistemological discussion the relationship between knowledge and

knowing can be understood as a debate between Cartesian finite and
Heideggerian changing knowledge. The former represents the modern idea
of permanent knowledge, and the latter the post-modern way of apprehend-
ing knowledge as changing and dependent on the context of the activity,
rather than on facts or truth. Problem-based pedagogy can be characterised
as a paradigm shift towards a post-modern society and a new epistemology
(Cowdroy 1994).

26 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING AND PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

Few scholars have attempted to distinguish between the epistemological

and ontological dimensions of knowledge. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) do
make this distinction. They argue that the epistemological dimension de-
scribes conversion processes from implicit (tacit) to explicit knowledge, and
vice versa, from explicit to implicit knowledge. The result of this conversion
is new knowledge and a new way of knowing and acting. The ontological
dimension, on the other hand, describes knowing processes that take place
between an individual, a group and an organisation. Cook and Brown (1999)
also make the same kind of distinction between the mode of knowledge and
the possession of knowledge. In their view, knowledge can be explicit or im-
plicit and is possessed by an individual or a group.
According to Nonaka (1994) explicit knowledge is symbolic, observ-
able knowledge and implicit knowledge refers to nonverbal, tacit knowledge
which is hardly observable. The ontological dimension concerns knowledge
existing somewhere and owned by someone: knowledge can be individual
or collective. Tacit knowledge is subjective in nature and it is bound to per-
sonal, collective or organisational competence. This means that producing
and delivering tacit knowledge depends on individual and collective action.
Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) examine subjective tacit knowledge, while
Ståhle and Grönroos (1999) study objective potential knowledge in the sense
that it has not yet been transformed into the form of individual or common
competence. Potential knowledge is a possibility embedded in environment
and it is an object of goal-oriented thinking and action (c.f. Barab & Roth
2006). We are used to calling this kind of thinking and acting learning when
practised within the framework of the curriculum in formal education and
in the form of professional development and informal learning in working
life (Poikela 2003).
Instead of the traditional two-dimensional theory/practice description,
a holographic three dimensional view of knowledge consisting of theory,
praxis and experience and experience, practice and competence should be
adopted (see Figure 4). As the most important elements of producing com-
petence, the concepts of objective and subjective, potential and tacit knowl-
edge challenge former dichotomies of knowledge. It is no longer possible to

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 27

 Esa POIKELA

The
The epistemology
epistemology and and
ontology
ofontology of problem-based
problem-based learning learning
Theory

Information PBL-
Experience
curriculum

Potential knowledge
Professional
Praxis
Evaluation development Competence
– expert knowledge
Tacit knowledge

Practice
OBJECTIVE SUBJECTIVE
KNOWLEDGE

FIGURE 4. The contextual framework of the problem-based curriculum

(Poikela & Poikela 2005)

divide knowledge simply into the theoretical “that” and the practical “how”.
A more useful division is theoretical “that”, practical “that” and experiential
“how” knowledge. This locates knowledge in a new way and the dichotomy
between theoretical and practical knowledge takes on the shape of a triangle
where the third dimension is experiential knowledge. This makes it possible
to clarify what part of knowledge is objective, existing outside of an individ-
ual (theory and praxis), and what part is subjective, experiential (experience,
practice and competence) knowledge.
Conceptual knowledge in textual, codified or any other symbolic form is
not the same as it is in the memory of an individual, a group or an organisa-
tion. Correspondingly, practical knowledge is not only in the possession of
a professional, but can be embedded in artefacts produced by humans or in
objects of nature. From the point of view of the learner, theoretical and prac-
tical knowledge, like any information, are sources of potential knowledge,
the goal of learning lying outside her or himself. The integrative knowledge
from and between theory and praxis/practice is needed for constructing

28 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING AND PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

experience, the mode of subjective experiential knowledge, including the

highly personal elements of tacit knowledge.
Figure 4 clarifies what the basic idea of learning is. The left-hand trian-
gle depicts the world of education, and the right-hand triangle the world of
work and professions. The aim of teaching is to guide the learner to deal
with substance so that it is possible to integrate necessary theoretical knowl-
edge (from theory) and practical knowledge (from praxis/practice) in the
processes of learning. The result of the integration is experiential knowl-
edge (forming experience) which has a permanence not enjoyed by knowl-
edge gained from the memorisation of facts without connection to practice,
or from emotional experiences without theoretical understanding. Figure
4 depicts the contextual, chronological and ontological transition between
education and work life. Practitioners continuously learn at work (within a
community of practice) and deepen professional competence (in personal
practice) during the whole of their work history.

Discussion

Burnard (1987) aims to bridge the epistemological dualism (theory/practice)

in her description of theoretical, practical and experiential knowledge. How-
ever, she does not make a distinction between knowledge, theory and prac-
tice existing outside an individual, but presents the types of knowledge as
dimensions of subjective knowledge familiarised by an individual. Blackler
(1995) describes the five forms of knowledge but fails to note the separation
between objective and subjective knowledge outside and inside the individual
or in the work community. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) describe the differ-
ence between the epistemological and ontological dimension of knowledge,
but do not differentiate between potential knowledge in an environment and
implicit knowledge in an individual and a community. The environmental
and contextual point of knowing and learning is lacking.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 29

 Esa POIKELA

Barab’s and Roth’s (2006) description of ecological curriculum theory is

deeply rooted in praxis and they do not make a distinction between theory,
practice and experience. Rather, differences are created between epistemic,
functional and experiential possibilities, abilities and realities. They con-
struct curricula as an ecological system and a learning environment where
the learner’s actions are as purposeful as possible. The individual’s inten-
tional and life-worlds need to be linked and this action must be support-
ed. When life-worlds overlap and are “in discussion” with each other, this
enables the ability to participate in and influence actions. In this way, the
ecological theory offers an approach firstly, for creating problem-based cur-
ricula (see Figure 4, left triangle) and secondly, for structuring learning at
work and professional development (see Figure 4, right triangle).
Pragmatic philosophers of education (e.g. Dewey 1911; Freire 1972) em-
phasise the importance of learners’ actions and of facilitating these in the
processes of growing and development. The way learners’ experience is con-
structed is crucial, and also how they learn “to read” the concrete, social and
cultural environment in which they act in the contexts of everyday life, work
and education. Our information society offers a huge amount of data, but
it does not offer knowledge when examined from the perspective of learn-
ing. The curriculum is full of theories, models, facts and exercises but, from
the learner’s perspective, this is just information coded and packed in a for-
mal mode. Information is transformed into knowledge only when personal
meaning is attached to it in the process of learning.
The dilemma of creating meaning is usually expressed in pedagogical
discussion as difficulties in personal motivation, commitment and the abil-
ity to receive information. Praxis, arising from real problems is more useful
for learning than theory because only in this way is it possible to create sense
and structure ways in which to use theories. Learning is carried out through
actions which can be aimed at achieving certain goals and targets in reality-
based problem-solving processes. This is why education cannot be based on
the transmission of information and skills coded as written text in books. A
solid basis for education lies in functional models and in developing abilities
which lead to lifelong learning in our present and future society.

30 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

KNOWLEDGE, KNOWING AND PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

The purpose of the problem-based curriculum is to link the world of

education to the world of work and professions. Education should produce
learning that leads to expertise in working life and, of course, to becoming a
civilised member of a multicultural society.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 31

32 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 Terry Barrett
University College Dublin

A PROBLEM AS A PROVOKER OF A SPACE BETWIXT

AND BETWEEN OLD AND NEW WAYS OF KNOWING

This chapter illustrates how the concept of the problem as a provoker of a

liminal space, a space betwixt and between old and new ways of knowing
was derived from analysing how lecturers as problem-based students talked
about the problem in the dialogue of PBL tutorials. It focuses on what can be
learnt about problem-based learning from how lecturers as problem-based
learning students talked about PBL problems in the dialogue of a PBL edu-
cation development module. The purpose of the chapter, then, is to explore
how lecturers’ language-in-use can help develop a conceptual understand-
ing of the nature of problems as provokers of a space betwixt and between
old and new ways of knowing. The main argument is that by conceptualising
problems as provokers of a liminal space, educators will be encouraged and
enabled to maximise their potential for learning. However, not all PBL prob-
lems provoke liminal spaces for all students in every context. Rather in this
chapter I am analysing how I derived the illuminative concept of a problem
as a provoker of a liminal space from listening to the students’ talk about the
two problems they encountered in the PBL tutorials of this specific educa-
tion development module.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 33

 Terry BARRETT

Barrows (1986; 1989) views the problem as a trigger, or a starting point for
learning. Margetson (2001) provides convincing philosophical arguments
for the rationale for learning in higher education to be based on problems. In
PBL the problem is not defined narrowly as something broken that needs to
be fixed but wider as an-ill defined, challenging starting point for learning.
Types of problems include: understanding a puzzling phenomenon, resolv-
ing a dilemma, finding a better way to do something, meeting a challenge,
exploring an effective way to design or build something and creating an ar-
tistic work. In this module there were two consecutive problems.
This chapter analyses the dialogue of two problem-based learning teams
that were given the pseudonyms of the Glendalough team and the Skelligs
team. Two teams of eight lecturers were completing a module on problem-
based learning that was part of a staff development Postgraduate Diploma in
Learning and Teaching in Higher Education in Ireland. These lecturers were
problem-based learning students for the module. The lectures came from a
variety of disciplines that included engineering, business, visual communi-
cation, nursing and architecture. They worked on two problems about PBL.
Thus both the content and process of the module was problem-based learn-
ing. The teams met once a week for fourteen weeks. This research is based
on all of the dialogue, of the full set of tutorials for two teams. Pseudonyms
were given to these PBL students.

Methodology of the study

Interpretivism was the paradigm and methodology for this study. Un-
derstanding is the goal of interpretivism and the goal of this chapter is to
understand how students talked about the problem and to learn from this
understanding. Interpretivism seeks to understand the complex world of ex-
perience from the perspectives of the participants and this chapter is about
students’ perspectives of PBL. Robson explains the underlying principles of

34 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

A PROBLEM AS A PROVOKER OF SPACE BETWIXT AND BETWEEN OLD AND NEW WAYS OF KNOWING

interpretivism in terms of understanding the nature of people who are the

subject matter of the social sciences:
People, unlike the objects of the natural world are conscious, purpo-
sive actors who have ideas about their world and attach meaning to
what is going on around them. In particular, their behaviour depends
crucially on these ideas and meanings. (Robson 2002, 24)

This central characteristic of humans has implications for doing research

involving them. Their behaviour what they actually do, has to be interpreted
in the light of these underlying ideas, meanings and motivations. From an
interpretive epistemological position knowledge is seen as “interpretation,
meaning and illumination” in contrast with a positivist epistemological po-
sition from which knowledge is seen as “generalisation, prediction and con-
trol” (Usher 1996, 18).
The formulation of the concept of the problem as a provoker of a limi-
nal space began by identifying and exploring interpretive repertoires of
how each team talked about the PBL process in the discourse of the mod-
ule. Willig clarifies that the concept of interpretive repertoires are used by a
range of discourse analysts:
to construct alternative, and often contradictory, versions of events.
Discourse analysts have identified conflicting repertoires within par-
ticipants talk about one and the same topic. (Willig 2001, 95)

This first level of analysis was informed by a critical discourse analysis

approach. Discourse analysis involves finding patterns and proposing in-
terpretations of the patterns together with accounts of the meanings and
ideological significance of these patterns (Cameron 2001). Critical discourse
analysis (CDA) makes use of systemic linguistics, continental pragmatics
and cross-disciplinary trends “but attempts to go beyond them in provid-
ing a synthesis of necessary theoretical concepts and analytical frameworks
for doing critical analysis.” (Fairclough 2001, 11). The Skelligs team talked
about the problem in terms of “professional development” versus “personal
development” and in so doing talked about different forms of knowledge,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 35

 Terry BARRETT

different ways of knowing and different ways of acting professionally. The

Glendalough team talked about the problem in terms of the problem be-
ing “about them” versus the problem being “about us”. In talking about the
problem, they were also talking about issues of identity. When I presented
my analysis of these themes back to participants at two participant valida-
tion sessions they both confirmed and augmented my interpretation of how
they talked about the problem. They talked about this both in terms of expe-
riencing working on problems as students and in making connections with
this and using problems with their own students. Then analysing the inter-
pretive repertoires of how participants talked about the problem across both
teams, and listening to the discussion at the participant validation sessions,
I formulated the concept of a problem as a provoker of a liminal space to
describe and analyse participants’ talk about the problem. Jackson and Shaw
highlight the fundamental nature of concepts:
Concepts are essential to advancing understanding and the develop-
ment of practice. We create them as we understand and organise our
environment and our place within it and we organise our environ-
ment and practice through developing our concepts Because of this
a concept is simultaneously the representation of a reality and the
expression of an intention, a generalisation from experience and a
hypothesis from which future experience might be predicted. (Bolton
1977). Concepts permit us to make sense of the world and apply this
sense making to new contexts and circumstances. This is the power
of concepts… (Jackson & Shaw 2002, 1).

The following figure summarises how the concept of a problem as a pro-

voker of liminal space was formulated from how participants talked about
the problem.

36 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

A PROBLEM AS A PROVOKER OF SPACE BETWIXT AND BETWEEN OLD AND NEW WAYS OF KNOWING

AP
rob
le m
as
aP
rov
o

ke
Con

ro
fa
Particip cep
a nt Va

Lim
li tu
dati

ina
on S

al

lS
e ssio

An

pac
n, C

aly
PBL Proble

e
o

sis
m nf
Vs. Ab: About
out Them
ere

Us
nce
s, P
u bl
icat

Explora
PB V

ti o
L P s. P

ions

informe n of in
rob erso

d by er
, Con
lem nal De

C
Ana r
pre cal Dis

: Pro

versat
iti sis
tive course

fessio
ly

io n s
repe

nal Dev.
v.
rtoires

Problem

FIGURE 1. Formulation of the Concept of a Problem as a Liminal Space

The concept of a problem as a provoker of liminal space

The concept of a liminal space captures the “betwixt and between” state
(Turner 1969) that the PBL problem provokes. The origin of the concept of
liminal space is from social anthropology, where it was originally used to
describe the space between one state and another as in the space between
boyhood and manhood. The concept of liminal space derives from the latin
word limen, meaning threshold or boundary (Meyer & Land 2003).
The PBL problems in this study provoked liminal spaces between current
levels of knowing and new levels of knowing, established ways of thinking

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 37

 Terry BARRETT

and fresh ways of thinking, satisfaction with current identities and a desire
to explore other possible identities, habitual forms of professional action and
forms of professional action new to the learner. It is argued that the partici-
pants of this study were in a particular liminal space also because as lectur-
ers who were problem-based learners they are betwixt and between the roles
of teacher and student. The following figure illustrates my visualisation of
the concept of the problem as a provoker of a liminal space.
This chapter focuses on one dimension of these liminal spaces-the
knowledge dimension. The other two dimensions of the liminal space that
PBL problems trigged as reflected by the language-in-use of the participants
is discussed elsewhere (Barrett forthcoming). This chapter thus explores the
connections between problems and liminality by discussing the linguistic
forms and the functions of these linguistic forms that participants used in
g
A Sp
win
Kno

ace
Betw
s of

Pro
Way

fes
ion

ixt a

sion
New
ens

nd B
Dim

al A
and

etw

ctio
dge

Old

e en O

n Di
wle

een

ld a

men
etw
Kno

nd N

sion
nd B

ew W
ix t a

ays
Betw

of D
ace

oing
A Sp

A Space Betwixt and Between Old and New Ways of Being

Indentity Dimension

FIGURE 2. Three Dimensions of the Problem as a Provoker of a Liminal Space

38 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

A PROBLEM AS A PROVOKER OF SPACE BETWIXT AND BETWEEN OLD AND NEW WAYS OF KNOWING

their talk about the problem. I thus take up the challenge by Meyer and Land
(2005, 380) who argue that: “the connection between liminality, creativity
and problem-solving would also merit further enquiry”.

The space between old and new ways of knowing

The problems in this PBL module appeared to have created liminal spaces
where the knowledge required for working on them was not obvious and
straightforward but unclear and troublesome. The language-in-use quoted
in this chapter illustrates how students could not have resolved the problem
with their existing level of knowledge. The only way of resolving the prob-
lem was for students to acquire new knowledge in order to reconceptualise
the problem and resolve it. Furthermore, problem-based learning offered
participants ways of learning that combined professional development with
personal development explicitly in integrated rather than disjointed way
of knowing. Sometimes participants talked about a gap in their personal
knowledge of knowing “that” or knowing “about” (to use their words) as
they named what they needed to learn in order to work on the problem. I
agree with Eraut (1994) that this should be considered as lacunae in their
personal knowledge rather than propositional knowledge as these students
developed “some constructs, perspectives and frames of reference which
were “essentially personal even if they have been influenced by public con-
cepts and ideas circulating in their community” (Eraut 1994, 106).
However sometimes process knowledge of the “know how” of specific
skills was also required to work on a problem as in when students developed
their process knowledge in terms of teamwork skills, information literacy
skills and presentation skills in order to work on a problem. In the language-
in-use the students also talked about a third type of “self” knowledge (their
word) that they developed in terms of the greater self- awareness developing
as they worked on a problem.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 39

 Terry BARRETT

The students talked about the different aspects of this knowledge dimen-
sion of the problem as a provoker of a liminal space: in their talk in the
PBL tutorials about their experiences of problems they worked on as PBL
students, in their talk of designing problems for a module for nursing and
management students as they worked on the first problem, and in their talk
in the participant validation sessions as they made links between these con-
texts and designing and using problems in their own teaching situations.
Firstly, I focus on how they talked about the problems they worked on as
PBL students. The participants in the study I conducted were conscious that
they knew something “about PBL” but that they had to know more to work
on the problems about problem-based learning. “The Professional Body Has
Spoken” was the first problem that both teams worked on. IBEC (Irish Busi-
ness and Employers Confederation) is the Irish national organisation for
employers in Ireland. I give the full text of the problem, as it is important in
order to understand the intertextuality as participants talked in the tutorials
about specific words and sentences in this text.

The problem: The Professional Body has Spoken

Your professional body has come up with guidelines for preparing the
professional of the future. They want people with specialist knowl-
edge. However they emphasise that they want people who will not only
continue to develop their technical skills but who will also continue
to develop their communication, problem-solving, learning to learn
and teamwork skills. Your institution’s strategic plan has an underly-
ing theme of the promotion of the capacity to learn and reason, and of
learning skills, as being of greater importance than the changing na-
ture of learning content. Other colleges have also emphasised the im-
portance of developing key skills. IBEC, have repeatedly stressed that
employers are looking for graduates with key skills (e.g. communica-
tions, problem-solving, learning to learn. and teamwork) in addition
to technical skills.
Your course is redesigning a total programme using a Problem-based
learning approach. You are requested to redesign your module using
a PBL approach to enable graduates to develop these attributes. Your

40 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

A PROBLEM AS A PROVOKER OF SPACE BETWIXT AND BETWEEN OLD AND NEW WAYS OF KNOWING

module descriptor and evaluation plan are due in on 22 October for

a team meeting.
You have also been asked to give a 20 minute presentation on your
module descriptor, the problem(s), the assessment strategies and your
plan for evaluating the module at this meeting.

© Terry Barrett

When the Glendalough team were discussing “The Professional Body has
Spoken” problem, which was a problem about problem-based learning, Noel
a member of this team remarked:
But the only thing is that we don’t know that much about PBL, we are
part of the kernel, not the whole kernel.

Noel realised that he knew something about PBL but that he did not know
“that much” about PBL and that he did not know enough about PBL to work
on and resolve the problem. He realised that he needed to acquire more per-
sonal knowledge. He needed to find out more “about PBL”. Noel perceived
that working on a the “Professional Body Has Spoken “ problem (that they
contextualised in terms of a human resource management module) involved
naming the space between prior knowledge and the new knowledge required
to work on the problem as he said:
One of the big things is we organize prior knowledge, what do we know
about it, I suppose to some extent what do we know about this inter-
view with human resource management and then, to, eh to identify the
areas that we know nothing about.

Kate in the Glendalough team was aware that not only did they need new
personal knowledge but they also needed process knowledge:
Kate: We now believe that we don’t know that, we don’t know how
(laughter).
Mary: We are creatively lost.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 41

 Terry BARRETT

While working on the first problem, Sue developed her “know how” of team-
work skills and her ability to relinquish individual control:
Sue: I have learnt a lot about teamwork……Can I let go a little bit
more, yes I can.

Working on this PBL problem prompted Kate to move from her current level
of teamwork skills to new levels of teamwork skills. This is important in
terms of Eraut’s (1994) argument that the area of learning to work effectively
in teams is often inadequate in professional education. He defines this type
of process knowledge as “essentially knowledge of how to do things and how
to get things done” (Eraut (1994, 93).
For the students in this study the problem prompted a space for the devel-
opment of a third type of knowledge, a “self-knowledge”. Kate discussed how
working on the two problems in the module has increased her self-aware-
ness, her ability to reflect on her own actions. Towards the end of the module
she said:
Kate: It has been the big difference to my didactic form of teaching and
now learning about problem-based learning, reflection If something
didn’t go well for me in a didactic lecture, it fell flat but I probably
moved on to the next lecture. This process, it’s forcing me to reflect on
my own teaching and on my ability to work in a group.

Working on the problems has prompted Kate to become aware of her tacit
knowledge (Schön 1987) about her own teaching and on her abilities to work
in a group and to subject both to critical scrutiny.
Secondly, I focus on their talk about working on “The Professional Body
Has Spoken” problem that involved them designing problems for a module
for other students. When participants encountered the problem “The Pro-
fessional Body Has Spoken” they experienced a liminal state: a state between
the old way of knowing and the new way of knowing.
The students in the Skelligs team were in the process of debating what the
problem was about. As well as engaging in problem-definition they were also
following up the invitation they have been given in the PBL process guide

42 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

A PROBLEM AS A PROVOKER OF SPACE BETWIXT AND BETWEEN OLD AND NEW WAYS OF KNOWING

to rewrite the problem according to the contextual realities of one or more

members of the team. They chose to rewrite the problem in terms of the con-
text of a module on professional and personal development on a nursing pro-
gramme that one of the participants was teaching on. They also later decided
that other participants could adapt this module in their contexts. In the fol-
lowing extract the Skelligs team was talking about designing problems for a
module on professional and personal development for nursing students.
Maura: Could we take a section on professional development that
might be generic?
Michael: Yeah.
Joseph: But there is an issue there, I am hearing two words, you said
personal and professional development, my huge question has been for
years is what is the relationship between those two?
Hanora: Yes, why are they lumped together?
Joseph: Or are they lumped together, I tend to think that they are. The
way we (inaudible) … into personal, the way we learn how we interact.
But to what extent are we taking that on board. I don’t think. I would
want to explore that. I suppose my question is then how does it relate
to our problem. Because you see, here is my problem I was thinking
about this on the way down, if this is very much skill based, okay. You
are talking about the relationship between personal and professional
development, which I think goes into other areas like attitude, you were
talking about snobbery and stuff like that. So how do we bring in some-
thing which I think goes beyond skills but yet still is skills.
Joan: Can we pose that as our problem, wouldn‘t that be a good prob-
lem… Is there a difference between personal and professional develop-
ment. as they go through the course?
Betty: Isn’t personal not characterised in professional, within a profes-
sional setting its how you conduct yourself within a professional set-
ting, its context.
Hanora: That is it, that is it. Yeah, I personally… (laughter) … I don’t
think we can, for me I can’t separate the two because I have seen a huge
leap for me on a personal level and I have brought that, how I have

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 43

 Terry BARRETT

developed as a person in relation to my life long learning techniques. I

know I have developed in my critiquing ability or my reflective ability,
which has been huge for me lately. And I am so glad that I was, that
part of the course was there for me. And I have been able to bring that
without, consciously into my job because I can maybe see things in a
different light and say hang on, I am not too happy. I am no longer so
accepting because somebody has helped me develop a lateral vision.
And I can now look at things, I am not afraid to maybe think laterally
and confront if that is what it is. If you have to confront. The course
for me personally has gone right into the professional development and
maybe that is why in this particular area of nursing that you can’t sepa-
rate the two of them. Maybe in other areas you can, but here they are
married together. I think they are incredibly good, because the person
in this context does refer to me, impinge on how people develop and
progress and behave professionally. That is how I feel, that inner per-
sonal strength.
Betty: I think you mentioned something that is quite important, it’s
that inner concept of themselves. I think that is really, really important
in any, in architecture, in design. Where you know the processes you
work through, you know how you get on with people or not. And being
able to counter that or to be able to see yourself within that context is
very important.

The problem has provoked them to explore the liminal space of the space
between what they already know about professional and personal develop-
ment individually and new levels of personal knowledge that can be achieved
through sharing their existing knowledge and seeking new knowledge. They
were drawing on their prior knowledge of their professional experience of
teaching different disciplines and their experience of their own professional
development.
The major theme of how the Skelligs team talked about the problem was
in terms of the interpretive repertoire: “Problem: Professional Development
versus Personal Development.” They talked about this in terms of seeing
them as different and separate and in terms of seeing them as integrated.
The participants were constructing their own meaning as they committed
themselves to varying degrees to different definitions of the problem through

44 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

A PROBLEM AS A PROVOKER OF SPACE BETWIXT AND BETWEEN OLD AND NEW WAYS OF KNOWING

making links and asking questions about the interaction between their prior
knowledge and the current PBL problem:
If I had to reduce all of educational psychology to just one principle, I
would say this: the most important single factor influencing learning
is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach him ac-
cordingly. (Ausubel, 1968, vi)

The participants were linking their prior knowledge to the problem, clarify-
ing what they already know, and what they do not know. The problem had
prompted a liminal space between old ways of knowing and new ways of
knowing. The problem made them more conscious of their current knowl-
edge of what professional and personal development is. They were also
increasing their level of knowledge by benefiting from other participants’
prior knowledge. It was also a liminal space in the sense that they were in
an in-between space in terms of seeing professional and personal develop-
ment as integrated and working out how to action that integration more in
their teaching with the nursing students and their own students compared
to their current existing situations.
The participants of the Skelligs team were designing problems for a PBL
module on professional and personal development for a nursing module.
They considered that the problems would help the students develop “skills”,
develop their “knowing how” (to use their words). These problems will
prompt students to move from their current level of skills to new skills levels.
They also argued that the problems they were designing for this module will
also go “beyond skills” to develop “that inner personal strength”, “that inner
concept of themselves”. Skills are not merely a question of technical know-
how but involve the integration of personal knowledge and the embedding
of appropriate attitudes.
Betty considered that curricula should provide spaces for engagement
with “the inner concept of themselves”. She argued that curricula in profes-
sional education should also be about self -awareness, self- development, and
management of self. She said:

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 45

 Terry BARRETT

I think you mentioned something that is quite important, it’s that in-
ner concept of themselves. I think that is really, really, important in
any, in architecture, in design. Where you know the processes you work
through, you know how you get on with people or not. And being able
to counter that or to be able to see yourself within that context is very
important.

She argued that it is important that higher education should focus on ena-
bling students to develop their sense of self, the space to become and know
who they are. Key elements to this is being aware of how they present them-
selves in their everyday working life to others and of what is happening when
they are getting on or not getting on with people. She argued that students
should not just learn specific work processes but should know these work
processes in such a way as to be able to adapt them to their personal styles.
Eraut has highlighted the metaprocess of being aware of and directing
one‘s own behaviour as a key kind of process knowledge:
The term ‘metaprocess’ is used to describe the thinking involved in
directing one’s own behaviour and controlling one’s engagement in
…processes… Its central features are self-knowledge and self-man-
agement, so it includes the organisation of one-self and one’s time, the
selection of activities, the management of one’s learning and thinking
and the general maintenance of a metaevaluative framework for judg-
ing the import and significance of one’s actions. (Eraut 1994, 115).

They considered that the new knowledge that will be prompted by the prob-
lems in this module would provoke the students to move from their current
levels of process and self- knowledge to new levels of process and self- knowl-
edge.
In addition to talking about problems in PBL tutorials and in relation to
writing problems in response to “The Professional Body Has Spoken” stu-
dents also talked about PBL problems at the participant validation sessions.
At the participant validation discussion the Skelligs team confirmed that the
theme of professional and personal development was an important theme
of how they talked about the problem in the dialogues of the education de-

46 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

A PROBLEM AS A PROVOKER OF SPACE BETWIXT AND BETWEEN OLD AND NEW WAYS OF KNOWING

velopment module and that it is still an important theme in their work as

teachers. Maura saw personal and professional development as difficult to
separate in terms of their student experience:
As adult learners we are coming with a certain amount of baggage and
experience and you know it is hard to separate the two, professional
development and personal development.

They talked about how this debate of professional development and personal
development was still being worked through in their practice and has been
influenced by their experience of the PBL module. Beatrice elaborated:
I think a lot of the time design courses have been very directive. A lot of
the time you would see the hand of the tutor all over the work…I’m sure
it happens with writing and theses. Having been through that system
myself, I don’t think it has the interests of the student at heart, it has the
interest of the tutor at heart… And you made the point further down
that what people are most interested in is themselves and their personal
development. And, eh, I think that is true. That’s another part of it you
actually give it over to the students and let them….

Beatrice talked about using ill-structured open-ended PBL problems with

her design students in a way that gave them space to become more self- aware
and to develop their own style rather than imitating the tutor’s style.
The knowledge dimension of the experience of the problem as a pro-
voker of a liminal space was about a betwixt and between state between
prior knowledge and new knowledge, between old and new ways of know-
ing in terms of personal knowledge, process knowledge and self-knowledge.
These knowledge dimensions of problems as provokers of liminal spaces
were talked about by the participants, in terms of three interrelated contexts
experiencing problems as PBL students, designing problems in response to
“The Professional Body Has Spoken” and using problems as teachers in their
own situations.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 47

 Terry BARRETT

Conclusion and implications for practice

Gijselaers (2005) challenges us to locate the nature of the problems we use

in our PBL practice from contrived to authentic. I argue that in order to
maximise the potential of PBL as a bridge between education and work and
to exploit the knowledge, professional development and identity dimensions
of problems then we must design problems that are at the far end of the au-
thentic side of the contrived-authentic spectrum of problems. Well-designed
problems are keys to maximising the learning potential of problem-based
learning (Gijselaers & Schmidt 1990; Schmidt & Moust 2000). This chap-
ter highlights major areas where problems conceptualised as liminal spaces
have implications for practice; namely: the design of problems, using prob-
lems from and/ or in the workplace and PBL education development.
In relation to problem design there are three issues; 1) writing problems
where the problem links with prior knowledge but demand new knowledge
to resolve it, 2) designing problems that integrate professional and personal
development, 3) having the size of problems big enough and their style real-
life so as to prompt professional action. In terms of the problem as a liminal
space betwixt and between old and new ways of knowing it is important to
design problems where the learner can make links between the problem and
their prior knowledge but also where they are challenged to acquire new
knowledge without which they cannot work towards resolving the problem.
Part of this is writing problems where the problem definition itself is not
obvious and evident but searching and debatable. This sets up antithetical
patterns of dialogue where knowledge about what the problem is about is
generated.
One of the ways of knowing is to integrate professional and personal de-
velopment. I would assert that one of the things that people are most in-
terested in is themselves and their personal development. Problems that
deliberately combine personal and professional development mean that
participants are getting two for the price of one. One of the values of well-
designed PBL problems is that they combine professional development with

48 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

A PROBLEM AS A PROVOKER OF SPACE BETWIXT AND BETWEEN OLD AND NEW WAYS OF KNOWING

personal development in ways that instil a high level of engagement of par-

ticipants with the problem.
My study suggests that in some situations larger problems that allow stu-
dents to work on problems over longer lengths of time with the size of the
problem real-life nature and the timescale mirroring the work place may
capitalise more fully on the professional action dimension of this liminal
space and the potential for learning from problems. In the module of this
study only two big problems were used for a fourteen -week module. This
stimulated some participants to move from using smaller problems to us-
ing larger problems with their own students. This is in the context of the
more common practice of using smaller problems in PBL, for shorter time
durations e.g. one problem lasting two weeks. PBL problems were originally
seen as a way of bringing professional practice into classrooms of higher
education. I think the challenge of the current wave of problem-based learn-
ing is to creatively find ways of writing problems that demand action in the
workplace. The professional action dimension of the liminal space in terms
of moving people on from habitual forms of professional action to forms of
professional action new to them is the major aims of problem-based learn-
ing. This is important when the future direction of PBL appears to be devel-
oping PBL in workplaces not just institutes of higher education. Exploring
the professional action dimension of problems will help us to maximise their
potential to bridge work and education, provided we have traffic going in
both directions on the bridge. Using problems from and/or in the workplace
as a basis for situated expansive action learning in a way that demands pro-
fessional action as well as reasoning is a way of maximising the professional
development dimension of problems as a liminal space for learning.
The implications for the concept of problems as provokers of liminal
spaces is the realisation that some effective PBL education development is
in fact about deliberately putting lecturers in a major liminal space of being
PBL students thereby encouraging new ways of knowing, being and acting.
I was doing this somewhat sub-consciously previously in my various educa-
tional roles but I would now do it with a focused intentionality. An under-
standing of the knowledge, dimension of problems as provokers of liminal

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 49

 Terry BARRETT

spaces highlights the importance of education development initiatives on

problem writing aimed at maximising their potential for learning.

50 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 Jyri Lindén
University of Tampere

Merja Alanko-Turunen
Helsinki Business Polytechnic

DECONSTRUCTING CONCEPTIONS OF
PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

From Plato, and throughout the classical age, there has been a tradition in
which knowledge is perceived as a hunt: “To know is to put to death […] To
know is to kill, to rely on death […] The reason of the strongest is reason by
itself. Western Man is a wolf of science.” (Serres 1983, 198.)

This article is based on an ongoing dialogue between the two writers. Jyri
Lindén is interested in theoretical curriculum issues in problem-based learn-
ing, while Merja Alanko-Turunen has studied the discursive resources busi-
ness students drew on while constructing a PBL tutorial site. A recurring
topic in these dialogues has been the discourses the PBL rhetorical commu-
nity draws on when constructing the concept of PBL: what is reconstructed
and what is silenced in these negotiations of PBL? This article aims to offer
some tentative answers to these questions by critically examining the theo-
retical basis and construction of the problem-based learning curriculum.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 51

 Jyri LINDEN & Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

It has been argued on numerous occasions that problem-based learning

is one of the most important pedagogical innovations in higher educations
in recent decades or even of the 20th century (e.g. Boud & Feletti 1977; Boud
2006). Even though PBL has gained popularity worldwide among faculties
of medicine, engineering, business and nursing, there are universities and
eminent researchers who are, in one a way or another, trying to disassociate
themselves from the mere concept of problem-based learning despite hav-
ing been strongly involved in its development (e.g. Boud 2006). They are not
denying its role as an effective approach to studies, but prefer using other
concepts or terms to describe learner-centred learning environments. Fur-
thermore, there are a number of social actors within problem-based learning
taking different stances towards PBL’s theoretical underpinnings, but they
nevertheless represent what could be called a rhetorical community, shar-
ing a general vision of PBL, albeit a vision that contains diverse ideological
and procedural assumptions (Savin-Baden 2003; cf. Sipos-Zackrisson 1999,
4). The concept of the PBL curriculum seems to have lost its credibility as a
logical theoretical framework. Some researchers have persistently tried to
sustain the construction of PBL by focusing on the practical development of
the curriculum.
We understand these signals to indicate that an intervention is needed to
challenge and deconstruct conceptions of PBL in order to be able to argue
more convincingly about its role and background, and position it among
other pedagogical approaches. We are writing this article from a moder-
ate critical perspective, and our position and values influence our choice of
material and how we represent it. These dilemmas are the starting points of
this article in which we wish to critically scrutinise and deconstruct con-
ceptualisations of PBL in general, and current thinking about the PBL cur-
riculum in particular. The idea of decontextualisation is based on a certain
understanding of the PBL curriculum. We see it as a construction, a con-
tinuum where each theoretical explanation has been part of its discursive
formation. By using the term deconstruction in this context, we do not sug-
gest a profound analysis of discourse practises, but refer rather to the idea of
decontextualising the dominant concepts. As Benno Galuser (1997, 151) puts

52 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DECONSTRUCTING CONCEPTIONS OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

it, “[T]he importance of deconstruction lies in trying to find out what lies
behind and at the origin of the concepts currently dominant. It means trying
to answer questions such as: to what do the terms used refer; how were they
generated; in response to what problems and issues did they arise; and whose
interests and needs do they serve?” We aim to be cautious in our efforts to
deconstruct conceptions of PBL since there are internal contradictions and
ambiguities in every story and text.
This article deals with three main ideas with regard to thinking about
the PBL curriculum. First, we reflect on and open up some of the discussions
associated with the problem-based curriculum. The idea is to take a brief
look at the general thinking and theoretical approach behind the problem-
based learning curriculum. In addition, we also support the argument that
the theoretical positioning of the curriculum has been somewhat random
and partly purpose-oriented.
The second part of the article focuses on the relationship between PBL,
the curriculum and the narratives of learning. We suggest that curriculum
theorisation combines metaphors of constructivist and humanistic theo-
ries of learning in an appealing way. This has led to an ideological conflict
that has consequences at the practical level of the curriculum. Moreover,
the current practical conception of the curriculum appears to transform the
disputed idea that learning processes are controllable. PBL curriculum theo-
risation has been contextualised closely to the narratives of constructivist
theories of learning. Practically speaking, the ideal has been an autonomous
learner who constructs her own knowledge. In the past few years, however,
there has been considerable debate about these root metaphors of construc-
tivism. This critique is targeted mainly at the ideology of constructivist
theories about learning. The reason, however, that we outline this critique
shortly, is that it is vital for future argumentation regarding the philosophi-
cal roots of PBL.
Finally, the last section of this paper considers the ways in which the cur-
rent contextualisation affects the future development of PBL. The interpre-
tation of PBL which frames the practical implementation of the PBL cur-
riculum determines the extent to which PBL can be understood either as

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 53

 Jyri LINDEN & Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

a technical method (almost as an eclectic practice), a critical emancipator

pedagogy, or a means of furthering the oppression it has led to in some edu-
cational contexts (e.g. Conway & Little 2001).

What is the curriculum anyway?

The current research tendency has been to compare PBL curricula with con-
ventional curricula. These studies have been criticised strongly as they seem
to assume that there is such a thing as blind intervention. The truth of the
matter is that it is impossible to attribute the success or failure of a curricu-
lum exclusively to the intervention. In these studies the focus has been on
whether PBL works in terms of end-goals, but the underlying theoretical un-
derpinnings of PBL curricula are rarely addressed (e.g. Dolmans, de Grave,
Wolfhagen & van der Vleuten 2005). Furthermore, in various discussions of
PBL, the interests of the world of work and the employability of the student
are foregrounded when arguing for the implementation of PBL curricula.
The value of institutions and the education they provide are mostly based on
the competencies they produce. These competencies are increasingly deter-
mined by global corporate markets, and they are represented by the needs of
local and global working environments. The demands of the world of work
have been described in such a way that it is no longer sufficient for a grad-
uated student to have knowledge of an academic subject; more important
are those skills which enhance her prospects of employment. Employability
skills are understood as employers’ preferences regarding employee values,
attitudes, personality and other personal qualities. The powerful role of in-
dustries in curriculum planning has raised questions, but nevertheless rep-
resentatives from the world of work on various curriculum advisory boards
(especially in professional education contexts such as business, engineering
and architecture) have gained a very important role and claim to have privi-
leged insight which qualifies them to pronounce upon a broad range of edu-
cational issues. These notions effectively reveal how education has become

54 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DECONSTRUCTING CONCEPTIONS OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

transformed into an industry, and curricula are seen as commodities to be

compared in a straightforward manner. Additionally, the combined effect
of competition and performativity is turning educational processes into a
matter of economic efficiency, rather than a matter of building societies (see
e.g. Autio 2003).
The concept of the PBL curriculum has, in essence, been based on the idea
that the curriculum is a practical solution to the issues of learning and teach-
ing. In order for a curriculum to be described as a PBL curriculum, it has had
to meet certain standards. The division between a PBL and a non-PBL cur-
riculum (or standard curriculum) has been clear and it has been made even
clearer by published comparative analyses and meta-analyses. The result of
this has been that institutions have focused on meeting practical demands in
order to show that they are doing things right. They have wanted to believe
that if the practical circumstances comply with those described in publica-
tions or in some other PBL institutions, results are guaranteed. The division
between PBL and non-PBL curricula is based on the idea that the curriculum
can be separated from the context of an educational institution. From this
perspective the curriculum is seen as a surface, a practical layer that links
goals and orientations to learning processes. Above all, the curriculum is
seen as a transferable tool which can basically be copied from one institution
to another.
This way of thinking about curricula is heavily critiqued by many recent
curriculum theorists. As suggested by Reid (1978), Kelly (2004, 21), and Pi-
nar (2004), the curriculum actually has a moral rather than a technical basis.
In order to understand the curriculum thoroughly, we need to keep in mind
that education is more than instruction or even more than individuals’ or
groups’ learning situations and their circumstances. What curricula at all
levels actually do, this also being the justification of this approach, is collect
and forward the moral, ethical, political and cultural atmosphere of society
and reveal their connections with social autobiography and national iden-
tity. Through these elements they actually determine how and what to teach.
(Värri & Ropo 2004, 58; Pinar 2004, 2.)

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 55

 Jyri LINDEN & Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

The theoretical positioning of PBL – anything seems to go?

Instead of basing an educational approach on just one philosophical theory

of learning, we argue that it has become acceptable for institutions to take
whatever set of educational theories seems to suit them best. It was inter-
esting to discover that Harold Barrows (2000, viii) claimed that neither the
work of Dewey, Bruner, nor Gagne inspired him in the development of PBL.
He argued that the introduction of the idea of small groups working with a
series of problems was practice-related, and that the pioneers at McMasters
University were not guided by educational psychology or cognitive science. It
was only after a few years of implementing the programme that they started
to study the outcomes of their approach and to relate it to other educational
methods and conceptions. It was only at this phase that the understanding
and development of problem-based learning required a positioning of the
approach within theoretical educational discussions.
Problem-based learning was first grounded in modern cognitive psy-
chology theory which suggests that learning is a constructive, not a receptive
process, in which the learner actively constructs new knowledge on the basis
of current knowledge. Information-processing theory, especially, was said to
underlie PBL (Schmidt 1983). Cognitive psychology is based strongly on a
positivist research paradigm and, as is well-known, the origins of problem-
based learning lie in medicine, which is also very positivist-orientated. It is
for this reason that the cognitive perspective has dominated the early years
of theorising problem-based learning, emphasising the role of the individual
as a knowledge acquirer and problem-solver.
Despite all the theoretical research undertaken by educational scientists,
the conceptualisation of educational psychology has maintained its position
in the mainstream of the PBL curriculum. The focus on the practical is-
sues of curriculum organising has also set the limits on theorising. While
there have been numerous attempts to conceptualise the curriculum, these
theories have been shaped to follow the guidelines of “good practice”. An
example of this is Ralph Tyler’s (1949) curriculum rationale. Without further
theoretical analyses, his conceptualisation of curriculum planning around

56 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DECONSTRUCTING CONCEPTIONS OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

goals, educational experiences, their organisation and evaluation has been

rediscovered as the framework of practical PBL curriculum planning. How-
ever, the Tyler rationale has its roots in theories of scientific management
and behaviourism, and is in fact ideologically at variance with humanist and
constructivist curriculum ideas (see e.g. Autio 2002; Kliebard 1995). In the
context of the PBL curriculum this seems not to be an issue, as long as the
model fits the practical orientation of the current curriculum.
As PBL was first introduced in medical education, it is important to ex-
plore how PBL has been challenged in that field. Some critical notions about
PBL have been voiced in medical education, especially with regard to its cog-
nitive emphasis. It has been seen as strengthening instrumental rationality
in the encounters between medical practitioners and patients. Medicine is
reduced to a task-orientated endeavour: to query and to examine a patient in
order to determine the diagnosis. In the name of efficiency no room is given
for value-orientated action. The interrogatory stance adopted in PBL is said
to present the medical practitioner’s world as the real world and the narrative
told by the patient is less important (e.g.Yamada & Maskarinec 2003; Milli-
gan 1999). Accordingly, Charlotte Silén (2000, 40–41) underlines the idea
that learning should not be reduced to mere problem-solving taking place
in the human mind which is what the cognitive perspective seems to em-
phasise. The social contexts of learning and the pragmatic aspects of group
interactions were often side-stepped in studies of problem-based learning
(e.g. Hmelo & Evensen 2000).

Grand narratives of the PBL curriculum

Problem-based learning forms an appealing mixture of student-oriented

and motivating goals connected to new type of constructivist curriculum
thinking. This is probably why it rapidly gained popularity among educa-
tional institutions. Despite the somewhat loose educational theory during
the early years of implementation, the general objectives of PBL curricula

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 57

 Jyri LINDEN & Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

were set high. In addition to forming deeper understanding of subject mat-

ter, goals such as self-directed learning, emancipation, critical thinking, re-
flective thinking, and acquisition of information were all added to the cur-
ricula. The origins of these goals were two-fold. On the one hand, they were
promoted by corporate institutions that demanded new qualifications from
their employees. On the other, cognitive research on student motivation and
meaningful learning, pinpointed the importance of these general objectives.
To teachers and curriculum planners this was somewhat confusing because
meeting the objectives required a totally new approach to the curriculum. To
find a scientific basis for the curriculum, sometimes at the expense of subject
matter, curriculum planners and researchers began to stress the humanistic
aspects of learning and instruction. Theoretically, this meant attaching the
narratives of humanistic psychology and experiential learning to the con-
structivist core of the curriculum. For example, the group process and forms
of self-evaluation, open-ended problems and the tutor’s work as a facilitator
were highlighted and brought to the practical process of curriculum plan-
ning.
The implementation of humanistic values into curriculum planning
processes caused a conflict in both students’ orientations and curriculum
practices. Many institutions reported serious cultural difficulties and resist-
ance. The inclusion of humanistic values in curriculum planning also con-
fused many teachers, revealing curriculum issues that had previously been
hidden. Although progress seemed rather promising at first, there was con-
siderable debate about PBL students’ content knowledge. For example Jerry
A. Colliver (2000) argued that a review of the literature, mainly in medicine,
revealed no convincing evidence that a PBL curriculum improves a student’s
knowledge base or clinical performance. The reason for this disappointing
conclusion, he stated, was not only in the debatable effectiveness of PBL,
but in the loose educational theory that provided very little scientific back-
ground to support curriculum formation. The reaction to these accusations
was to connect the PBL curriculum more tightly to ongoing constructivist
theorisation (e.g. Norman & Schmitd 2000).

58 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DECONSTRUCTING CONCEPTIONS OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

What is, then, the problem with this mainstream constructivist orienta-
tion mixed with humanistic premises? Humanistic and constructivist cur-
riculum theorisations are based on very different philosophical assumptions.
However, this level of the curriculum is often hidden because of the practical
orientation of curriculum development. It is partly this foundational differ-
ence, we argue, that makes curriculum theorisation somewhat confusing.
Practical curriculum development seems to form a pattern as far as orien-
tation is concerned. It usually begins by emphasising identity construction,
students’ own interests and open-ended goals. However, after some time,
the students usually demand a return to the old system, teachers report that
exam results are worse and there are general questions about an increased
need for resources. As a result, the practices tend to move towards more
controllable studies, problems with one right answer, and equal objectives.
After this process, the curriculum has echoes of rationalism with a strong
emphasis on social control. In many institutions, this has meant returning
to the traditional culture, with the exception that now the structure of the
curriculum seems different. As a result, instead of developing the curricu-
lum on a new basis, there is a pressure to adhere to the appearances of a
PBL curriculum. There is a danger, therefore, that the curriculum becomes
unconvincing to both students and teachers.
There have been great expectations that PBL curricula would solve prob-
lems, mainly concerning students’ motivation and theoretical understand-
ing. What is perhaps common to most of these curricula is the belief that
these problems can be sorted out by constructing a curriculum according to
scientific theorisations and practical findings. This work has proved endless
and exhausting, especially to teachers. In addition, and perhaps most impor-
tantly, this paradigm has left very little room for alternative contextualisa-
tions of the curriculum.
To conclude, the curriculum as prescription ideology values mechanistic
development over ideological considerations. It promotes the kind of think-
ing in which an institution is always two steps behind as far as practical
development is concerned. Teachers and curriculum developers seem to
think that almost every problem in student learning can be fixed by making

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 59

 Jyri LINDEN & Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

certain, well aimed changes in a curriculum. Not only does this orientation
make the curriculum work exhausting for teachers and students, but it also
promotes the idea that learning processes are controllable. As Ivor Goodson
(1990, 299) argues, this view of the curriculum develops from a belief that
we can dispassionately define the main ingredients of the course and then
cover them systematically.

The disputed promises of constructivism

PBL has recently been positioned within several genres of constructivist

learning: the socio-constructivist perspective (e.g. Raucent, Galand, Frenay,
Laloux, Milgrom, Vander Borght & Wouters 2005), the situated learning
framework (Hung 2002), and in Vygotsky’s sociocultural framework (Har-
land 2003; Loftus & Higgis 2003). What is perhaps shared by all these con-
textualisations is their overall approach to theorisation. This theorisation
can be called theory as idealised practice. People involved in curriculum
design “think up ways in which the existing goals of practice could be more
effectively attained. The theories produced are inspirational and represent
a kind of thought experiment” (Reid 1978, 17). They are based on “good
practices” and use benchmarking to find out “what works”. But, as has been
noted and reported by numerous institutions, the curriculum in practice
has its own logic, which is highly situational. Students and their orientations
differ, institutions differ and cultures vary. As Reid (1978, 17) puts it: “It is
hardly surprising that inspirational prescriptions often turn out badly and
fail to provide suitable guides for action.”
Generally speaking, PBL became fully acceptable to curriculum planners
when it was rooted in the metaphors of constructivist theories of learning.
This can be described as a process of reconstruction, where practices and
theory were mixed together with the premises and starting points of cogni-
tive psychology, rationalistic curriculum thinking, and instrumental goals
of education. Constructivist theories of learning neatly match the practices

60 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DECONSTRUCTING CONCEPTIONS OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

of PBL, since they promote the student’s individual knowledge construction

and simultaneously accept an individual and active learner as the implicit
goal. Many PBL curriculum planners shared the vision of an ideal educat-
ed person promoted by constructivism. She is an independent and critical
individual, ready for the international labour market, an enterprising soul,
who takes responsibility for her own competence. Needless to say, this ideal
was readily accepted by heads of departments and educational policy mak-
ers. The shared vision also connected companies, governmental and educa-
tional institutions. They all seemed to share these educational goals based
on a post-modern view of citizenship. PBL seemed like an ideal solution for
turning this educational thinking into reality.
C.A. Bowers (2005) argues that constructivist theories of learning make
false promises regarding students’ own knowledge construction and auton-
omy.
“And how can students be expected to construct their own knowledge
and thus emancipate themselves so that they can become autono-
mous individuals when they are exposed to a constant barrage of me-
dia messages scientifically engineered to influence the deepest levels
of their consciousness and self-identity? The tragedy is simply being
compounded by encouraging students to think they are construct-
ing their own ideas, meanings, and identity when this rootless form
of individualism is exactly what serves the interests of promoters of
consumerism. Students may learn to think critically about aspects
of their world, but they are not likely to understand that their own
subjectively limited knowledge and lack of skills will not provide a
real basis for resisting the forces of consumerism and environmental
destruction.” (Bowers 2005, 54)

 For example, Dave S. Knowlton (2003, 6) argues: “Namely, students cannot meet the
basic criteria of ‘an educated person’ unless they are adept at managing and solving
problems. From this statement emerges an allied mandate to faculty members in
higher education: Professors must engage students in PBL because to ignore prob-
lem-solving skills is to undermine the academy’s responsibility to develop educated
individuals.”

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 61

 Jyri LINDEN & Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

Every institution has a body of culturally important knowledge that it tries

to transfer to the students. The PBL curriculum, like all curricula, as a cul-
tural continuum includes a moral code hidden within its metaphors and
structures. As Bowers points out, there is a danger that the constructivist
metaphor of an autonomous learner separates students from this ongoing
cultural idea and leaves them alone with their identity work. At the same
time, teachers distanced from their previous relations with students will
not be able to help them to recognise the boundaries of their knowledge.
By highlighting an autonomous and independent learner as the ideal of the
curriculum, PBL can promote the same kind of individual knowledge con-
struction.
Simultaneously, the humanistic aspects of the curriculum may boost
the illusion of doing better without the cultural and historical background.
There is a danger of students losing their abilities to recognise the location
of the moral and social basis of their professional identity. Bowers calls this
a paradox of the constructivist theories of learning. For all the promises of
constructivism, young people do not seem to be becoming more aware, more
responsible and free, but more dependent on consumerism and markets. In-
stead of opening up to outside influences as autonomous actors, they have
turned inside, towards individualism and towards their own bodies.

From deconstruction to reconstruction – two possible futures

How are these examples regarding the theoretical basis of the PBL curric-
ulum related to curriculum work in practice? In other words, what is the
practical relevance of this kind of deconstruction? It has been apparent that
implementing PBL without thinking about its basis has led to difficulties
regarding the depth of students’ learning. Students seem to work hard, but
many teachers are convinced that their content knowledge is below the av-
erage. There seems to be a paradoxical situation as far as learning results
are concerned. Curriculum thinking based on theory as idealised practice

62 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DECONSTRUCTING CONCEPTIONS OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

and the ability to control students’ learning processes seem to produce su-
perficial knowledge and stable power relations. However, deep learning and
usefulness of knowledge are the very areas that originally supported the im-
plementation of PBL curriculum in many institutions.
To sum up, we argue that the ideological basis of the PBL curriculum,
despite its wide range of contextualisations, appears to have been reduced
mainly to the level of a method, and its curriculum theorisation to the level
of curriculum as prescription. These developments are mostly due to the lack
of theoretical research regarding the PBL curriculum. Accordingly, problem-
based learning will probably find its place among other widely used teaching
and learning methods, although some of its shortcomings have been pin-
pointed on several occasions. According to David Boud (2006), the main
problems with PBL are that one single model is used across the curriculum.
He also mentions that the pre-defined problems give a static picture of the
practice. Moreover, simulated problems may ignore the real challenges of
professional work. He also finds it problematic that the identity constructed
for the learner is that of a student rather than a practitioner.
However, some people will find this acceptable, because teachers and
curriculum planners can now focus their efforts on thinking how best to
turn goals into practice. This trend may even increase the popularity of PBL,
because the knowledge produced offers more accurate explanations of prac-
tical curriculum problems. As a practically valid methodology, PBL provides
useful answers to the questions of many institutions in an ever growing edu-
cational market. One indication of this trend is the traditional specialisation
of the research field regarding PBL. It has been divided into different curric-
ular areas (goal planning, problem design, the tutor’s work, and assessment),
where researchers in different areas seem to have no shared theoretical basis
or orientation.
This construction of PBL, however, is not sufficient to solve the problems
that exist between the curriculum and identity in the post-modern context
(Goodson 1998; 1999). As indicated in some academic studies (e.g. Savin-
Baden 2006), the starting points of PBL indicate a shift towards regarding
the curriculum first and foremost as place for identity work. Ronald Barnett

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 63

 Jyri LINDEN & Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

(2000, 258) emphasises that “[e]ach curriculum can be understood as a set

of more or less intentional strategies to produce – in each student – a set
of subjectivities.” He adds that, in the current circumstances, higher edu-
cation has to follow the “needs” of society by producing human capital for
the labour market even more extensively than before. What these needs are
and what ideologies they are based on are partly in the hands of curricu-
lum planners. A remaining question is whether PBL can have an alternative
form of reconstruction. What is there to be found in PBL after the process
of decontextualisation? The field of curriculum theory is anxiously look-
ing for practical solutions that would promote the curriculum as a narrative
construction (see Goodson 1999). This alternative idea would require that
PBL distance itself discursively from the grand metaphors of work-based
learning and constructivism. Those metaphors could be replaced by identity
construction as a curricular starting point.

64 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 PART II

CONSTRUCTING PBL CURRICULA

AS A LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

From the postmodernist point of view, PBL is a strategic answer to the com-
petency needs of an information society (Cowdroy 1994). These competen-
cies emphasise the skills of processing knowledge, communication, interac-
tion and problem solving. The shift from knowledge to knowing is reflected
in the demands for continuing learning and for the ability to develop or even
change a professional orientation repeatedly. Education has to be able to re-
spond in a new way to the demands of knowing. It is no longer enough that
education provides sufficient knowledge to be applied in professional prac-
tice; education itself has to be able to produce professional competencies.
PBL has been described as offering a constructivist (Schmidt & Moust
2000), an experiential (Savin-Baden 2000) and a situated practice field (Bar-
ab & Duffy 2000) approach to learning. The aim of PBL is to build a bridge
between education and work. The first and most essential characteristic of
PBL is described by Boud (1985, 13). “The principal idea behind problem-
based learning is … that the starting point for learning should be a problem,
a query or a puzzle that the learner wishes to solve”. Because the problems of
working life do not follow the divisions of science and academic subjects, it is
necessary to learn to solve problems as they appear in professional practice,
both in present and future communities of work. The problem, as a start-
ing point for the learning process, can be a scenario, a trigger, a case or a
structured, contextualised problem depending on the aim of learning. These
carefully designed problems should come from the reality of working life
and professional practice (Schmidt 1983; Barrows 1985; Woods 1994).
There is a long educational tradition behind problem-based learning.
The main idea can be traced back to John Dewey, one of the most influential

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 65

pragmatist philosophers of the last century. Dewey (1938) states that strate-
gies of learning can be characterised by inquiry and problem solving. Fac-
ing new situations, dealing with them and drawing conclusions is a directed
and controlled process of forming knowledge. In the process of learning, the
unstructured situation and the observation will be constructed and under-
stood, and the original situation will be converted into a new unified whole.
Hence, Silén (2001) argues that cognitive psychology has excessively domi-
nated the field of PBL. In her view, learning cannot be reduced to individual
problem solving. The roots of PBL are found in Deweyan pragmatism which
emphasises the process of learning, not just the outcome.
PBL is based on two transformative principles – social interaction and
self-directed learning. The learning and problem solving process is guided
during the tutorials; students learn to acquire and construct knowledge, and
gradually become self-directed learners. PBL is essentially different from tra-
ditional approaches, which assume that learners have to have the knowledge
required to approach a problem before they start to work with the problem
(Boud 1985). PBL tutorials, particularly, offer students a challenging envi-
ronment for testing their own understanding and examining the under-
standing of the others. One of the central questions around which recent
research on learning and teaching has concentrated is how social interaction
mediates the construction of knowledge in a learning situation. Hence, it
has become important to understand the kinds of opportunities particular
interaction patterns and social activities offer to students’ learning and the
possible obstacles there may be to effective problem solving and peer group
learning.
In PBL the learning and problem solving processes are guided in the tu-
torials; students learn to acquire and construct knowledge collaboratively
and gradually become self-directed learners. The group is a resource for
learning and it offers a mirror for individual reflection in relation to one’s
own actions, interaction in the group, the substance of the problem in hand
and theoretical aspects of the phenomenon. Learners have considerable con-
trol over and responsibility for their choice regarding which issue to pursue,

66 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

the identification of individual learning needs and the selection of resources
they use.
Knowledge is not simply material for memorising, but an object for
observation, analysis, integration and synthesis. The co-construction of
knowledge through dealing with problems is one factor in the process of de-
veloping multi-professional and scientific competencies. Individual learning
(independent knowledge acquisition) and collaborative learning (knowledge
construction in tutorials) are separate processes in PBL. However, together
they form a comprehensive process of developing professional knowing and
competence. In the tutorial, the teacher acting as a tutor has an important
role in facilitating the process of constructing knowledge.
Tutoring is used not only to coach students in professional techniques,
it is also to help develop the competencies needed in the professional life,
such as cooperating with different personalities, leading teams and projects,
taking responsibility for one’s own and others’ learning, producing and us-
ing knowledge, acquiring and allocating resources and so on. This creates
a challenge for the teachers’ own professional development, too. Teachers
learn to cross the boundaries of traditional teaching practices and meth-
ods. They also learn to facilitate individual and group learning processes,
to guide problem solving within the group, to utilise group dynamics as a
resource for shared learning and to promote the processes of professional
development in the context of education. (Neville 1999.)
As a resource and catalyser of learning, the nature of knowledge is con-
textual. It is not only conceptual, symbolic or formal fact, it is embedded as
potential in objects, artefacts, human action or in the structure of an organi-
sation. This is why the education should teach “reading” of the context of
a future profession – the complex knowledge environment of work (Karila
& Nummenmaa 2001; Poikela & Poikela 2001). Although this may appear
rather chaotic, the development of this kind of competence requires an or-
ganised curriculum.
A curriculum normally consists of starting points, aims and principles
formed by the particular ideology of the era in which it is created. It forms a
general reference for discussion and action in the field of education. The ba-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 67

sic principles of a curriculum also determine how the learning environment
is organised. (Goodson 1989; Bernstein 1990; Tompkins 2001). The essential
characteristics of a PBL curriculum are:

a) the organisation of the curriculum around problems that are relevant

to desired learning outcomes, rather than around topics or academic
disciplines;
b) the creation of conditions that promote small-group work, self-direct-
ed learning, independent study, contextual knowledge, critical think-
ing, life-long learning and self-evaluation;
c) the construction of a student-centred learning environment.

The aims and specific research questions concerning the practical applica-
tions of the PBL curriculum and learning environments on different levels
of education were:

• How is knowledge constructed in the PBL tutorial discussions?

• How do students learn within the PBL curriculum as compared with
subject-oriented curricula when constructing knowledge?
• How do students learning within the PBL curriculum describe their
learning experiences and processes compared with those pursuing sub-
ject-oriented curricula?
• How do PBL students describe and evaluate their own processes of
knowing, learning, problem solving and adopting roles in tutorials?
• How can a web-based learning environment be organised in a PBL cur-
riculum and what advantages/disadvantages will using this technology
create?
• How can learning at work be organised as part of a PBL curriculum
and integrated as a part of a tutorial?
• How does the PBL strategy enhance transformative learning, critical
thinking and emancipatory processes in teacher education?

These questions will be analysed and discussed in the following articles:

68 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 Esa Poikela and Sari Poikela ‘Problem-based curriculum – theory, devel-
opment and design’.
Timo Portimojärvi ‘Synchronous and asynchronous communication in
online problem-based learning’.
Marja-Leena Lähteenmäki ‘Constructing the physiotherapy curriculum
– reflective dialogue between education and working life’.
Merja Alanko-Turunen ‘Working out a text: PBL tutorial participants as
knowledge constructors in international business studies’.
Helvi Kaksonen ‘The repertoires of tutorial discussion as resources of col-
laborative knowledge construction’.
Satu Öystilä ‘The significance of group dynamics in problem-based learn-
ing – experiences of PBL tutors in higher education’.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 69

70 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 Esa Poikela
University of Lapland

Sari Poikela
University of Lapland

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULA
– theory, development and design

Problem-based learning has often been understood simply as a method of

learning. What distinguishes PBL as a teaching technique, as an education-
al strategy, or even as a philosophy are the changes in the whole learning
environment that the approach requires. Defining PBL as an educational
philosophy involves the holistic consideration of a number of elements: or-
ganisational context, curriculum content and design, and the teaching and
learning approach, including methods of assessment and evaluation.
Although problem-based learning has been investigated within the con-
text of education, the theoretical basis of PBL is closely connected to learning
in the work place. PBL runs the same risks as any other progressive peda-
gogical idea: the baby may be thrown out with the bath water. PBL can fail,
for instance, because of the way in which it is applied, or because no changes
have been made at the curriculum level or because a system of assessment
and evaluation has not been developed in response to the new ideas about
learning. In this article we examine the contextual basis of PBL and describe
prerequisites for the development of PBL curricula: the functioning of cur-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 71

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

ricula as knowledge and learning environments, the construction of inte-

grated PBL-curricula and the design of appropriate problems.
The publication of Herbart’s Science of Education during the early 1800s
marks a turning point in the development of curriculum theory. This devel-
opment is characterised by a distinction between the Anglo-Saxon curricu-
lum tradition and the German tradition of the lehrplan. The basic difference
between the two approaches is that the former emphasises the functional
pedagogical system, while the latter emphasises the administrative and di-
dactic system. The roots of western curriculum philosophy can trace back
to Descartes’ rationalism, Locke’s hermeneutics and Kant’s dualism. During
the 1950s the positivist-empirical ideas of science appeared in the form of a
goal-oriented rational curriculum posited by Tyler. (Autio 2002.)
Contrary to conventional ideas about the curriculum, problem-based
pedagogy and the problem-based curriculum is founded on problems which
function as starting points for learning. Learning is organised around prob-
lems and this is the main principle of pedagogical action, rather than the
delivery of knowledge and information during lessons. In other words, the
process of problem solving governs the kind of information needed, as well
as the substance of the learning. There are some similarities between the
Anglo-Saxon curriculum tradition and problem-based learning. For exam-
ple, both emphasise student-centred learning and the importance of interac-
tion. However, there are also clear differences: with problem-based learning,
problems do not simply support didactic teaching, instead the whole cur-
riculum is organised around problems and problem themes.
The problem-based curriculum creates both knowledge and the learning
environment in which learners operate. For teachers it offers an effective
tool for facilitating learning and producing learner competence. However,
the use of this tool demands collegial cooperation rather than the tradition
of working alone. In this article, we explore the epistemological underpin-
nings of problem-based pedagogy, the strategic and practical elements of
the problem-based curriculum and the basis of problem design within the
framework of renewing learning and of the teaching culture.

72 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULUM

Philosophical remarks regarding curriculum theory

Curriculum theory can be explored through a series of world views known

as formist, mechanist, organicist and contextual. According to Pettigrew
(1985) the aim of a hypothesis is to create the order out of chaos and each
idea has its own basic metaphor. The metaphor for formism is similarity in
categorising phenomena and ideas. Mechanism, on the other hand, seeks
permanent causalities between phenomena, creating a system that functions
like a machine. The metaphor for organist theory is harmony and a sys-
tematic view of the world. Contextualism differs from organist theory in its
focus of time, and its metaphor is that of historical event.
The similarity of curricula reveals notions of formism. The state’s educa-
tional administration ensures the same level of education and similar curric-
ula in all schools. This is achieved through setting given norms and through
school inspections. This kind of thinking has been partially abandoned as
the state nowadays defines only the basics of curricula and delegates the
power of decision making to a local level.
Mechanist thinking is expressed in the way the qualifications demanded
by the state and by places of work are equated with the content of curricula.
These qualifications have to be renegotiated from time to time because edu-
cation has a tendency to lag behind social developments and especially be-
hind developments in working life. As a result, the teacher-specific parts of
curriculum documents are usually updated every two or three years.
Organicist thinking integrates the curriculum, a system consisting of
pieces, into a whole entity. An integrated curriculum is a structure formed of
teaching modules which comprise different kinds of contents and skills. The
systemic structure also enables cooperation between teachers because mod-
ules can seldom be left to the responsibility of a single teacher. At their best,
the curricula of higher education achieve the level of systemic design. Un-
fortunately, they all too often degenerate to the level of mechanist or formist
planning. (cf. Pettigrew 1985; Poikela, E. 1999.)
Contextualism implies that both the common and the specific context
of pedagogical actions are taken account in curriculum design. The starting

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 73

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

points for curriculum design are the processes of learning and knowing that
lead to competence. Mere similarities between qualifications or the regula-
tion of structures are not enough. For instance, universities are required to
express their excellence, profile and mastery of quality. The core idea of the
so-called Bologna process is precisely this: to recognise core, basic and spe-
cific competencies demanded by disciplines and professions, and to make
visible the processes of learning and teaching which produce functional
competence.

PBL curricula as knowledge and learning environments

Pedagogical approaches based on problem solving may differ in several ways.

Problems are used as criteria in order to select content and learning meth-
ods in problem-oriented curricula. Teaching may still be traditional and real
changes are not made. A curriculum based on problem-solving concentrates
on techniques of rational problem solving and students are trained in using
such techniques. Because the former is too broad and the latter is too nar-
row for the needs of professional and scientific education, the problem-based
curriculum lies between them. (Ross 1991; see also Savin-Baden & Wilkie
2004.)
Miller and Seller (1985) analysed the quality of curricula according to
meta-orientations of knowledge; transmission, transaction and transfor-
mation. Transmission describes the one-way delivery of knowledge from
teacher to student. The educational argument for this is found in behaviour-
ist psychology. Transaction describes the two-fold nature of knowledge as
a dialogue between teacher and student. The basis for this approach lies in
humanist psychology. Transformation is connected to the purpose of renew-
ing and changing knowledge and the result is personal and social change.
The meta-orientation of the problem-based curriculum at least achieves the
transactional level because PBL is based on communication within a group

74 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULUM

and the facilitation of learning. PBL also creates opportunities for transfor-
mation and empowerment. (Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 1999.)
The problem-based curriculum can be understood as a knowledge and
learning environment which can be researched as wholeness from many
points of view: psychological, technological, cultural and pragmatic. Psy-
chological factors are connected to hidden beliefs as to how individuals gain,
organise and use their knowledge and competence. Technological expecta-
tions focus on actions, methods and infrastructures of the learning environ-
ment created by advanced technological possibilities such as virtual learning
environments. A cultural perspective reflects existing educational beliefs,
organisational values and roles. Pragmatism provides a bridge between the-
ory and reality. (Hannafin & Land 1997; Poikela, S. & Portimojärvi 2004.)
In the context of PBL, knowledge is not only an object for memorising, it
is a subject and tool for observing, analysing, integrating and synthesising.
The construction of shared knowledge starts from facing the problem, and it
is an essential element for producing scientific and multi-professional com-
petencies. Independent knowledge acquisition (individual learning between
tutorials) and shared knowledge construction (during reflective discussions
in tutorials) are separated chronologically. Together these processes lead to
deep learning and competence.
The PBL curriculum can be simplified in the form of a proto-model (see
Figure 1). The core or dynamo of learning is the tutorial, namely a group
session of 7–9 students and a teacher acting as a tutor.
Tutorials are held once or twice a week with the same participants dur-
ing the whole study module or semester. Another fundamental element is
a self-directed study period between tutorials when students utilise several
kinds of information resources. Common and shared information seeking
focuses on theoretical knowledge resources. The aim is to reach sufficient
understanding to allow closer exploration of the phenomena at hand. Be-
sides this, supplementary information seeking can be shared between par-
ticipants. This can be done by interviewing experts, seeking information on
the internet or acquiring some other kind of knowledge based on experi-
ence. (Poikela, E. 2001.)

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 75

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

Work life
Workplaces Experts

Problems
Training Media

Exercises Internet
Tutorial

Lessons Library

Self directed studying

FIGURE 1. The PBL-curriculum as a knowledge and learning environment

The result of this new way of integrating shared and self-study is to reduce
time spent in lectures and to increase time for independent study and infor-
mation seeking. Lectures become a learning resource like any other type of
study, including professional literature, training periods and exercises. New
kinds of demands are placed on the quality of lectures and exercises – they
need to be tailored and timed according to the process of problem solving.
New demands are placed on the qualities of learning materials, too. For
instance, the web-based material available needs to be useful for problem
solving. Useful material, relevant literature and established theories need si-
multaneous updating. The importance of material produced by the students
themselves increases because the learning processes are shared and coopera-
tive.
The PBL-curriculum requires broad cooperation among staff in various
positions within the organisation. Teachers cannot handle the curriculum
by themselves because PBL demands collaboration in planning and imple-
menting the teaching and learning program.

76 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULUM

The problem solving process

The process of problem solving may be structured in different ways. One

of the most famous models was developed by Barrows at the University of
McMaster, Canada (e.g. Barrows 1985; see also Barrett 2005). The other well-
known model is Schmidt’s (1983) “seven jump” model from the University
of Maastricht, the Netherlands and its variations in many universities. The
cyclical model developed at the University of Linköping, Sweden has been
applied in many places, too. For this reason it is not possible to identify a
single model of PBL (Poikela, S. 2003; Savin-Baden & Howell Major 2004;
Barrett 2005).
Sometimes PBL is defined simply as a method. For example, Fenwick and
Parsons (1998) argue that students might become “blind problem solvers”
and PBL may even create an impression of a fragmented, problem-centred
world. They claim that use of PBL may increase the development of closed
professional elite. Helle, Tynjälä and Vesterinen (2004) emphasise the supe-
riority of project-learning by stating that PBL is more like practice without
connection to a real professional world. In such cases it seems that PBL is
understood only as a method, a technique or exercise aimed at increasing
interaction and autonomy in a restricted classroom environment.
PBL offers a procedure for structuring and facilitating learning and group
processes based on problem solving. Carefully designed, work life related
problems create a solid base for learning (Poikela, S. 2003, 144). The tutor
facilitates the problem solving process during tutorials lasting two, three or
a maximum of four hours at a time.
During phase 1, students have to find a shared understanding of perspec-
tives and conceptions of the problem. The purpose of the second phase is to
elicit and elaborate former knowledge about the problem phenomena. This
is achieved by brainstorming ideas about possible ways of dealing with the
problem. The third phase starts with connecting similar types of ideas to-
gether into separate categories and naming them. During the fourth phase,
the most important and actual problem areas (named categories) are negoti-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 77

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

ated. The fifth phase culminates in the first tutorial session, the aim being
that students form the learning task and the objects of study.
The sixth phase is a period of information seeking and self-study be-
tween tutorials. Students work both alone and in small groups depending on
the learning tasks and aims. The second tutorial begins the seventh phase.
It is a practical test for using new knowledge. Freshly acquired knowledge is
used to tackle the learning task and applied in constructing the problem in
a new manner.
New knowledge will be synthesised and integrated at a more advanced
level and it provides a basis for learning to be continued. During the eighth
phase, the whole process of problem solving and the learning process is clar-
ified and reflected in the light of the original problem. The assessment is

Problem solving process

- continuing
1. Problem
– setting 2. Brainstorm
– free association

8. Clarification 3. Systematization
– comparing with Assessment
– structuring
original problem

4. Selection
7. Knowledge integration – thematization
– construction 5. Learning task
– formulation
6. Knowledge acquisition
– self study

Experts Lessons Internet

Training Library
Workplaces Exercises Media

FIGURE 2. Problem-based learning cycle and knowledge acquisition

78 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULUM

described in the middle of Figure 2. It is part of every single phase, but it is

necessary that the tutorial closes with a period of feedback and assessment
discussion. It means that students get necessary information and feedback
about their own learning, group processes and problem solving skills.
Students’ information seeking skills may require a great deal of improv-
ing when starting with PBL. It is not enough that tutors simply ask students
to go and find information from the library or the internet. It is essential
that tutorials include discussion about where the most relevant information
could be sought and what the most important resources are. Acquiring in-
formation and becoming familiar with different kinds of information envi-
ronments needs practice and assistance. Librarians and informants are spe-
cialists whose help is needed, too. The importance of virtual and web-based
environments is increasing as forums for guiding courses and for finding,
sharing and evaluating materials. (Poikela, S. & Portimojärvi 2004.)

Constructing problem-based curricula

Savin-Baden and Howell Major (2004) categorise different models of PBL

curricula. They describe “the PBL funnel approach” and “PBL on a shoe-
string” as examples of implementation on a macro level. This means that
individual teachers are trying to experiment with PBL in their own courses
or modules within traditional subject-based curricula. The so-called “patch-
work PBL models” are described as two-track, one track based on lectures
and traditional teaching and the other based on group work which partly
follows the ideas of PBL. An integrated curriculum allows PBL to be imple-
mented on a macro level across the entire curriculum. A cross-disciplinary
approach is the underlying strategy, allowing problems to be linked with
each other. It is a strategy for transforming curricula. At its best, it leads
to fundamental pedagogical changes, the redirecting of teachers’ work and
a transformation of the whole learning culture (Barrett 2005; Chen 2000;
Poikela, S. 2003).

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 79

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

PBL does not follow the academic logic of subjects but the logic of prob-
lem solving within shared and individual learning processes. Figure 3 clari-
fies why it does not make sense to apply PBL within single subjects. Starting
PBL within separate subjects rapidly leads to a situation in which problems
are not challenging enough because they are designed simply within the
framework of one subject. It also precludes the possibility of developing a
method of assessment which is in harmony with problem-based learning.
This ultimately results in “ostensible PBL” which does not satisfy anyone.
The problem-based curriculum is organised on the basis of problems and
problem themes creating core competence (for example, academic or general
professional competence). Time, place and other situational factors need to
be considered during the problem solving process. Lectures, exercises and
other types of teaching are carried out as before, but their timing and con-
tent is designed according the needs of problem solving. Implementation of
PBL usually leads to diminishing time for face-to-face teaching because stu-
dents themselves acquire a remarkable deal of information that was earlier
delivered in the form of lectures. However, students need more guidance
with independent studying, especially at the beginning of their studies.
An integrated PBL curriculum makes it possible to produce functional
core competence (C) related to a discipline or profession. At the same time,

CONTEXT
C = Core process, core competence,
integrated core substance, problem
S E themes and problems
B B = Basic competence, basic substance,
C P knowledge and skills of the
W professional field

I E = Expertise, specialisation, specific tasks

of the profession

SOCIETY S, P, I, W = Subjects, projects, internships,

WORK LIFE
working periods

FIGURE 3. Integrated PBL curriculum

80 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULUM

basic competence (B) related to professional knowledge and skills are devel-
oped. In other words, students learn to learn, to acquire and use knowledge,
to understand complex relations of interaction, to solve problems together
and independently, and to utilise different resources and technologies. This
creates a solid basis for the learning expertise (E) needed at work. (Poikela,
E. 2005; Poikela, S. 2003.)

Designing curricula

Problem-based pedagogy is often misunderstood simply as an activity un-

dertaken in tutorials, and the requirement to negotiate the schedule and con-
tent of different disciplines is not understood. Nevertheless, PBL demands
considerable cooperation between tutors facilitating tutorials and teach-
ers responsible for their subjects. Problem-based curricula demand a high
standard regarding the problems used as starting points for learning. The
purpose of problems is not only to integrate disciplines or subjects, but also
to achieve the pedagogical core process of producing learning and compe-
tence. It is the foundation of lifelong learning and of continuing professional
development amidst the changing conditions of working life. (Barrett 2005;
Poikela, S. 2003; Savin-Baden & Howell Major 2004.)
Problem-based curricula offer a strategy for developing the functional
competencies working life expects from trained novices. This means, for ex-
ample, that academic skills of research and argumentation will be drawn
upon in order to manage the varied tasks demanded by complex work envi-
ronments. Professionals graduating from polytechnics are expected to have
the ability to apply knowledge and act as creative problem solvers in practi-
cal work situations. Trained workers from vocational institutes are expected
to work initiatively according the rules and to be able to cooperate in the
work community.
Students who have chosen their field do not only study techniques or
substance, they construct their personal and professional identity, too. Two

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 81

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

fundamental starting points need to be considered when designing PBL cur-

ricula: firstly, that students have a need to construct a professional identity
related to their discipline; secondly, that society and employers have a need
for a civilised and competent work force (see Figure 4).
It is necessary to clarify what of kind of competence and knowing is re-
quired when starting PBL pedagogy. It is essential to define novice compe-
tence when planning the training program. Usually, the goals of exams, study

STUDENT COMPETENCE
- learning PBL curriculum process - profession
- identity - expertise

Start of curricula The goal of examination

studying – semesters – good novice
knowing?

Evaluation
The aims of studies
study program
– knowing for the next
– study modules
study stage?

Assessment
The objects of teaching and
study module learning
– tutorials, designing problems – skills and knowledge students
Feedback – knowledge acquisition: lessons, need to achieve?
exercises, independent study etc.

Reflection
tutorial Learning tasks
– problem solving – what students have to do to benefit own
– facilitating learning and shared learning?
– assessment of learning
process

timetable Student’s work?

1. y 2. y 3. y 4. y Teacher’s work?

weekly schedule Tutorials, 2–4 h 5– 10%

Teaching 35– 50%
Mon Tue Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun Independent study 40– 60%
Facilitation and assessment 20– 30%
100–150%

FIGURE 4. Designing PBL curriculum

82 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULUM

modules, teaching and learning are set deductively on the basis of more gen-
eral goals of education. This kind of approach does not provide a solid basis
for PBL curricula. The goals of learning have to be reproduced inductively
through problems and problem themes and these need to be connected to
deductively set goals and aims regarding education. In other words, the PBL
curriculum is designed abductively, on the one hand from the point of view
of wholeness and on the other from parts. So, the PBL curriculum may be
understood as a process involving participants (students), actors (teachers),
owners (departments or units) and interest groups (society, employers).
Planning semesters, study modules, learning modules, tutorials and
problems needs continuous evaluation because the focus of collaborative
design is in the curriculum process and its ability to produce competence
for studying further and for professional capabilities needed in the future.
Even an excellent novice competence cannot be compared to the expertise of
experienced professionals. That means it is essential to evaluate what kind of
competence and knowing working life requires and what kind of core, basic
and special competencies education is able to produce within the period of
a few academic years.
One of the most important tasks of the tutorial is to direct what students
need to do together and independently in order to achieve learning results.
This is more important than the traditional approach in which teachers’
lecturing separates substance or attempts to teach contents and skills when
they cannot be used. Students need to learn skills of reflection, as well as self
and shared assessment because these are the means of producing ‘learning
to learn’ skills (Silén 2000; 2004). The knowledge and skills necessary for
problem solving must be obtained when they are needed and learning must
be verified with the help of well-focused and appropriately timed feedback.
The importance of process assessment is emphasised through the use of
peer assessment and tutor feedback in tutorials. Students become actors and
owners of the assessment and evaluation process. This helps them become
interested in their learning results and their level of knowing. Nevertheless,
those organising PBL have to be prepared for continuous evaluation of the

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 83

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

competencies needed in working life, now and in the future. (Poikela, E.

2004; Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 2004.)
Implementing problem-based learning leads to re-evaluation of teacher
and student workloads. Reduced contact teaching means that the need to fa-
cilitate learning increases. New ways of defining teachers’ work descriptions
are needed. The amount of lecturing hours is not crucial, but the varied con-
tent of work over short and long periods is. Shared planning and cooperation
with colleagues becomes an indispensable tool in the application of the PBL
curriculum. Students’ contributions to learning may vary strongly depend-
ing on previous levels of knowing, experience and talent. Skilful facilitation
within the PBL tutorial creates an atmosphere of shared learning and stu-
dents can lean on one another during different phases of learning.
The time needed for tutorials is only a small part of the total study time.
However, the tutorials’ power for organising learning is surprisingly effec-
tive. This is why the problem solving process in tutorials can be character-
ised as a dynamo or an engine that is the driving force for the whole PBL
curriculum. Conversely, if the engine is not working well, the whole system
suffers.

Problem design

Why use the term problem when it has a generally negative connotation in
everyday language? In English the concept of problem-based learning has
been accepted, but the word “problem” still has many roundabout expres-
sions. For example, integrated learning, case-based learning, pathway mod-
els, context-based learning or solution-focused approaches are used (see
Chen, Cowdroy, Kingsland & Ostwald 1994; Poikela, S., Lähteenmäki &
Poikela, E. 2002). The endless variation of terms serves to make the concept
more obscure, rather than clarifying what PBL is all about.
The basic unit of the problem-based curriculum is the problem. It can be
described as a puzzling phenomenon that might not have a clear or single

84 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULUM

solution. Nevertheless, the concept of problem is perhaps the most misun-

derstood or underestimated factor in PBL. The problem in PBL comes close
to the concept of the research problem that is not connected with simple
solutions or the negative connotations implied in everyday language. Mar-
getson (1993, 20–22) defines a problem as a description of a situation at a
certain moment involving an option of development or improvement. Every
kind of creative task requires naming, clarifying and solving problems be-
fore achieving goals and outcomes becomes possible. Types of problem may
include:
The scenario. This may include a wider and longer perspective of problem
solving that extends beyond the single cycle which occurs between the first
and second tutorials. The following cycles may focus the learning task on
problem areas that have not have yet been covered.
The case. This frames problem solving more precisely under certain con-
ditions and lasts one cycle. It means the problem is set during the first tuto-
rial and it is solved in the second tutorial. After this a new problem is set
during the same tutorial.
The trigger or starting point. Here the aim is to awake interest, ideas and
viewpoints regarding a situation. It might be a picture without words, a short
video or audio clip, a drama or other performance.
Typically, the problem is a description of a case or a starting point remi-
niscent of a situation encountered in working life. The background for the
problem always lies in real life phenomena and in situations of professional
practice. Dealing with problems requires information from different disci-
plines and professional areas. Knowledge linked with a certain discipline
becomes evident when it is needed in problem solving. In other words, the
same problem may have dimensions within natural, social and human sci-
ences. Knowledge may be obtained from many fields of science and practice.
Values and ethical issues need to be taken account, too. Problem solving
never starts from a complete blank, but from identifying former knowledge
and experience.
The scenario is a problem with a wide and long-term perspective. As a
starting scenario or as problem theme it can consist several sub-scenarios,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 85

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

triggers or cases (see Figure 5). Single problems steer students’ learning and
studying based on knowledge acquisition from different resources (litera-
ture, lectures, projects, exercises, work periods). Figure 5 depicts the logic of

Problem theme Problems Studying and teaching

– basic scenario – sub scenario – studying integrated in
– trigger problem solving process
– case
A-scenario 1. Problem Knowledge acquisition
– lessons, books etc.
– library, internet
– projects, exercises
– training periods etc.
2. Problem Knowledge acquisition
– etc.
–
–
–
N. Problem Knowledge acquisition
– etc.
–
–
–
B-skenaario 1. Problem Knowledge acquisition
– etc.
–
–
–
N. Problem Knowledge acquisition
– etc.
–
–
–
N- scenario 1. Problem Knowledge acquisition
– etc.
–
–

FIGURE 5. Problem design in integrated PBL curricula

86 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULUM

problem design where problem themes or scenarios correspond to the aims

of study modules or courses.
With problem design it is necessary to take into account what students
are able to do between weekly tutorials. Problems cannot be too loaded; nei-
ther can they be too simple. If a problem is too demanding, knowledge ac-
quisition is difficult or even impossible within the period of a single week.
This may lead to postponing the second tutorial for too long a period. If a
problem is too simple, it does not offer sufficient challenge for the develop-
ment of knowledge acquisition and study skills. If the answer to a problem
can be found directly from a textbook, it becomes simply the problem-cen-
tred teaching that is used to support traditional lecturing. So, the problem
has to be the right size to challenge, motivate and engage both shared and
individual learning. (Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 1999.)
In the following, we present a general structure and guidelines for prob-
lem design. The aim is to offer a basis for developing discipline- or profes-
sion-specific guides for tutors and experts designing PBL problems (see Fig-
ure 5). The presentation format of a problem has to vary and it needs to
be sufficiently complicated, as students become bored with problems “that
smack of textbooks”. The aim of the problem is to initiate learning and to act
as a challenge to action. We have modified a list based on our experiences as
teacher trainers in PBL. The list helps with the early stages of problem design
and serves as a checklist which helps to evaluate the problems being used.

• What is the background of the problem?

• How does it relate to work and professional practices?
• When is the problem typically encountered?

• What kinds of skills and knowledge are needed in problem solving?

• What kinds of action are needed in the problem situation?

• What is the student expected to learn during the process of problem

solving?
• What kinds of learning results are aimed for?

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 87

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

• What characteristics of the problem situation match best with learn-

ing goals?
• What are the most appealing items of the problem that will awaken
students’ interest in learning and problem solving?

Writing the problem

Writing a problem requires careful planning and help is needed from ex-
perts in working life, colleagues and students alike. The feedback from stu-
dents is the final test for a functioning problem. When writing a problem,
pay attention to the following:

1. Try to use the present tense.

2. Describe the context: time, place, actors and roles.
3. Be clear and avoid information that is easy to misunderstand.
4. Do not write a list of questions.
5. Write in an active way – the aim of the problem is to challenge ac-
tion.
6. Test the problem with students or at least with your colleagues.
7. Make corrections or rewrite if necessary.
8. Write guidelines for tutors. Also do this when tutoring yourself be-
cause it secures the future of PBL.

Developing the curriculum and designing effective problems is a challeng-

ing task. Single problems have to be bound together both with the goals of
the study module and the time used for study. Designing and testing prob-
lems takes time – do not attempt to do it the night before. One problem
cannot cover everything, but it has to be sufficiently wide and challenging.
Framing and matching problems is difficult, too. At first, problems are often
either too transparent or too full of detail because teachers are afraid that
students will not form the right idea about the content. In turn, students

88 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBLEM-BASED CURRICULUM

become frustrated if they immediately notice where the solution lies. The
process of problem solving loses its power and meaning if it is done only
because the curriculum demands it. (Poikela, S. 2003.)

Conclusions

We have described the theoretical basis of problem-based pedagogy and

the process of designing PBL curricula and problems. There are several ap-
proaches to teaching that have problem solving as a starting point. Imple-
mentations at a micro level do not usually change the curriculum. Macro
level implementations, which are applied simultaneously across the entire
curriculum, mean that difficulties are encountered in one go. The small units
that comprise the traditional curriculum can be gathered and restructured
according to the logic of problem-based learning and problem solving. How-
ever, most Finnish PBL applications have followed a step-by-step strategy
with the result that advances and difficulties are faced one after another. In
this case, a strong goal-oriented concept of PBL is needed. So, what is a good
starting point for applying PBL? The object of implementation and develop-
ment should be a cross-disciplinary and multi-professional study module of
appropriate size that is easy to develop once it has been encountered.
Only by changing the curriculum can problem-based pedagogy be used
as a stable strategy within an organisation. The change is fundamental af-
fecting every single part of the curriculum, including teachers’ professional
identity and work habits. This is why the process of change is very demand-
ing. In our view, teachers first need to understand basic principles and have
initial trials in applying PBL. After this they will begin to worry about their
abilities in facilitating group processes and learning. During the next phase
they will begin to understand the importance of assessment and evaluation
and its relationship to the new curriculum. If the methods of assessment do
not follow the principles of PBL, the new pedagogy loses credibility. Students
contribute to studying that is assessed and evaluated. They behave according

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 89

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

to the way in which they have been assessed and according to their role in
the assessment and evaluation process. This is one of the biggest challenges
in developing problem-based pedagogy.

90 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 Timo Portimojärvi
University of Tampere

SYNCHRONOUS AND ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION

IN ONLINE PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

In this article I will examine the forms of synchronous and asynchronous

communication as a part of the problem-based learning process. The article
is based on research into combining problem-based learning (PBL) and re-
search on computer-mediated communication (CMC). The article supports
earlier studies, which indicate that successful working within the distributed
group requires both synchronous and asynchronous forms of communica-
tion.
Problem-based learning is not just a method of teaching, it is a strategic
alignment which also takes place at the curriculum-level. It is vital that the
culture of the educational institution, its mode of action and the tools it uses
are congruent with one another. However, in this article I consider only one
aspect of the programme – the level of practices and processes which shape
the group-intensive learning process. Firstly, I will describe the viewpoints
of PBL with regard to the learning process. In connection with this, I will
examine the forms of communication, the alternating forms of action and
the process of conceptual transformation. Secondly, I will focus on commu-
nication and the social aspects of PBL. I will examine media choices which
support distributed collaborative work and learning. Here, I will lean on two

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 91

 Timo PORTIMOJÄRVI

contemporary studies on mediated communication. They offer interesting

interfaces for structuring forms of online PBL. Thirdly, I will combine the
modelling of the PBL process with an examination of forms of communica-
tion. Here, I will highlight the alternation of synchronous and asynchronous
communication, and I will consider the phases of the PBL process when im-
plemented fully in virtual environments.
I interlink considerations of PBL with contemporary progress in amplify-
ing online learning and with the intention of supporting PBL with technol-
ogy (Donnelly 2005). Instead of examining technological premises, I argue
that it is more important to focus on pedagogical viewpoints and processes.
In conjunction with these processes, I would combine applicable technolo-
gies in such situations where physical and temporal presence is limited, or
where technology offers real added value.

Alternating processes of learning in problem-based learning

The practices of PBL can be illustrated using different models in order to

make pedagogical principles and ideas more concrete. Descriptions of learn-
ing, collaboration and tutoring cannot be transformed into active practice
unless the executors have suitable tools or ways of working. Methods of
working, learning and assessing, which emphasise group- and student-cen-
tred assessment, are difficult to apply if the values and the culture of an
institution do not support these. The learning activities in PBL are described
in the literature in terms of step, phase or cycle models, which are constantly
under development, and there are numerous versions of these around the
world (Uden 2005). In this article I examine the cyclical model, which em-
phasises experiential and communal aspects of learning and the importance
of assessment and reflection. This model has been created at the University
of Linköping in Sweden and further developed by the ProBell research group
in Finland. (Poikela 1998; Poikela & Poikela 2005, 34.)

92 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

SYNCHRONOUS AND ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION IN ONLINE PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

The cyclical model of the PBL process is based on models of experiential

learning, of which Kolb’s cycle (1984, 20) is the best known. In its basic form
it is based on Lewin’s model, which starts from concrete experience. This is
followed by reflective observation, abstract conceptualisation, and finally a
return to action and experience. Kolb has reviewed the likenesses and differ-
ences of the models offered by Lewin, Dewey and Piaget. All of these models
include alternations of bidirectional, even opposing processes of meaning
construction. In Lewin’s model the alternation occurs between concrete
experience and abstract conceptualisation. In Dewey’s model the conflict
is between the impulse which starts the learning process and the directive
orientation of the process. In Piaget’s model we find a balance between as-
similation and accommodation. Paolo Freire (2005) is also often mentioned
as a theoretical agent of problem-based learning. According to his reasoning,
there is parallelism (rather than polarity) of objectivity and subjectivity. His
concept of praxis combines the abstract and the concrete.
This list can be continued by pointing to the dualism of cognitive struc-
tures. Learning can be seen as a transformative process between the epi-
sodic and semantic structures of memory and understanding. This aspect of
learning is related to theories of Vygotsky, Bruner and Schank, among others
(Cole 1985, 152–154; Tolska 2002, 85; Schank & Abelson 1977). The aspects
listed up to this point are strongly individual-centred; learning is seen as an
internal process, even though these scholars, with the exception of Piaget,
agree on the social nature of learning.
There has been an obvious shift towards more social, collaborative and
communal perspectives of learning in recent educational research. Vari-
ous forms of collaborative and inquiry-based learning include the idea that
learning should be understood as a combination of participation, knowledge
creation and internal processes (Hakkarainen ym. 2005, 125). Those pursu-
ing problem-based learning, especially in the tutorial groups, can be seen as
forming communities of learning and construction sites of shared knowl-
edge. Tutorial settings include various forms of action, convention, genre and
discourse (Alanko-Turunen 2005, 22). This connects PBL to socio-cultural
or socio-historical traditions. Lave and Wenger consider learning as a proc-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 93

 Timo PORTIMOJÄRVI

ess of becoming a legitimate member of a group, community or a field. The

construction of one’s own identity, the development of competencies and the
process of empowerment are aspects of the same process. This process may
include questions of motivation, recognising prior knowledge, information
acquisition, transforming prior knowledge and re-conceptualising. Becom-
ing a legitimate member of a community is a demanding communicative
task, which connects or distinguishes the member and the community (Lave
1993, 65).
Each phase of the PBL process involves specific, even unique forms of
action and communication. Online learning applications, especially, require
that these characteristics should be resolved and understood in order to be
utilised within online environments which have certain limitations. The
communication among groups varies from rapid, intensive and involving

FIGURE 1. Communicative forms in the PBL cycle model

94 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

SYNCHRONOUS AND ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION IN ONLINE PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

tasks such as brainstorming or debate, to cautious and individual modes of

information seeking. Furthermore, groups often use collaborative methods
to create shared understanding by using visual or other aids, such as white-
boards, mind maps and concept maps. (Portimojärvi 2002.)
Figure 1 illustrates the forms of communication and media in online PBL.
These specifications are based on traditional face-to-face tutorial settings,
and require more detailed research into communicative activities and tech-
nological solutions, which could support distributed collaborative tasks.

Media choices for distributed collaborative learning

Collaboration in a distributed group presumes social presence, shared un-

derstanding and versatile communication among the participants. The basic
structure of PBL – the tutorial group – can be considered a community of
learning. Transferring the group’s activities to online environments requires
the selection of suitable media for each situation and task. For instance, sto-
rytelling, creating new ideas, commenting on drafts, negotiating, decision
making and synthesising are all different processes. Even in face-to-face
situations these processes may be supported with different tools for presen-
tation and documentation.
Almost any tool that enables one to present one’s thoughts to another – a
sheet of paper, for example – can be seen as a collaborative tool which cre-
ates a shared space (Schrage 1990, 90–100). Collaborative tools can be used
to stimulate other people’s thinking, and this is the way to achieve dialogical,
shared understanding. One basic type of shared space (created with a col-
laborative tool) is a room equipped with a blackboard or whiteboard display-
ing notes for the whole group.
In an online environment, physical space is not a connective element as it
is in a face-to-face setting. Instead, it becomes an element of separation. This
emphasises the importance of the communicative tools and shared virtual
spaces that are available to the group. Distributed communication and col-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 95

 Timo PORTIMOJÄRVI

laboration may be considered from the viewpoints of social presence, me-

dia richness, shared understanding and media synchronicity. I regard the
theory of media synchronicity (Dennis & Valacich 1990; De Luca & Valacich
2005) as a useful conceptual tool for understanding the cycle model of on-
line PBL. The theoretical developments that I will present next are based on
media synchronicity theory, and offer important tools and perspectives for
understanding online PBL.
Action and learning within a community presumes awareness of other
members. This awareness is built through communication. Social presence
theory (Short, Williams & Christie 1976) offers a view of social psycholo-
gy and highlights the experience of other actors. The question here is how
group members experience the presence of the group in a mediated environ-
ment, and to what extent the members experience the communication as
warm, sensitive, personal or intimate. The level of social presence is depend-
ent on the medium’s ability to convey information, tone of voice, gestures,
expressions, eye contact or other social cues. The members’ consciousness of
the social presence standard of each medium directs the selection of media.
Recent mainstream literature on online learning highlights the lack of social
cues as a reverse side of social presence. This is in keeping with the notion
that online learning is seen mostly as asynchronous, text-based and involv-
ing limited communication. What communication there is between students
is not seen as a vital element of learning. This, in turn, can be understood
as an out-growth of the tradition of distance learning and a consequence of
low-bandwidth connections (Preece 2000, 151). Media richness theory (Daft
& Lengel 1986) is often discussed alongside social presence theory. Here the
point of view is medium-centred, and the main question is, to what extent
each medium can convey or support immediacy of feedback, non-verbal
cues and natural language.
While learning is understood as a process of participation and knowl-
edge construction, it also requires shared meanings and concepts. Common
ground theory (Clark & Brennan 1991) deals with communication from the
viewpoint of constructing shared meanings. Participants involved in a com-
municative occasion have to control both content and process, and this is not

96 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

SYNCHRONOUS AND ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION IN ONLINE PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

possible without common ground. Shared understanding and the process

by which common ground is constructed have a double importance. They
are both communicative tools, which utilise methods of presentation based
on shared meanings, and also communicative tasks, through which partici-
pants develop the common ground further (Preece 2000, 159). Co-presence,
visibility, audibility, immediacy, synchronicity, alternation, rehearsability
and reprocessability are central elements in constructing common ground. I
will briefly review these concepts, since they are suitable tools for examining
a group’s communication and its collaborative learning process.
Co-presence is widely thought of as a basic form of human interaction,
which includes various kinds of action. The concept of presence is usu-
ally linked with physical and temporal closeness. It is closely related to
social presence, which does not presume physical closeness.
Visibility refers to the opportunity to perceive people’s body language,
gestures and other visual cues. In text-based communication media, such
as discussion forums, SMS, and email, there are smileys and other sub-
stitutes for these.
Audibility of communication allows the perception of tones and stresses
of voice – elements which convey strongly emotional messages. On the
other hand, speech is also an effective tool for conveying explicit knowl-
edge.
Contemporality concerns the speed of communication. An immedi-
ate message reaches the receiver almost at the same time as it leaves the
sender.
Simultaneity, in turn, includes the idea of many participants acting at the
same time. It includes the idea of talking or writing occurring among
many participants at the same time. In multimodal environments par-
ticipants can use different modalities for different tasks.
Sequentiality refers to the notion that the order of messages is not mixed
up.
Reviewability describes the option of returning to a previous message to
check what had been stated earlier.
Rehearsability presumes a capacity to store communication.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 97

 Timo PORTIMOJÄRVI

Revisability is connected to reviewability. It includes the possibility of

editing, adding or changing previous messages.

Different media have different capabilities for supporting these elements.

On a communicative occasion a missing element may be replaced, but this is
usually laborious, or, alternatively, the defectiveness of communication may
be accepted. However, it should be pointed out that a situation, which is first
considered defective and limited, may offer added value when it compels the
use of forms of communication that may sometimes be even more effective.
For instance, the absence of synchronous conferencing may force partici-
pants to produce messages with better arguments. (Preece 2000, 159.)
With regard to supporting shared understanding, each medium has its
own affordances and attracts users accordingly (see Gibson 1977). Media
richness theory examines tools for communication, their modalities and
facilities for conveying information. However, it simplifies the order of su-
periority of different media. Media synchronicity theory is based on media
richness theory and social presence theory. Here, the perspective is focused
primarily on the communication processes, and secondly, on suitable media.
Dennis and Valacich (1999) argue that five characteristics form the basis
for action in a group, and that all communicative actions are based on two
main processes. The theory also considers the relationship between different
groups and different forms and needs for communication.
The characteristics of media are immediacy of feedback, symbol variety,
parallelism, rehearsability and reprocessability.
Immediacy of feedback – the capacity to receive rapid feedback from a
communication. Immediacy of feedback describes the medium’s ability
to enable rapid response and also its capacity for bidirectional commu-
nication.
Symbol variety – the format by which information is conveyed. This in-
cludes verbal and non-verbal symbols, the cost of delays in order to alter
or compose a message for a medium, and the social cost wrought by a
lack of symbols. Symbol variety illustrates the versatility of modalities
and forms of symbolic presentation. Scripts and symbols are created

98 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

SYNCHRONOUS AND ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION IN ONLINE PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

through socio-cultural processes, and are prerequisites for language and

communication. They can exert four influences on understanding com-
munication and messages. (1) Some types of information may be more
easily understandable in one form, and others in another form. (2) Lin-
gual and non-lingual forms of symbolic presentation supplement each
other. Together they strengthen the intelligibility of the message. (3) One
set of modalities, symbols and tools may create delay, and another set
may require a more complicated production process. These costs and
disadvantages have implications regarding the ways in which messages
may be sent and also regarding their quality. (4) The absence of lingual or
non-lingual symbols may have significant effects on social observation.
This may cause a loss of experience regarding social presence or promote
the objectification of persons.
Parallelism – the number of effective simultaneous conversations. For in-
stance a telephone enables only one discussion, but many forms of digital
communication open the way for many parallel discussions. However,
when the amount of parallel processes increases, they are less easy to
control.
Rehearsability – the fine tuning of a message before sending. Text-based
tools, especially, enable rewriting and careful revising before sending.
Reprocessability – the readdressing of a message within the context of
the communication event. It describes to what extent the sent or received
messages may be revised or refined. This requires recording of commu-
nication.

In summing up the characteristics of media, three observations can be

raised. (1) No single media is rich in all characteristics. (2) Media are not
stabile; they can be used in many ways or as parts of different systems. Some-
times a telephone may be a tool for something other than speaking. (3) It is
not reasonable to set different media in order of superiority. The context in
which they are used changes the way they are used.
Communicative actions are basically built on two processes: conveyance
and convergence. Conveyance refers to conveying and exchanging informa-
tion. There may be divergence – all participants do not have to concentrate
on the same subject or fully agree on presented arguments or meanings. Ba-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 99

 Timo PORTIMOJÄRVI

sically, media with low synchronicity are suitable for conveyance. Environ-
ments which support low immediacy of feedback and high parallelism are
tools for asynchronous collaboration, which is a central element of convey-
ance. Convergence refers to convergence on shared meanings. It is a proc-
ess of searching for mutual understanding and agreement on shared under-
standing or at least agreement on accepting various viewpoints. Basically,
media with high synchronicity are suitable for convergence. Environments
which support high immediacy of feedback and low parallelism prompt syn-
chronicity, which is a key to convergence. (Dennis & Valacich 1999.)
There are five notions that emerge from synchronicity theory, and these
provide a basis for further development and research. (1) For convergence,
media of high synchronicity (high feedback, low parallelism) are preferred.
(2) For conveyance, media of low synchronicity (low feedback, high parallel-
ism) are preferred. (3) Symbol variety is a factor only when a symbol is not
available. (4) Generally, media of higher rehearsability are preferred. (5) For
conveyance, media of higher reprocessability are preferred.
In addition, media choices are considered from the viewpoints of group
processes, stages, roles and norms. From these arise further notions regard-
ing matured groups and newly-formed groups. (6) A lower degree of high
synchronicity is needed with matured groups. Having established accepted
norms, such groups do not require synchronous tools as much as new groups.
(7) Over time, a lower degree of high synchronicity is needed. (8) Media of
high synchronicity should be used with new groups. (9) Media with symbol
sets allowing greater social presence should be used with new groups. Not
having accepted norms, these groups engage in more socially communica-
tive modes than matured groups, and select tools which offer richer forms of
social presence. (Dennis & Valacich 1999; 2005.)
Research into audio- and videoconferencing and computer-mediated
communication has a tradition of more than 40 years. Wainfan and Davis
(2004) have comprehensibly reviewed this tradition and the tools of medi-
ated group interaction, and they have ended up with results that closely par-
allel media synchronicity theory.

100 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

SYNCHRONOUS AND ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION IN ONLINE PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

Alternating synchronous and asynchronous collaboration in online

problem-based learning

Based on the theoretical developments presented above, I will now describe

the processes and tools of online problem-based learning. There are out-
comes in two areas: the first area concerns changes in the group during long-
lasting collaboration; the second concerns the PBL cycle model, its phases
and suitable media choices.
The most successful implementations of problem-based learning cover
the whole curriculum and shape the learning culture of the educational or-
ganisation. During long periods of study the learning cycles create a chain
or continuum. In such cases a group’s previous meetings and history builds
common ground for new collaborative situations. In the context of this so-
cio-historical co-presence the members of the group get to know each other,
create a shared set of concepts and understanding, as well as setting shared
goals and working to achieve these goals together. This is in congruence
with the notion of media synchronicity theory which notes that the need for
synchronicity decreases and that, over time, asynchronous collaboration be-
comes more and more beneficial. As the group’s shared history expands, the
issues in the tutorials change. This can be seen especially with the problems
which start the learning processes, and in the first phases of the PBL cycle
model. With a newly formed group the problems relate mostly to personal
experiential knowledge and implicit prior knowledge. With a more uniform
group, the shared prior knowledge is more explicit and conceptual. This shift
in prior knowledge seems to set challenges in creating problems and tutoring
the learning process. As a group’s work progresses over time, the importance
of convergence decreases and the importance of conveyance increases.
New groups stress the need for convergence and a rich social presence, al-
though this is often expressed in more practical terms. Literature on online
learning, for example, often brings up the importance of face-to-face meet-
ings at the beginning of a course. This has been seen as vital for group for-
mation and therefore important for a successful course. With a new group,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 101

 Timo PORTIMOJÄRVI

synchronous forms of communication are stressed, and this is also the case
in virtual environments. (Portimojärvi 2006.)
The objectives of recognising prior knowledge and convergence are typi-
cal at the beginning of the PBL cycle model and the first tutorial. Partici-
pants are supposed to be able to deliver and share their own basis of knowl-
edge and experience with other group members. This is needed in order to
create a shared, mutually understood learning task. Communication, which
is synchronous and rich in modalities, supports social presence, shared un-
derstanding, and especially immediacy, visibility and co-presence. When
the meanings that are converged on are experience-based and often implicit,
the need for multi-modal forms of presentation is emphasised. On the other
hand, asynchronous story-writing and reading one another’s stories might
create a solid basis for common tasks. This mode of getting acquainted is
widely recommended for groups starting an online course. With a matured
group the need for multi-modality decreases, but the need for shared spaces
and visible productions remains.
The ending of the second tutorial includes the objectives of negotiation
and decision making. At its best this is a consequence of the previous process
of convergence, but it may also include disagreements, which highlights the
importance of instant feedback. These phases are mostly based on coordi-
nated synchronous collaboration.
The use of information and communication technology changes the
phase of information acquisition. Instead, this becomes a phase of knowl-
edge acquisition and sharing, where group members add notes and memos
of their information findings to a repository or discussion forum. The tools
used during this phase enable asynchronous, loosely coordinated commu-
nication with many parallel discussions and developments of viewpoints. In
such a case there is no need for turn-taking, and the tasks are flexible with
regard to time and place. The main characteristic of this phase is a shift
from individual and self-directed studying towards interactive and collabo-
rative study, which is supported by peers and the tutor. It is concerned with
searching, retrieving information and distributing it to the others. Convey-
ance is the main process during this phase, and it serves the later process of

102 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

SYNCHRONOUS AND ASYNCHRONOUS COMMUNICATION IN ONLINE PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

convergence in the second tutorial. Discussion forums, blogs, wikis or other

applications for argumentation and commenting may allow the students to
take negotiated, alternative reading positions (see Alanko-Turunen in this
book), and thus help the students to adopt positions of critical contesting
during the second tutorial.
The communicative nature of the second tutorial is similar to that of the
first. The goal is to converge, compare, combine and synthesise the infor-
mation or knowledge components that the group has gathered. There is a
difference, however. In the first tutorial the aspects of knowledge are ex-
periential and individual, and in the second tutorial the group works with
components which are gathered through a planned, systematic information
seeking process. These components are known to all members of the group
before the second tutorial. In this case there is no longer a strong need, in the
second tutorial, for participants to get to know one another’s background, as
was the case in the first tutorial. Instead there is a need for rehearsability and
reprocessability which can be provided by asynchronous forums. However,
the kinds of activities that are based on negotiation, cry out for synchronous
tools which offer comparison, collaboration and instant feedback. The main
characteristics of these phases are shared, coordinated and synchronous – or
almost synchronous – collaboration.
The second tutorial is followed by a phase, where learned and construct-
ed knowledge is applied to practice or new learning tasks. If the PBL cycle
model follows the cycle of experiential learning, it should be possible to ap-
ply the learned knowledge and constructed meanings in a concrete fashion.

Summary

In this article I have examined the cycle model of problem-based learn-

ing and the modes of communication which occur during this process. I
have also considered the changes in communication which take place as the
group matures. Media synchronisation theory, among others, offers tools for

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 103

 Timo PORTIMOJÄRVI

understanding the solutions that were arrived at during the development of

online PBL. These were alternating and multimodal solutions. Examining
the PBL cycle model in parallel with theories of communication supports
and strengthens earlier suppositions and results regarding the successful
combination of online learning and problem-based learning. Traditional
face-to-face tutorials can be supported with asynchronous collaboration, es-
pecially during the phase of information acquisition. For distributed groups,
problem-based learning offers a way of working which requires multifac-
eted, varying and multimodal media choices.

104 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 Marja-Leena Lähteenmäki
Pirkanmaa Polytechnic

CONSTRUCTING THE PHYSIOTHERAPY CURRICULUM

– reflective dialogue between education and working life

The aim of this article is to answer the question: How do teachers, students
and working physiotherapists cooperate when designing a physiotherapy ed-
ucation program? The research focused on the change in curriculum from
subject-based learning to problem-based learning that took place at Pirkan-
maa Polytechnic. The research methods included individual and group in-
terviews using an interview schedule based around the theme of cooperation
in developing the new curriculum. The data was interpreted using qualita-
tive content analysis.
This article is part of my PhD project which was made possible through
the support of The Finnish Academy and the Life as Learning project award
for the ProBell research group. The original article was earlier published in
Finnish (Lähteenmäki 2006).

Dialogue and dialogism

Dialogue and dialogism are common, but often loosely used, concepts. Peo-
ple frequently understand dialogue as synonymous with the concept of con-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 105

 Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

versation, without taking account of its special nature. Since these concepts
are seldom separated in the literature, it is important to define dialogue,
dialogism, dialogical and (discussion) conversation as I use them in this pa-
per.
Dialogue in Greek refers to the flow of meanings, which created a cor-
nerstone for the discussion that was needed for autonomy and for democracy
(Isaacs 2001). Nowadays, dialogue may be understood as communication
between two or more people connected by time and space so that they are
aware of one another and are oriented towards one another (Markova 1990).
Dialogue and conversation differ from each other. Conversation refers to
everyday interaction, where other peoples’ viewpoints, opinions and ideas
are downplayed. People may refuse to acknowledge other peoples’ ways of
thinking or stand their own ground without being willing to question their
ideas. (Jenlink & Carr 1996; Isaacs 2001.) Conversation can be regarded as
dialogue only when it has features of dialogism.
Dialogism cannot be characterised as winning, losing or compromising
(Kent & Taylor 2002). According to the theologian Martin Buber (1878–1965)
reciprocity and equality between those taking part in conversation are es-
sential characteristics of dialogism (Buber 1995). The philosopher and liter-
ary theorist Mikhail Bakhtin (1895–1975) characterises dialogue as the skills
of thinking together and acting together. The conversationalist, on the other
hand, offers his/her background and knowledge base to the partner and the
latter tries to take it actively into account. (Bakhtin 1986.) Burbules, who
examines dialogue in relation to learning and teaching, asserts that dialogue
refers to focused dialectics, where at least two participants act as speaker and
as listener. These persons express statements that are of different lengths
including questions, answers, new directions for the discussion or new state-
ments. Dialogue consists of socialising, asking, arguing and guiding dia-
lectics. Dialogue is open and confidential. It is both inquiring and seeking
to explain, and involves the “need to see into the heart of things”. People
engaging in dialogue aim at common understanding, new insights and the
creation of new knowledge. (Burbules 1993.)

106 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

CONSTRUCTING PHYSIOTHERAPY CURRICULUM

The adjective dialogical describes the nature of the previous type of con-
versation (Markova 1990). When different people talk after one another, the
resulting conversation can be either dialogical or non-dialogical. Such a con-
versation can be defined as dialogue if it contains features that correspond
to dialogism such as considering the other person’s differing views without
confrontation. The reciprocal and receptive atmosphere that characterises
dialogism arises from openness in relation to other peoples’ viewpoints as
well as openness in relation to delivering one’s own viewpoints. Openness
promotes the skill of thinking together and allows deeper consideration of
issues. It provides an opportunity to clarify each person’s thinking and, in
this way, it offers a basis for finding common understanding. Dialogism im-
plies that the partners trust and respect one another, appreciate one another’s
viewpoints and are aware of their common goal. They can achieve common
aims when they respond to their partner’s comments, await a response to
their own comments, and are ready to change their own earlier viewpoints.
In educational contexts dialogue between teachers and students cannot
always be completely reciprocal. Buber (1995) observes that in dialogue, the
educator considers situations from the students’ perspective and aims to as-
sist and guide them in the best possible way. Sarja (2000) along with Seikkula
and Arnkill (2005) also consider inner dialogue. Inner dialogue takes place
when one individual offers opportunities for their partner’s reflection. This
kind of dialogue can occur, for example, when reading an author’s book
(Markova 1990; Burbules & Bertram 2001).

Dialogue and reflection

Maranhao (1991) notes that dialogue with other people requires reflection
– a process that involves observing and considering the viewpoints other
people have highlighted. Dialogue is essential for reflection, because with
dialogue one gains new perspectives for reassessing and testing previous
viewpoints (Markova 1990). Dialogue activates individuals’ reflective skills,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 107

 Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

enabling them to understand phenomena more fully, change viewpoints and

connect theory to practice (Ojanen 2002).
Reflection occurs when action, learning or knowledge creation is con-
nected with active observation, thinking and reasoning (see Kolb 1984; Boud
et al.1985). Critical reflection is about questioning previously learnt, already
established, conventional presuppositions. It is about renewing knowledge
by yielding new or transformed meanings. (Mezirow 1991.)
Reflection can be seen as a fundamental part of the learning and knowl-
edge creating process. Kolb (1984) views learning as a process in which
knowledge is created through transforming experiences. He argues that re-
flective observation of concrete experiences is an important part of experi-
ential learning. Observing practices helps the observer to discover the in-
telligence behind them which Schön (1986) calls knowing-in-action. Schön
further states that reflection represents the interrelationship between think-
ing and action, both during (reflection-in-action) and after (reflection-on-
action) action. According to Boud et al. (1985), active reflection is important
for learning at every phase of the learning process. McAlpine et al. (1999)
highlight the importance of reflection for planning future actions and call
this reflection-for-action.
When one participates in a discussion one constructs new meanings, ei-
ther alone or together with others (Isaacs 2001). Nonaka and Konno (1998)
present the concept of “ba” in connection with common knowledge creation.
In their view “ba”, which offers a basis for creating new knowledge, repre-
sents a shared space for existing relationships. This space can be physical (for
instance a school), virtual (telephone or e-mail), mental (shared experiences
or ideas) or a combination of these. Within this shared space the cooperative
partners can achieve new knowledge by reflecting on their own and others’
experiences. Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) argue that only an individual can
create new knowledge. Cooperating partners pass their knowledge to one
another and, at the same time, provide tools for their partner’s individual
knowledge creation – a process Nonaka and Takeuchi describe as social dis-
cussion. This article will focus on the process of social discussion in con-
structing physiotherapy education.

108 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

CONSTRUCTING PHYSIOTHERAPY CURRICULUM

The context of the research

The focus of this research is the curriculum transition that took place at Pir-
kanmaa Polytechnic and the cooperation between the different partners in-
volved in this process. The old subject-based curriculum was replaced with
a problem-based one, and I was the teacher responsible for coordinating this
process, which meant organising meetings, writing the agendas and memos
and acting as a chairperson.
At the beginning of this process we had to define what physiotherapy
students needed to learn during their education (Savin-Baden 2003). We did
this by asking teachers and the physiotherapists to brainstorm together. The
next step was to group the numerous items that had come up, using our
professional expertise. We gave titles to all the groups and arranged them
in order from the beginning of the education programme to the end. The
next task was to formulate modules from these grouped ideas, which meant
specifying the name, aims, contents and size of each module. At the end of
this process, teachers were nominated to take charge of each module. They
were responsible for the more detailed planning, including organising coop-
eration with professionals from working life and other teachers, as well as
constructing the problems together.
These problems were designed to activate the students to study in re-
lation to the written learning outcomes of the curriculum (Dolmans et al.
1997). The problems acted as starting points aimed at stimulating students
to engage in problem solving. Problem solving was regarded as the think-
ing required in clarifying issues, finding solutions and making appropriate
choices (Ropo 1994). It has been repeatedly stressed that PBL problems come
from the demands of working life and that they describe situations encoun-
tered at work (Drummond-Young & Mohide 2001; Poikela 1998). The prob-
lems can be classified as scenarios, triggers and cases and I make specific
differentiations between these three categories. The scenario is typically a
problem that does not lead to any single solution. The trigger, on the other
hand, aims to guide the students towards a certain solution. (Poikela 2001.)
A case may, for instance, refer to a patient description. In this curriculum

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 109

 Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

study we used all of three types of problems in the form of written descrip-
tions, pictures, videos and simulated situations.

Data and analysis

Interviews were conducted with all four physiotherapy teachers, who worked
at Pirkanmaa Polytechnic during the years 1997–2004 and were responsible
for the modules that included practical training outside the Polytechnic.
Those physiotherapists who had taken part in the curriculum change for at
least one full year were also interviewed. The aim of these individual inter-
views was to elicit teachers’ subjective experiences. A further interview was
conducted with a group of five volunteer students who were approaching
graduation. Here, the aim was to learn about the students’ shared under-
standing, as well as their individual experiences (see Vilkka 2005). One of
these students had also participated in curriculum development meetings as
a representative of her group.
All the interviews were structured around themes selected from the agen-
das and memos of curriculum development meetings. The themes relating
to cooperation were curriculum, teacher in charge, problems, working life
expertise, practical training and final theses. Since a number of interviewees
asked for their interviews not to be recorded, open questionnaires were used
in these cases and answers were written down. During the interviews inter-
viewees were asked to discuss the previously selected themes in relation to
the cooperation that took place between the different partners. Many inter-
views included emancipator episodes where discussions served to broaden
understanding about the problem-based learning environment (see Vilkka
2005).
After each interview written notes were expanded to include further de-
tail, then all items that represented the interviewee’s own thinking and activ-
ity in relation to cooperation were selected for further analysis (see Uusitalo-
Arola 2004). The data was structured entirely around the interview themes,

110 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

CONSTRUCTING PHYSIOTHERAPY CURRICULUM

although one of the original themes (teacher in charge) was deleted because
the interviewees did not mention any cooperation in relation to this theme.
Also, one new theme (practical lessons) emerged from the data and was add-
ed to the list. The 17-page summary was sent to all informants for checking
and correcting. This was one way to ensure that the data was authentic (see
Puolimatka 2002). After receiving the feedback one addition (from a physi-
otherapist) and one clarification (from a teacher) was made to the data.
The method of qualitative content analysis was adopted for analysing the
data, and the focus was on features of dialogism in informants’ speech. (See
Eskola & Suoranta 1996; Tuomi & Sarajärvi 2002; Vilkka 2005.) The analysis
helped to clarify the type and nature of the dialogue (see Nonaka & Takeuchi
1995) that emerged from the data.

Results

Dialogism was very much in evidence in the cooperation that took place
between teachers, physiotherapists and students. Communication was open
and there was a respect for other partners and their viewpoints. Dialogical
discussion made it possible to achieve the common goal that was the aim
of the cooperation. The various categories of dialogue can be described as:
understanding dialogue, expert dialogue, inner dialogue and guiding dia-
logue. Next I consider in more detail the nature of dialogism and common
knowledge creation in each of these types of dialogue, supporting observa-
tions with quotations from informants.

Understanding dialogue

Understanding dialogue was apparent in constructing the curriculum and in

its continuous updating. The teachers, physiotherapists and students worked
as equal partners beside one another. After the cooperative work began and

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 111

 Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

the partners became better acquainted, a sense of openness developed and

participants started to express their own viewpoints more freely. Trust de-
veloped between the partners, and viewpoints were appreciated and listened
to. All viewpoints were discussed and taken into account when reaching
common conclusions. In fact, it was the combination of each partner’s ex-
pertise that brought richness to the final outcomes.
Participating in cooperation meant “learning to talk a common language”
(P2, T3). This common language was said serve as an intercessor between
working life and education. Teachers said that physiotherapists gave the stu-
dents “wordless respect which showed that the school is not apart from prac-
tice” (T1). Also the students felt that their voices were fully taken into ac-
count.
The teachers reported that the physiotherapists at the beginning of the
process gave their “blessing to the themes included in the curriculum” (T2).
Later, the physiotherapists had a role in deciding on the relative importance
of different parts of the curriculum and in correcting its content. The teach-
ers pointed out the way in which the physiotherapists confirmed that the
content of the modules corresponded with the needs of working life. Teachers
appreciated the way physiotherapists “brought everyday realism into educa-
tion and kept the teachers’ feet on ground” (T1). Some teachers felt that it was
thanks to the physiotherapists that the curriculum remained “up-to-date”
(T4). The interviews with the physiotherapists supported these views. They
saw one of their functions within the group as “bringing the teachers back to
earth” (P4). Physiotherapists viewed themselves as intercessors, bringing the
changes in working life to teachers’ attention, and generally acting as “mid-
dlemen” (P1) between education and working life.
Cooperation was often described in terms of metaphors, a way of making
tacit knowledge explicit when one does not have direct words for it (Nonaka
& Takeuchi 1995). The cooperation process itself involved making individu-
als’ experiences and expertise explicit for others’ reflection (see Nonaka &
 In connection to the quotations I use the codes T1, 2, 3 and 4 to refer to teachers’
speech, P1, 2, 3 and 4 to refer to physiotherapists’ speech and S to refer to students’
speech during group discussion.

112 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

CONSTRUCTING PHYSIOTHERAPY CURRICULUM

Konno 1998). This is how dialogical cooperation can activate reflection in

individuals who participate in cooperative processes (Maranhao 1991). Par-
ticipants process what they listen to and everyone produces his/her own re-
flection for creating common understanding (see Nonaka & Takeuchi 1995;
Järvinen & Poikela 2000).
All who took part in the cooperation represented their prevailing exper-
tise, and each considered the items under discussion from their own point
of view (Schön 1986, reflection-on-action). This was a way of making com-
mon understanding possible. Through common reflection participants had
the opportunity to also consider items that were unfamiliar to them, giving
them the possibility to understand the reality in a broader way than before.
(Freire 1972; Hannula 2000.)
Figure 1 illustrates the equality between partners in understanding dia-
logue. The expertise, experiences and needs of the teachers, physiotherapists,
as well as students meet in the dialogue space that is located in the middle of
the figure. Each of the arrows describes the reflection each individual part-
ner offers in the dialogical discussion.

Student’s experiences,
expertise and needs

= student
= physiotherapist
= teacher
Teacher’s
Physiotherapist’s experiences, = dialogue space
experiences, expertise and
expertise and needs
needs

FIGURE 1. Understanding dialogue in the cooperation between teachers, physiotherapists and

students

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 113

 Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

Expert dialogue

Teachers were responsible for constructing problems in accordance with the

aims set out in the curriculum and also in accordance with the reality of
working life. In order to achieve this, they cooperated with physiotherapists,
other health professionals, patients and other teachers. Although teachers
had dominance over the other partners, the data reveals that power was giv-
en as well as taken (see Järvilehto 1996). This cooperation mostly took the
form of bilateral discussions, and the dialogue here showed a clear respect
for other partners’ expertise and experience.
One teacher noted that the physiotherapists “helped us to understand
patients’ situations and they added professional perspectives to the items se-
lected in the starting points” (T1). She added that creating problems together
with the physiotherapist offered a feeling of “security” (T1) when running
PBL. The students noted that the problems they handled were just like pieces
from “everyday life” (S). Such problems, they argued, guided their learning
towards practical issues and, in this way, they felt their learning experience
was “inspiring” (S) (see also Fyrenius 2003; Hafler 1997; Silén 2003).
Physiotherapy teachers also cooperated with nurses and patients’ rela-
tives in order to achieve a broad understanding of the issues in problems. For
instance, the experience in which one mother described her child’s disease
as “a pain in my heart” (T1) helped the teacher to understand the relative’s
feelings more deeply. Creating problems had different phases: the teacher’s
initiative, the experts’ input, the teacher’s confirmation, the expert teachers’
comments, finalising the problem, implementing the problem, getting feed-
back, redefining the problem and updating the problem (Table 1).

 In physiotherapy education at Pirkanmaa Polytechnic we use the word starting point

as a synonym for problem in order to avoid misunderstandings. In physiotherapy the
term problem is reserved for the physiotherapy problem that physiotherapists create
after having assessed their patient (see Boud & Feletti 1997; Fyrenius 2003).

114 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

CONSTRUCTING PHYSIOTHERAPY CURRICULUM

TABLE 1. Examples of creating a problem dialogically

The phases in Example 1 Example 2

creating problems
Teacher’s initiative The teacher told the student nurse about The teacher wrote a case from her previ-
the aims and basic contents of the module. ous expertise as a physiotherapist using
the physiotherapy report one student had
written on a placement.
Experts’ input The nurse thought of an example in Three different physiotherapists read
which the aims and contents could become the case making additions from physi-
concrete. otherapy practice.
The nurse told the teacher about a case
in which she had connected things from
two different students’ life situation. The
teacher tape-recorded the story.
Teacher’s confirma- The teacher listened to the tape a The teacher read through the case
tion number of times and wrote a case after making additions from the point of view of
appropriate editing. the module.
Expert teachers’ The subject expert teachers made com- The teacher asked for comments from
comments ments about the case using their subject another teacher who was familiar with the
expertise. content.
Finalising the The nurse read through the case and The teacher finalised the case with physi-
problem made some corrections with the teacher. otherapists using telephone contacts.
Using, redefining The case was used as a problem. Later, the The case was used as a problem. After
and updating the case was redefined and updated after feedback from the tutorials, it was later
problem the feedback. updated.

After the dialogue, which prompted the teacher to reflect on the issues
raised, she seemed to achieve a richer understanding of the theme area
she was responsible for. During the dialogue the partners found common
ground through sharing reflections based on their own areas of expertise.
Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) as well as Nonaka and Konno (1998) talk about
a similar connecting of knowledge. Expert dialogue led to the creation of
new problems for PBL learning environments (McAlpine et al. 1999, reflec-
tion-for-action).
Figure 2 describes how expert dialogue occurred between teachers and
physiotherapists. The dialogue started on equal terms, with the teacher’s

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 115

 Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

Problems for the

students’ use

= student
= physiotherapist
Teacher’s initiative
Teacher’s responsibility = teacher
Teacher’s expertise = space of dialogue
Physiotherapists’,
and other experts’
expertise

FIGURE 2. Expert dialogue in creating problems

initiative. The teacher offered her expertise for consideration and also gives
space to the partner’s expertise which, in turn, enriched her viewpoint. The
dialogue led to a mutually created outcome in the form of PBL problems that
were used for students’ learning.

Inner dialogue

One teacher’s dialogical reflection started when the teacher attended a lec-
ture by an expert physiotherapist and, in another case, when a teacher ob-
served students working with patients. The know-how that was derived from
this open reflection helped the teachers to reconsider their former views
about the content and the implementation of their modules.

116 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

CONSTRUCTING PHYSIOTHERAPY CURRICULUM

In their interviews teachers reported that the experts in physiotherapy

put lecturers in touch with practice in a “hard and solid” (T1) way “they
deepened the knowledge in question for the students” (T4). The physiothera-
pists observed that the lectures given by expert physiotherapists gave con-
ceptual frameworks regarding how different approaches work in practice.
The physiotherapists need to be able to mediate patient-centeredness and
the different viewpoints used in therapy practice. One teacher said that she
attended these physiotherapists’ lectures in order to learn something new,
and also to be able to develop the module as a whole.
During the education process, the students attended practical exami-
nations where they met ‘real patients’. The students made plans for these
situations as a group. They welcomed the patient, interviewed him/her and
observed his/her movements and the functioning of his/her joints. They also
carried out a detailed physiotherapeutic examination, drew conclusions with
their patient and offered them guidance. One teacher said that situations like
these showed the students’ preparedness to act in real work contexts. One
teacher felt that, from these situations, she could “discover the strengths and
weaknesses the students have and thereby develop their education.” (T2).
Inner dialogue is connected to observing action and the reflection it pro-
vokes. Here, the active partner made his/her knowledge explicit (Schön 1986,
knowing-in-action), while the observing partner – the teacher – considered
the elements she had noticed in relation to her previous experiences and own
expertise. This reflection during action, reflection-in-action (Schön 1986), is
promoted by the teacher’s expertise, and the resulting inner dialogue offered
useful insights regarding students’ learning abilities.
Figure 3 shows how the teachers’ participation in the physiotherapists’
lectures and the observation of students’ physiotherapy work activated
teachers’ inner dialogue. In situations like these the physiotherapist or stu-
dent makes his/her knowledge explicit and offers this as an instrument for
prompting teachers’ individual reflection (Nonaka & Konno 1998). Nonaka
and Takeuchi (1995) describe this as internalisation, which refers to the in-
ner thinking process, reflection, that starts during action and that assists the
development of action.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 117

 Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

Student’s actions
and know-how

= student
= physiotherapist
= teacher
= dialogue space

Physiotherapist’s Teacher’s thinking

actions and
know-how

FIGURE 3. The teacher’s inner dialogue

Guiding dialogue

Guiding dialogue took place when teachers chose practical placements for
the students. It was also in evidence when the supervising physiotherapist
selected patients for the students which she thought would further his/her
learning. Characteristic of guiding dialogue was the initial aim, on the part
of the teacher and the physiotherapist, to learn about the student and his/her
level of knowledge. Although the teacher and the supervisor occupied domi-
nant positions in relation to the student, they tried to respect the student’s
know-how and goals when making choices.
One teacher mentioned that she worked both with students and the su-
pervising physiotherapists in order to find the most suitable placement for
each student. A physiotherapist stated that, at the beginning of the practi-
cal training, she takes students with her to her own therapy sessions. She
explained that she chooses the patients for the students according to her un-

118 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

CONSTRUCTING PHYSIOTHERAPY CURRICULUM

derstanding of each student and his/her capabilities. Students start by carry-

ing out physiotherapy under supervision and, after they develop their skills
sufficiently, the physiotherapist offers them opportunities for autonomous
therapy situations.
Guiding dialogue only becomes possible when the expert has expertise
and the will to act in the other person’s best interest to further his/her profes-
sional growth (Schön 1986, knowing-in-action; Ojanen 2002). He/she must
consider the learner’s potential in relation to existing learning possibilities,
and also how he/she can organise productive opportunities for the student’s
development.
Guiding dialogue (Figure 4) does not require full equality. Instead, the
teacher or the physiotherapist needs to understand the prior experiences of
the students and be prepared to create a supportive learning environment for
them. Buber (1995) asserts that the educator has an opportunity to act in the
best interests of students when he/she knows their capacity, goals and short-

Student’s learning
environment

= student
= physiotherapist
= teacher
= dialogue space

Physiotherapist’s Teacher’s
expertise expertise

FIGURE 4. Guiding dialogue in the instruction process between teacher and student or teacher
and physiotherapist

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 119

 Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

comings and how they interrelate. This can be compared with what Nonaka
and Takeuchi (1995) observe about socialisation that enables the delivery of
experiences to the other partner in a dialogue without verbal communica-
tion.

Discussion

The purpose of this article was not to cover all the discussion that took place
during the cooperation process between working life and education. Instead,
the focus was on speech that had the quality of dialogism as Bakhtin (1986),
Burbules (1993) and Buber (1995) define it. This study explored the dialogi-
cal cooperation between people involved in constructing a problem-based
learning environment.
The dialogical spaces that emerged from the data took the form of un-
derstanding dialogue, expert dialogue, inner dialogue and guiding dialogue.
During informant interviews, dialogism was apparent in the respect for one
another’s expertise and experiences, in the reciprocal and focused content
analysis, and in the ability to think together. These findings demonstrate
that genuine dialogue between partners mutually activates autonomous re-
flection, which is driven, in turn, by partners’ previous expertise and ex-
periences. When each partner brings his/her own reflection to the shared
discussion, they can together create new shared knowledge through reflec-
tive dialogue (Kolb 1984; Boud et al. 1985). In the data this new knowledge
appeared, during the creation of the curriculum, as common understanding
and shared solutions. It was evident in the formulation of problems, in the
new ideas for implementing education and in the choices made for providing
an optimal learning environment for students.
Dialogical cooperation and the four types of dialogue discussed in this
paper are important tools for the development of partnerships between edu-
cation and working life. Dialogue makes it possible to challenge traditional
hierarchical modes of action in developing educational programmes (Isaacs

120 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

CONSTRUCTING PHYSIOTHERAPY CURRICULUM

2001). Continuous dialogue makes it possible for professionals from edu-

cation and working life to achieve common goals (Sarja 2003). Collabora-
tive dialogical discussion offers opportunities to exploit the expertise of all
participants. This is why dialogical discussion works as a tool for creating
new common knowledge and new common viewpoints (see Silkelä 2003).
The results of this study establish dialogical cooperation between partners
in education and working life as a fundamental prerequisite for developing
PBL education. Dialogism helps to create education that is relevant to the
needs of working life and has the potential to develop working life. It is only
through dialogical cooperation that problem-based learning can be under-
stood as a pedagogical approach that integrates education and working life.
The starting point for this study was the unquestioning acceptance of
statements made by the informants (Holstein & Gubrium 1994). Despite the
impossibility of acquiring such data in authentic situations, the results of the
study are congruent with reality. Every informant described concretely and
in detail the communication that took place during the cooperation proc-
ess. This is why it was possible to examine the nature of communication in
relation to different types of dialogue. The incongruity of the informants’
answers adds validity into the results. To confirm the data, the informants
were asked to check the summaries of notes.
My own active role in working with the partners may have affected my
interpretation of the data. However, I found the dual role as researcher and
active partner more beneficial than harmful, since these roles allowed a full-
er understanding of content and meaning than would have been available
to an outsider. Being an insider allowed close contact with the reality of the
studied phenomenon (Aittola & Kallio 1991; Vilkka 2005).
During the analysis it became clear that the reflective dialogue used to
develop education did not only develop the learning environment. Active,
shared reflection was shown to advance the learning and professional de-
velopment of each participant. These are the reasons it is essential that eve-
ryone involved in developing education should understand and implement
dialogism and dialogical reflection. In conclusion, I would argue that only
after dialogical cooperation between education and working life is it pos-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 121

 Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

sible to talk about problem-based learning as a pedagogical approach that

integrates education and working life.
This article focuses on dialogue between education and working life in
planning and implementing the PBL environment. Two further areas merit-
ing future research in the area of PBL and dialogue are an analysis of the
types of dialogue in PBL tutorials and an examination of the relationship
between dialogues in PBL tutorials and work settings.

122 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 Merja Alanko-Turunen
Helsinki Business Polytechnic

WORKING OUT A TEXT

– PBL tutorial participants as knowledge constructors
in international business studies

As I was interacting with the empirical material I produced for my PhD study
‘Negotiating interdiscursivity in a problem-based tutorial site’ I understood
how hard it was for PBL tutorial participants to regard themselves as ac-
tive knowledge constructors rather than passive recipients parroting the ob-
jective knowledge produced by the mainstream business and management
textbooks. This article is based on these notions. The aim is to describe and
analyse how students pursuing international business studies try to make
sense of the textual material they have studied for a closing PBL tutorial. I
am especially interested in exploring how students position themselves with
regard to knowing. The empirical material I drew from is derived from a
videotaped PBL closing tutorial at Helia Business Polytechnic during the au-
tumn of 2001. At this time, the students had only had one semester of PBL.
A problem-based learning tutorial discussion as a site for knowing and
interaction is constructed, negotiated and renegotiated continuously during
an international business programme. Students produce discursive practices
of knowing, language, modes of interaction and social identities within the
domain of international business. They use various resources from a wide
variety of cultural and social realms in creating these practices. I am partic-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 123

 Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

ularly interested in gaining a glimpse of how students negotiate knowledge

and knowing when exploiting the material they have studied during the in-
dependent knowledge creation phase. My goal is to indicate how challenging
it is for them to question the information expressed in textbooks and how
tight the conventions are that endorse the contents of business and man-
agement textbooks as the dominant, neutral, natural, and taken-for-granted
discourse of international business.
The structure of this article is as follows. First, I explore the goals of the
PBL tutorial script. By PBL tutorial script I mean the tutorial procedure (the
steps or the cycle) which structures the tutorial interaction. PBL provides a
fairly firm and yet reasonably effective script to guide the interaction of a
collaborative group towards the completion of their task. The tutorial par-
ticipants are invited to negotiate their roles within this script and to intro-
duce sufficient flexibility to the tutorial modes of interaction.
I am particularly interested in how the students are instructed for the
self-study phase and how they orientate themselves towards various sources
of information. The sources that are mainly used in international business
education are Anglo-American textbooks and other popular management
books describing business operations. I therefore analyse how the interna-
tional business textbooks are seen to have been constructed and what kinds
of reader positions they offer to their student-readers. These reader posi-
tions are generally revealed when students talk about their learning in the
tutorial discussions. Earlier, I studied (Alanko-Turunen 2005) how these
students invite and negotiate various genres and discourses within a tuto-
rial site, and in this article, I concentrate on analysing one closing tutorial
discussion which exposes the variety of discursive resources international
students draw on during the early phases of their PBL studies. Finally, I dis-
cuss the role and status of international business studies in enabling certain
discourses of business to dominate curricula in general and a tutorial dis-
cussion in particular.

124 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

WORKING OUT A TEXT

PBL tutorial participants setting learning objectives and the direction of

their self-study in a tutorial context

The starting point of PBL is that learning occurs when active and independ-
ent learners work collaboratively with problems in a tutorial setting, reflect-
ing their assumptions and the premises of their thinking and actions. In
the tutorial group setting, learning and problem-solving are facilitated by a
tutor. A tutorial should provide a safe setting in which students can explore,
reflect and attempt understanding, rather than seeking to learn and remem-
ber the right answers. This setting involves several phases depending on the
PBL script adopted by the curriculum. The major difference between these
scripts are that the Maastrichtian seven-jump procedure (Schmidt 1983)
rests more on the cognitive approach to learning which underlines the sig-
nificance of the rational problem-solving process and individual knowledge
construction. Furthermore, the role of assessment is not explicitly embedded
in the learning process (e.g. Poikela 1998). The cyclical models of PBL em-
phasise the experiential approach to learning as well as the role of continu-
ous assessment and evaluation (Poikela 1998; Poikela 2003).
The PBL tutorials take place within a certain model of PBL curriculum.
Savin-Baden (2000) has examined various models of PBL curricula and
concluded that they can be differentiated by the ways in which knowledge,
learning, and the role of the student are created within them. The position-
ing of knowledge or knowing in the PBL curriculum is revealed by the ways
in which triggers are expected to be solved, processed and managed, as well
as the through the assessment processes. Curriculum development is thus
based on the stances teachers have taken when planning the processes; they
have had to commit themselves to certain ideas about knowledge, learning,
and the roles of students and teacher. The demands of the world of work have
also been dominant in PBL curriculum reforms. Quite often it has been the
practical side of PBL that has encouraged teachers to transform their curric-
ula, leaving theoretical curriculum discussions aside (see Lindén & Alanko-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 125

 Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

Turunen in PART I). The scripts and roles PBL provide, are seen as simple
and straightforward tools to be used without theoretical considerations.
The various phases of the PBL script guide the tutorial group’s work from
the initial clarification of terms in the learning trigger, through a phase of
problem definition, to a phase of brainstorming in which they express their
initial ideas. Students have to elaborate on their initial ideas and critically
assess what they know and what they do not know. Finally, they have to
compose individual learning objectives for self-directed study. During this
fifth phase of the tutorial script, they agree on their joint learning objec-
tives. They also have to reach an agreement regarding their approaches to
acquiring information: what kinds of resources will they study? The self-
study phase is usually 2–4 days long and contains not only individual study
with textbooks and articles, but also resource lectures, workshops and ex-
pert interviews depending on the theme (e.g. Alanko-Turunen & Öystilä
2003, 107). The starting point of the self-directed study phase is that students
learn to schedule their studying, find relevant sources of information, read
the sources according to the set learning objective and challenge the sources
based on the logic of the arguments presented in the read materials. Fur-
thermore, students are expected to process the material they have studied by
producing notes and concept-maps. These summaries help them to present
their meaning-making to the others in a rapidly progressing tutorial discus-
sion. They are also expected to bring along to the tutorial topics they found
difficult to understand. Students who master critical information retrieval,
processing and assessing skills can be described as information literate (see
e.g. Ruokolainen 2005).
During the closing phase, students discuss and synthesise the results of
their self-study in order to gain a deeper, more detailed understanding of
the processes and phenomena underlying the problem under study. Students
are invited to elaborate their understanding by probing, structuring and so-
cially validating. The effectiveness of the closing phase depends, according
to students, on the amount and nature of students’ explanations, application
and integration of knowledge, discussion of counter-related differences of
opinions and measured guidance of the group discussion (Visschers-Plei-

126 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

WORKING OUT A TEXT

jers, Dolmans, de Grave, Wolfhagen, Jacobs & van der Vleuten 2006). The
more advanced students are expected to deconstruct the multitude of ways
in which scientific knowledge is created and what positions writers of certain
disciplines take when employing certain concepts and pre-understandings.
They should pose problems and examine the assumptions underpinning the
knowledge they have studied. Critical students, it is assumed, will question
naturalised truths and understand the contestable nature of knowledge and
the power/knowledge relationship.

Textbooks as learning resources – the reading positions offered

Conventional business education is usually presented as if the skills and com-

petences it promotes are acultural, ahistorical and unrelated to the power
relations that shape life in organisations and society. Graduates are equipped
to undertake assignments, carry out instructions and work with others, but
they are not necessarily able to analyse or critique a situation in which they
find themselves or information which has been given to them.
The most important information sources employed in international busi-
ness education – unless students have former experience of business opera-
tions beyond that of being customers – are textbooks and popular manage-
ment texts written by famous managing directors of companies or gurus
in specific fields. Business textbooks appear to give a rather homogenised
and value-free picture of society so as not to present any uncomfortable
controversies to the students (e.g. Perlmutter 1997; Grey 2005). Textbooks
about marketing, especially, appear to portray it as a neutral tool. A consid-
erable portion of these textbooks is dedicated to introducing the student to
a specialised vocabulary of concepts and definitions. Hackley (2001; 2003)
even goes so far as to claim that marketing textbooks carry epistemologi-
cal bacteria, that infect students after their first encounter with them. He
points out the immediacy, the simplicity, the directness and the practicality
of mainstream marketing textbooks. If, thereafter, one adopts a tone or style

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 127

 Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

of argument which does not coincide with this, students and lecturers find it
quite easy to comment that ‘this is not marketing’.
International business knowledge is in danger of becoming a series of
pre-packaged information fixes, often understood as the creation of a par-
ticular expert, with a slightly unusual yet memorable name such as Kotler,
Hofstede or Trompenaars. Watson (2004, 239–254) encapsulates this phe-
nomenon in an article aptly entitled ‘Motivation, that’s Maslow, isn’t it?’ The
training of international business practitioners has not been tied to certain
theoretical traditions; rather it has been shaped through general and univer-
sal, mainly Anglo-American textbook recipes (Eriksson 1999). The Anglo-
American dominance of textbooks reflects particular social constructions of
the business world, usually written by white, middle-class male professors.
This recipe-like format approach seems to transform business discourses
into McCommunication (Block 2001, 117–133) which underlines not only
the fact that the process relies on a framework which over-rationalises com-
munication, but also that this framework is commodified and spread around
the world. McCommunication could be understood as the framing of com-
munication as a rational activity committed to the transfer of information
between and among individuals in an efficient, calculable, predictable and
controllable manner via the use of language, understood strictly in linguistic
terms (syntax, morphology, phonology and lexis). The spread of McCom-
munication is manifested in the worldwide sales of popular management
books. Students of business and management are likely to become accus-
tomed to this type of discourse and learn from it how to communicate in
business contexts.
Roberts (2005) has elaborated a similar line of thought regarding the de-
velopment of textbooks. She has named it the Ritzerisation of knowledge,
referring to the book McCommunication (sic!) of Society by James Ritzer.
The Ritzerised academic text involves repackaging existing knowledge and
associating it with a popular brand. Rationalising the production of aca-
demic texts leads to highly readable texts for students but, at the same time,
when the market judges the success of ideas and information, then the mar-
ket determines what information is available to students. Students, accord-

128 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

WORKING OUT A TEXT

ing to Roberts, spend time reading highlights of edited great works instead
of more challenging works that would demand more from a student reader.
Knowledge-lite as opposed to a broad and rich knowledge base seems to be
the flavour of the month in higher education.
Textbooks address their readers, and position them in ideological rela-
tions through various grammatical and lexical devices. Texts operate prag-
matically through the use of pronominalisations, modal auxiliaries, and the
selection of speech acts such as questions and commands, injunctions and
orders. These lexical and grammatical choices construct different relations
of power and agency between readers and writers, and between students and
textbooks (e.g. Luke 1997).
Fairclough (1995) claims that reading positions are constrained and
limited by the nature of the text. Even though business and management
textbooks are written for a particular reading position, texts are neverthe-
less open to a multitude of readings and it is the reader’s task to produce
these meanings. Readers produce meanings from the linguistic and visual
elements in texts by taking one of the three typical reading positions that are
offered to the reader (e.g. Luke 1995; Hall 1980). The first reading position is
called the preferred reading position. Here, the reader adopts the invited or
intended reading. The second reading position is the alternative, negotiated
position, where the active reader partly shares the preferred reading code
although recognises some discrepancies in the text. She may modify the text
in a manner which reflects her own interests and experiences. The third
reading position entails reading against the grain; the authority of writer
is challenged and the reader analyses the text by positioning the writer and
what the writer assumes of and from the reader (e.g. Ellsworth 1997). Fur-
thermore, the reader recognises the silences and marginalisations in the text
and identifies biases and contradictions, and she may also deconstruct the
text with other perspectives such as a critical or a feminist frame of refer-
ence.
Students should be able to read the textbooks with critical questions in
mind. The guiding question is normally the learning objective collaborative-
ly set in the PBL tutorial discussion. Consequently, learning objectives have

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 129

 Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

a central impact on how students approach and study the chosen theme (see
e.g. Abrandt Dahlgren & Öberg 2001). Moreover, the form of the learning
objective is dependent on the nature of the problem in the trigger. It should
provoke debate and demand that students take a stance. Therefore, a student
should also formulate her own questions in accordance with the collabora-
tive learning objective in order to understand how the writer is producing a
social construct of multiple discourses. Therefore, she has to identify from
the beginning what the writer is intending to construct in the text, and what
kinds of arguments she develops in order to support her case. When reading
the text, students should be invited to write up their notes in order to recon-
struct the main lines of the arguments and their take on these arguments.
The processing of the text challenges them to take full responsibility for the
information they bring back to the tutorial discussion, instead of merely be-
ing neutral reporters of other people’s texts.

Setting the scene and methodology

The PBL curriculum of the International Business Programme (Liibba) was

introduced in spring 2001 at Helia Business Polytechnic. Prior to this, exten-
sive development work had been carried out by an active group of teachers in
order to plan the contents and the methods of the reformed curriculum. The
curriculum model of that time could be categorised more as PBL for profes-
sional learning than PBL for interdisciplinary understanding, although the
development process has now been geared to this new direction. According
to Savin-Baden (2000; 2006), with this model of PBL, students learn to solve
problems and become competent in applying this ability to other kinds of
problem cases and situations within given frameworks. In this way, the stu-
dents develop critical thinking skills for the world of work, often interpreted
fairly narrowly as the ability to use problem-solving abilities in relation to
propositional knowledge as a means of becoming competent in the work
place. The problem with this model is that students do not necessarily com-

130 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

WORKING OUT A TEXT

bine the concepts of skills and know-how with cognitive content and profes-
sional judgement. Although the PBL script for the tutorial setting employed
in this programme is mostly based on the Maastrichtian model, it has been
elaborated by the introduction of an eighth step (assessment), as well as by an
emphasis on continuous assessment during the whole process.
The Liibba curriculum consists of modules which last a semester. The
tutorial discussion studied here is from the second semester and is centred
on the theme of ‘Establishing Business Ventures in the Global Environment’
(24 ETCS). The students worked around a sub-theme of ‘Identifying and
Building Customer Relationships’, which had a certain marketing and in-
tercultural emphasis, for 8 tutorial sessions. The goal was to introduce the
students to the realm of international marketing. This particular sub-theme
was selected for the study because of my own professional and educational
background in marketing, which made ideas conceptually manageable (see
Holliday 2002, 38). My understanding of the tutorial themes assisted me in
following the chains of thoughts and references presented by the tutorial
participants. In this article I concentrate on analysing just one closing tuto-
rial discussion which I videotaped and transcribed. The learning objective
the students had set for the closing tutorial discussion was ‘How do we build
an international customer relationship?’ The trigger, from which this objec-
tive was formulated, was not produced in collaboration with companies, un-
like the rest of the triggers belonging to this sub-theme.
The videotaped tutorial consisted of 12 students and a tutor. The number
of students in PBL tutorial groups was defined by the financial resources
allocated to the Liibba programme. None of the students spoke English as
their native tongue. The analytical approach I employed in reading the tran-
script and the memo students produced after the tutorial is informed by
critical discourse analysis (Fairclough 2003; 2001). I was not so much trying
to reconstruct the discourses the students drew from in the tutorial, as to
pinpoint the relations, positions and representations that were constructed
among the tutorial participants regarding knowledge and knowing. What
makes Fairclough’s CDA framework appropriate for this type of analysis is
its outlook on texts as intertextual – made of other texts – and its multifunc-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 131

 Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

tional viewpoint in which three social functions are achieved concurrently

(representations, relationships and the constitutive properties of texts).
Critical discourse analysis involves a transparent movement back and forth
between microanalysis of the text exploiting textual and semiotic analyses,
and macroanalysis of the social interactions and power relations that texts
build.

Reconstructed positions and relations to international business knowledge

The learning objective of ‘How do we build an international customer re-

lationship?’ had guided the students’ period of self-study from Thursday
afternoon until Tuesday morning. The required reading list for this theme
included books by Czinkota-Ronkainen, Kotler and Jobber. Some articles
were also handed out on the resource lecture where an overview was given of
some of the cultural frameworks applied in international business.
The Liibba students started their closing discussion by strongly refer-
ring to the concepts and terms they had read, rather than combining their
reading to focus on the problem they had formulated based on the trigger
of the Finnish businesswoman in Singapore. The discussion was guided by
an active discussion leader (DL) who tried to involve certain students in the
discussion. These students seemed to be the ones who were accustomed to
being active. The students were trying to understand how to build an inter-
national customer relationship.

132 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

WORKING OUT A TEXT

Excerpt 1
15 DL Yes, I read a different book
It is about (xxx)public relations and there was something
about building trust – It says it is built on information and
and if both sides have it, then they can build trust, but there
are other things like (xxx) protection, credibility, confidence,
harmony and seeking for mutual understanding and then
there is trust […] (Reads from her notes, shows the cover of the
book to the others)
16 Nelly I thought it was said pretty well in a couple of sentences that
the trust is the beginning of everything. It is difficult to
create and easy to destroy, so and in the trigger they talked
about(.)was it this one(.) they wanted to know the boyfriend
and stuff like that.
So in this one, they say it is not a waste to talk stuff like that,
’cause that kind of builds the trust if you know where you
went to school what you(.)she studied and what kind of back-
ground does she have. It is better for the trust if you know
nothing about this partner.
So they put like another point of view we thought it was funny
that they wanted to know all about her personal stuff but here
it says it is useful.
17 Heidi Yeah, I found out that (.) in this business instructions(.)this
is Business in Singapore that and there is just about what you
are talking about trust and in Singapore they like had to build
on really personal relationship they concern it really impor-
tant when making a business deal and they must genuinely
like you before they can feel ease with you and do business
with you. (She shows the pile of papers she has printed from the
internet, looks at her papers firmly and, in the end, looks at her
peers)

The main sources of knowing seemed to be books and summaries printed

from the internet. Students felt they did not need to mention the sources

 Transcription conventions:
(xxx) one or more words are inaudible or unclear
(.) a brief pause
[…] some material from the original transcript has been omitted

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 133

 Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

in detail: it was enough to show the cover of the book or a pile of papers to
make them legitimate sources. The names of the writers were not mentioned
nor was their credibility as information providers judged. The discussion
leader encapsulated her reading in a list of words and no one questioned the
concepts or terms. It seemed enough simply to express these terms. Nelly
tried to involve herself in the discussion by seizing on the term ‘trust’. She
did not specify her source either, she only noted, that ‘it was said pretty well’
or ‘they say’ and assessed the source as reliable. She attempted to combine
her reading with the prior discussion by explaining how the book provided
a different outlook for understanding the meaning of building trust. The
contents of the book were not challenged; they were reported in a neutral
manner in the tutorial. Rarely did the students submit ideas from the book
as ‘the author argues’ or ‘the writer suggests’. Heidi simply stated that she
found something on the internet and proceeded to share it with the oth-
ers. Knowledge seemed to be regarded as something found and received – it
was definitive and neutral. The relationship between the authors and stu-
dents was distant, and tutorial participants gave authority to these writers
by ensuring that quotations came directly from their books. Hence, neither
editing nor reconstruction work was undertaken. The position of the stu-
dent was thus that of a reporter of authorial information, a quiet acceptor of
submitted information or a passive listener. She could also be marginalised
in the tutorial if she could not explicitly contribute information based on the
written materials that were required reading.
During Heidi’s turn (17), one could also identify the hortatory genre of
many popular management books. This genre is evident in texts where the
author seeks to persuade the reader to fulfil commands that are given in a
discourse. This is usually achieved by first establishing the credibility of the
text producer. Then a problematic situation is presented and the text pro-
ducer issues one or more commands which can also be softened to sugges-
tions of varying urgency. Finally, the text producer moves to motivation for
action. (e.g. Longacre 1992.) In terms of taxis, the way clauses and sentences
are related to each other, the syntax of the hortatory genre seems to be pre-
dominantly paratactic, with one clause or sentence constituting an addition

134 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

WORKING OUT A TEXT

to the others. These hortatory lists are thus easily memorised, and facilitate
the transition from prescription to action. (e.g. Fairclough 2003, 152.)
In the following extract (Excerpt 2) the students had renegotiated the
PBL script as one of the participants, Boris, was not content with the struc-
ture of the discussion. He was subsequently appointed by the DL as an assist-
ant discussion leader. He had problems in taking the role as he also wanted
to be the main contributor to the discussion.

Excerpt 2
105 Boris I could start with Hofstede’s four dimensions, first the power
distance. As we can see, Singapore is very high and Finland
more low – power distance, ah anybody know what it is?
(waits briefly for an answer, but continues quickly)
It is just the level of hierarchy (draws a vertical line in the air).
It is strong hierarchy where the boss is really the boss[…]
When I read this stuff and what you asked about Germany I
always thought and read that Germany is really hierarchical
(has problems in pronunciation, grimaces) country, and here
I read that power distance is really low, I don’t believe that! I
see it in the structures of our firms.
Do you have anything about that (looks straight to the tutor)?
106 Nelly Can it be it says here that it is West Germany, could it be that
is has been(.)?
107 Boris No.
108 Nelly No, it’s been like that for long time.
109 Boris It has been more extremely in the West Germany. I don’t be-
lieve, that it is true, but.
110 Nelly So, it is more probably like a guideline just(.)(.)
111 Boris So(.)could we talk about(.)
112 Kaius (His talk overlaps with Boris) Maybe it is that the power dis-
tance is not that big in Germany, but there is like a structure
which is really important, do you know what I mean?
For example in the Latin countries where the power distance
is very big there are many levels. (looks at Boris)
From how to say normal workers to the manager there are like
tens of middle managers and like never this guy who is in the
bottom can talk with the manager. There is always so many
levels and the information gets through so slowly [...] because

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 135

 Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

maybe you don’t have power distance is that much but the
structure
113 Boris If it is strong structure, with not so many levels, but between
those levels there is really a gap, an obvious gap, it is not easy
for the employees to jump over one level and talk directly to
a boss – he would be afraid of doing this (Kaius shows in ges-
tures, and saying ‘yes’ that he understands)
114 DL How about Indonesia?

Boris showed in Excerpt 2 that he had reflected on the issue and compared
his experiences and the contents of the book. He questioned the argument
presented in the book and tried, first by looking at the tutor, to find a solu-
tion regarding the incongruity. The tutor did not intervene in the discussion
but waited for other participants to probe the matter. Nelly was ready to
point out that the source referred to a study made in West Germany, not in
united Germany. Boris was not content with this explanation and still in-
sisted that he could not believe the source. Nelly tried to work as a mediator
in relation to this question, using low modality, and defined the status of the
source as a guide giving general outlines. In this way, she did not dismiss the
information presented in the book. This seemed to dampen the discussion
for a short while.
Boris continued to lead the discussion to the next dimension in Hofst-
ede’s model, but Kaius wanted to pursue the previous topic. There were, at
this point, two active discussants negotiating positions as sense makers. Oth-
ers were left to follow their reasoning. Kaius and Boris did not consult the
resource book in order to find out how Hofstede had argued his case, which
was based on a survey he had conducted and the factor analysis he had car-
ried out. Neither did they assess the logic and argumentation of Hofstede’s
study. They did not look for material that would have challenged Hofstede’s
results (e.g. McSweeney 2002; Williamson 2002). They remained at the level
of accepting various conceptions, but did not take an active stance in assess-
ing the arguments in order to construct a more developed understanding or
a solution to the problem identified in the learning trigger.

136 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

WORKING OUT A TEXT

The following excerpt shows how the students related to the topics they
had discussed up to this point and how they entered them into the memo.

Excerpt 3
226 Nelly Maybe we covered it all?
227 Kaius I don’t think so (.) because this is so big, huge, we could talk
like five hours about this (.)
228 Recorder It is difficult to put all the relevant things in here (xxx) make
it a little bit longer (others agreeing and saying ‘yeah’)
229 Maria I don’t think it has to be that long because we have had to
study this thing at home maybe it could be like a reminder in
the memo, some key phrases like, you don’t have to write it
all over again (.) we have to really know these before we come
here and not to read them from the memo, that is not(.) It is
all here (.) (looks at her papers, others agree with her by saying
‘yeah’)

At the end of the tutorial the students summarised the contents of the dis-
cussion, and the recorder produced a recap of what had been said up to that
point. Nelly, in turn 226, using a low modality, suggested that ‘Maybe we
covered it all?’ This suggests the idea that learning is about covering certain
concepts and ideas from various materials – a phenomenon that is neatly
described by Margetson (1994) with the expression ‘coveritis syndrome’.
Becoming an international business person was construed as knowing the
‘right’ terms and concepts. The students were anxious about whether they
had achieved this. Kaius tried to position himself as understanding the scope
of the studied area, but others did not accept this idea. The recorder worried
about how to write down all the important terminology. Maria, meanwhile,
reminded everyone about the role of the closing tutorial and the need to be
prepared for the discussion. She stressed the importance of learning the ma-
jor concepts even prior to the discussion, thus the role of the memo was con-
structed as simply a reminder of key phrases. This seemed to create the idea
of the tutorial as a forum for students simply to tell one another that they had

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 137

 Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

‘covered’ the required material, and therefore knew the subject; discussion,
arguing and sense-making were marginalised at this point of the tutorial.
The brief memo produced by the recorder of the tutorial was consistent
with the reporting tone of the tutorial discussion. The memo consisted of a
list of topics that had been covered: trust, the phases of developing a custom-
er relationship and the four dimensions of culture-related values outlined by
Hofstede. It was interesting to note that these themes were written in a de-
contextualised manner, drawing once again from the textbooks rather than
from the actual discussion that took place. What was totally missing, were
the examples and personal experiences shared in the tutorial. These were
not understood as valid sources of information, to be recorded in the memo.
Furthermore, the discussion about understanding the learning objective and
solving the problem was also absent from the memo.

Discussion and concluding remarks

My goal was to provide some glimpses of the tutorial discussion in the early
stages of implementing PBL as a pedagogical approach in an international
business curriculum. I have taken a somewhat critical stance in my con-
strual of the tutorial discussion. By studying the tutorial closing session I
have represented the social practices present there at that particular time.
One has to bear in mind that it may take as long as 18 months for students
to grow accustomed to and feel comfortable with identifying themselves as
knowledge constructors instead of information reproducers.
What seemed to count as international business knowledge in the early
phases of discussion in the PBL tutorial were the objective facts represent-
ed in mainstream business books (cf. Kaksonen in PART II). These were
granted the status of neutral information; they were authoritative and per-
suasive in their constructions of the identity of the future businessperson.
Their content was reproduced almost verbatim time and time again in the
tutorial. The dominant discourses of business textbooks offered the students

138 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

WORKING OUT A TEXT

the identities of passive reproducers of received knowledge. Business litera-

ture operated as a powerful machine in the tutorial. The employment of a
new pedagogical approach, such as PBL, did not immediately lead to new
means of understanding and making sense of the content. Even though stu-
dents had problems to be solved or they had to apply the information to the
case company situation, they seemed to prefer to stick to the order of re-
porting the concepts from the book and then, if time allowed, tried to apply
them to a case. The content of textbooks appeared to be produced in a way
that seduced the student-reader into taking a special reading position. This
position ought to be resisted by introducing students to an oppositional or
misreading of materials. Students should be encouraged to ask, for example,
why this current organisational reality is promoted in these texts; why this
reality and not another; and what ends are served and not served by this ver-
sion of reality (e.g. Korpiaho & Päiviö 2004).
Business and management education in general, and the textbooks in
particular, seem to socialise students into a view of what is normal and natu-
ral in the world. Business education could be taken as a symbolic indica-
tor of possession of particular sorts of values, a particular code, rather than
possession of certain skills. It offers entry into a code of business – a basis
for communication. This business script offers positions, orientations and a
sense of community. The role of business faculties is to legitimise this lan-
guage. (For more see Grey 2005.) While PBL is often advocated as a progres-
sive methodology, the PBL literature demonstrates little interest in using it
to promote the kind of criticality associated with examining assumptions
underlying accepted knowledge and the professions’ power to maintain the
status quo. (e.g. Hesketh 2005.) In addition, Yanar (2001) maintains that it
is quite possible that the representative of the educational institution, in this
case the tutor, might genuinely invite the students to participate in knowl-
edge construction. However, it is also possible that she might unintention-
ally expect the tutorial participants to base their knowledge on the prevail-
ing knowledge claims that are intertwined with the dominant mainstream
discourses.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 139

 Merja ALANKO-TURUNEN

Crump and Costan (2003) even imply that business education relies on
a system of closed pedagogical objects which create and sustain a fantasy
world in whose mirror future managers see themselves as privileged experts
able to comprehend and manage the complexity of work organisations. The
notion of closed pedagogical objects involves the reduction of learning to
simplistic, unreflective schemata. The tutorial discussion should endorse
the understanding that studying business is a fully discursive activity that
should be critically challenged, scrutinised and deconstructed from various
perspectives.

140 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 Helvi Kaksonen
University of Tampere

THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION

AS RESOURCES FOR COLLABORATIVE
KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

In this article I describe how the repertoires of the tutorial discussions can
be resources for collaborative knowledge construction. It is important to
study tutorial discussions because tutorials lie at the core of PBL (Poikela, E.
2002a). The research context in this study was the programme for kinder-
garten teachers at the University of Tampere. The data were video recordings
of tutorial discussions which were examined using discourse analysis. This
article is a part of my PhD degree, which was made possible through the sup-
port of the Academy of Finland and the “Life as Learning” project award for
the ProBell research group.

Starting points

Rapid changes in working life and other areas of our post-modern society
are bringing challenges to education. Key questions to study are: What kind

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 141

 Helvi KAKSONEN

of competence and expertise is needed in working life now and in the fu-
ture? How is expertise understood? Where is expertise produced? Another
important concern, especially in the area of academic education, is how to
develop a connection between education and working life and how to estab-
lish a connection between theory and practice. (Tynjälä & Collin 2000.) It is
important to discuss how education can reveal new directions and function
as a developer and innovator of working life practices. Recent views on the
nature and development of expertise emphasise problem-solving skills (Be-
reiter & Scardamalia 1993), collaborative skills (Iedema & Scheeres 2003),
participation in learning communities (Lave & Wenger 1991) and participa-
tion in creating new knowledge (Bereiter 2002; Bereiter & Scardamalia 1993;
Hakkarainen, Palonen & Paavola 2002; Tynjälä 2006).
One pedagogical challenge in developing academic education and the
curriculum is how to develop connection with working life, and how to inte-
grate learning at work placements with theoretical studies (Ahola 2004; Col-
lin & Tynjälä 2002; Tynjälä & Collin 2000). Problem-based learning (PBL)
is one approach to connecting education and working life. Many studies of
collaborative leaning have been made in school environments and in com-
puter or web-based learning environments (see Arvaja 2005). However, there
is little research on collaborative learning or knowledge construction in the
PBL environment (see Alanko-Turunen 2005).
The Department of Early Childhood Education at the University of Tam-
pere has followed a PBL-based curriculum since the year 2000 (see Num-
menmaa, Karila, Virtanen & Kaksonen 2006). During 2000–2006, learning
at work placements was integrated into every year of the curriculum and
into some of the courses offered by the programme. Thus PBL was used not
only for theoretical studies, but also for learning at work placements. The
theoretical background includes the idea of a close relationship between
knowledge and action (Dewey 1999/1929), and solving problems can act as
a bridge between work and theoretical studies (see Poikela, E. & Poikela, S.
2005b). In my view, knowledge can also be seen as a collaborative construc-
tion process that takes place in work tutorials. In this study, the theoretical
background is linked to social constructivism (Burr 1995). Here, the concept

142 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION AS RESOURCES OF COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

of “collaborative knowledge construction” refers to discussion in which a

small group constructs new knowledge while solving a problem or carrying
out a learning task (cf. Dillenbourg 1999).

The purpose of the research, data collection and the method of analysis

In this article the focus is on the question “How do different repertoires act
as resources for collaborative knowledge construction?” The specific re-
search questions are

• What kinds of repertoires do students use in tutorials, when they talk

of knowledge?
• How do students use these repertoires in constructing collaborative
knowledge?

Research data

The data collection methods were observation and the video recording of tu-
torial discussions. The research data comprises nine tutorial discussions that
took place over three learning-at-work periods among five tutorial groups.
The data collection was conducted during 2004 and 2006. The focus of the
research and the analysis is on the seventh and eighth phases of the tuto-
rial procedure. The total number of students participating in tutorials was
49. The number of students in each tutorial varied from 6 to 12. The same
tutor was present in all tutorials for practical reasons. In discourse analy-
sis, the purpose is not to compare different persons, because the analytical
unit is not a person, but a repertoire system. My orientation to collaborative
knowledge construction has been social constructionism (Burr 1995). From
this perspective, language has a constructive task; it does not simply offer a

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 143

 Helvi KAKSONEN

picture of reality, it is a part of it. (Potter & Wetherell 1989, 173; Suoninen
1993, 49.)

Data analysis

Discourse analysis is often regarded as a loose theoretical framework, which

can be interpreted and used in a number of different ways. In this study I
have drawn on ideas from the tradition of discursive psychology. My interest
was in seeing how students used language and constructed knowledge with-
in the course of tutorial interaction (Potter & Wetherell 1989). Many terms
from discourse analysis (repertoire, discourse, frame) are used to describe
what is constructed on the basis of the data. I have used the term “reper-
toire” because it allows more effective analysis of everyday talk than official
language (Jokinen, Juhila & Suoninen 1993, 26–28). People have various ver-
sions of reality and one person can use different repertoires in a discussion
about one topic. (Jokinen et al. 1993, 112–113.)

Repertoires in collaborative knowledge construction

The students typically used nine different repertoires in talking about

knowledge in tutorials, which I named as follows: text, observation, remem-
bering, agency, criticism, difficulty, consideration, interpretation and goal-
means repertoires.
In the text repertoire the students described seeking and locating infor-
mation in books, on the internet or in other written sources. In this reper-
toire the students gave summaries and listed items; they also used expres-
sions such as “what I found in a book”, “what the books say”. Elements were
constructed in passive and static terms. During this style of talk students
considered their position in relation to the target as that of outsiders. The

144 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION AS RESOURCES OF COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

questions presented in this repertoire often took a passive form: “Was it said
…?”
In the observation repertoire students described physical environments,
practices and the actions of children and adults. In this repertoire the posi-
tion of the speaker was that of a spectator and a listener. The observation
repertoire was characterised by subjectivity, and thus it included talk about
experience, drawing on such expressions as “There was …” and “I noticed
…”. The questions in the observation repertoire took the form of “Did you
see …?” and “Was there …?”
In the remembering repertoire – which was characterised by passed time
– students recalled personal, individual and concrete events from childhood.
Their own position was considered from the point of view of a child actor.
Verbs tended to be in a past tense and there were expressions such as “It was
…” and “I remember when …”. The students talk about the past events using
narrative and reporting tenses. In this repertoire students also talked about
their feelings and occasionally employed strong expressions.
In the agency repertoire, students talked about their actions and solu-
tions. Here, it was possible to accomplish things. A feature of this repertoire
was the use of “we” and action was described in terms of “an opportunity to
act”. The position of the speaker was considered from the viewpoint of an ac-
tor. In the repertoire there were expressions of feelings such as “I am lucky”
or “Sometimes I had to make irritating decisions”.
In the criticism repertoire it was the problems of the action environment
that made an impact. With this type of talk students sometimes employed
strong expressions: “It was stuck” and “It never happened”. There were oc-
casional expressions of feelings, and the style of talk was narrative. Here,
students made frequent use of the present tense and also of negatives. The
criticism repertoire was often characterised by the use of softeners; to tone
down a criticism, students referred to the opinions of others and to the con-
ditions or frequency of the phenomenon.
In the difficulty repertoire students described their actions when con-
fronted with difficulties, and such descriptions invariably included such
expressions as “It is difficult …”. Students often used negatives when de-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 145

 Helvi KAKSONEN

scribing difficulties and the feelings which were related to these difficul-
ties were sometimes communicated with strong expressions. Many students
expressed the need for support from the mentor in these difficulties. In the
difficulty repertoire students often talked about children’s individuality and
how to take it into consideration during their actions. Experiences of dif-
ficulty were also connected to planning. In the difficulty repertoire the style
of talk was at the level of individual situations and environments.
In the interpretation repertoire an explanation or meaning was found
for phenomena. This repertoire included expressions such as “To my mind
…” and “It is like this because …”. In the interpretation repertoire the style
of talk was that of personal interpretation, either of individual cases or at
a general level. I refer to the explanation of individual cases as situational
explanation and of generalisations as conceptual explanation. In these ex-
planations the value dimension of an issue can often be seen. The interpreta-
tion repertoire seems to require either a text, an observation or an operation
towards which the interpretation is directed.
In the consideration repertoire the picture of the phenomena was hazy
and contained many possibilities. The style of speech could indeed be de-
scribed as the repertoire of possibilities. Typical forms of expressions includ-
ed “Could it be …?”, “Perhaps …” and “I will think about it”. In this reper-
toire students talked both about individual cases and at a general level. The
consideration repertoire also included rhetorical questions. Furthermore,
there were speculative questions which were based either on imaginary or
real situations in the consideration repertoire.
In the goal-means repertoire the students’ aim was to improve their own
actions or practices. This repertoire sometimes applied to the individual case
and was sometimes an expression of objectives and means at a more general
level. The verbs of the repertoire were in the conditional or present tenses
and the forms of expressions were sometimes strong, including modals such
as “I must” and “I should”. In this repertoire the adult’s pedagogic role was
stressed. In addition, the repertoire was typically normative by nature and
contained a value dimension.

146 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION AS RESOURCES OF COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

How the repertoires were used

When analysing the use of repertoires a range of functions were observed.

It was possible to identify four different styles of speaking on the basis of
these repertoires: repeating, applied, inquiring and developing talk. While
some repertoires were constructed alone, others were integrated into other
repertoires. These repertoires were the text, observation, remembering and
agency repertoires. The repertoires that appeared in a solitary form were
giving a summary, stating or repeating, and describing.
The function of the repertoires was mainly information transmission.
I refer to this kind of repertoire as repeating talk. Next, I will describe the
repertoires which were used on their own. In addition to information trans-
mission, the text repertoire was used for emphasising a lack of experience.
The observation repertoire was used to describe the interests and behaviour
of the children and to transmit action ideas to other students. As well as
transmitting information and describing feelings, the remembering reper-
toire was used for entertainment purposes, for creating a positive atmos-
phere in the group and for maintaining group solidity. In addition to infor-
mation transmission, the agency repertoire was used for the description of
students’ own means. Except for the text repertoire, the talk was at the level
of individual cases.
These repertoires may become integrated into other repertoires. When
the text repertoire was integrated with the observation repertoire, the talk
was applied. I refer to this integrated talk as applied talk. Students sought
examples to illustrate observations made in the text repertoire or to supple-
ment the text repertoire. These illustrations were used to confirm the re-
search results or theories that had been indicated in the text repertoire. I
refer to such integrated repertoires as inquiring talk, where the repertoires
were connected to interpretative or consideration repertoires. Together, the
text, observation and also the criticism repertoire were used to criticise theo-
ries that had been presented in books. When an interpretation repertoire
was attached to text and observation repertoires, conceptual explanations

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 147

 Helvi KAKSONEN

were sought from the book. In such cases the text repertoire might be con-
nected to the consideration of ethical questions.
The observation and interpretation repertoires contained, an explana-
tion or a contention regarding the observed matter, and thus served as a
means of argumentation. Together, the observation and consideration rep-
ertoires were used to make comparisons and to support or overturn earlier
considerations. The observation repertoire was also connected to the agency
repertoire. In this case the observations served as a starting point for a new
action. The information that was received through the observations was uti-
lised in the planning and realisation of the action.
The remembering repertoire, in connection with the interpretation rep-
ertoire, served to offer a meaning or explanation. When the agency reper-
toire was used in connection with the interpretation repertoire, the meaning
of the student’s own actions was justified. The connection to the consid-
eration repertoire meant that different possibilities for action were thought
about beforehand, during the action or afterwards. In connection with the
goal-means repertoire, new targets or means were set for individual action
and for solving difficulties. The difficulty repertoire was integrated into the
goal-means, agency, interpretation, and consideration repertoires. On the
one hand, difficulties were specifically encountered through the action; on
the other, action subsequent to the difficulties was explained, as students
described how the difficulties had been resolved. The interpretation reper-
toire revealed the reasons and significance behind the difficulties. In the
consideration repertoire, however, solutions to the difficulties were thought
about beforehand, during the action or afterwards. In the inquiring talk
the repertoire was produced on the one hand at the level of individual cases
and on the other at the level of general phenomena. I refer to the level of the
individual cases as horizontal talk and the level of general phenomena as
vertical talk.
In analysing the use of repertoires I found two combinations of develop-
ing talk which were used for describing the present situation and for exam-
ining problems or difficulties which were seen and encountered. This type of
talk also produced an aim to improve or develop the situation at the level of

148 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION AS RESOURCES OF COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

Observation repertoire
5 1a
1b

2b
3b Interpretation repertoire
Agency repertoire Text repertoire Criticism repertoire

Consideration repertoire

3a
4 2a

Goal-means repertoire

FIGURE 1. Displacements in developing talk in relation to the acting environment

action. One of these combinations of talk applied to the individual level and
the other to the environmental level. The following figure (Figure 1) depicts
developing talk at the level of the acting environment.
Figure 1 illustrates the collaborative knowledge construction process.
The repertoires with bold lines are, in my view, the places where it is possible
to move from the level of individual cases to the level of general phenom-
ena in tutorial discussions. By means of common interpretation and con-
sideration, and by using conceptual explanations, it is possible to achieve
an understanding of the essence of the phenomenon under discussion. Fur-
thermore, in the goal-means repertoire it is possible to produce potential
knowledge which is directed towards the future. Students can make use of
this knowledge in new situations and activities. Although I have numbered
the process of displacements, the order of displacements can vary. Further-
more, all repertoires in Figure 1 are not found in all developing talk. The
agency repertoire, for example, may be missing. Several group members can
participate in producing these repertoires.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 149

 Helvi KAKSONEN

In Figure 1 collaborative knowledge construction begins with the obser-

vation repertoire in which a student describes the conditions or events of
the environment. One can move directly from the observation repertoire or
through the interpretation repertoire, to the criticism repertoire (displace-
ments 1a or 1b and 2a). In the criticism repertoire a student describes prob-
lems which he/she has observed in the environment, and from this repertoire
the student can move either directly to the goal-means repertoire (displace-
ment 2a) or to the interpretation or consideration repertoire (displacement
2b) in which he/she can explain or consider the reasons for the phenomenon
being criticised. In this interpretation and consideration process there can
be many participants, in which case it is possible to examine the phenom-
enon from several alternative viewpoints. The talk that has been produced
in the interpretation repertoire can either be situational explanation or the
text repertoire integrated with conceptual explanation. In this way, it is pos-
sible to produce a common reserve of knowledge regarding the essence of the
phenomenon. Furthermore, shared reflections also are possible in this proc-
ess. From the interpretation repertoire the student can move back to the ob-
servation repertoire and the criticism repertoire (displacements 1b and 1a).
This produces new critical observations. From the interpretation repertoire
the student can move either to the agency repertoire or to the goal-means
repertoire (displacements 3b or 3a).
When moving to the agency repertoire, the student describes how he/she
has tried to act in the environment criticised earlier. Possibly he/she moves,
at this stage, back to the interpretation or the consideration repertoire (dis-
placement 3a). Alternatively, the student can move from the interpretation
repertoire to the goal-means repertoire (displacement 3b). In this displace-
ment the process tutor with his/her questions is an important initiator. The
goal-means repertoire includes the consideration of different alternatives.
The new, collaboratively constructed knowledge reserve is a potential re-
source for the student in new situations and actions (displacement 4), in
which he/she can make observations for new collaborative knowledge con-
struction (displacement 5). I illustrate the processes occurring in Figure 1

150 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION AS RESOURCES OF COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

with examples from the research data (1a, 1b, 1c and 1d). These examples
are from the second tutorial during the learning-at-work period for third-
year students. The theme of the study period was “Advancing Expertise in
Early Childhood Education” and the object of information collection was
“continuity in the planning and actions of the day care centre”.

Example 1a

313 student 51 well, so, we have a water project going on there, supposed to be going on, but so it
314 is, when here is something, it was stressed last time, that the source is children, but,
315 it isn’t, actually, they have decided it beforehand that they will take it, so not so
316 many children’s thoughts are taken into consideration that they have decided
317 beforehand what they will include in the project and they have planned beforehand
318 what will be done each day …((the description continues))

323 …then I still asked the mentor what she

324 thinks about that the way the continuity is realised, so she asked “what”
325 ((laughter)), in other words, it has not become conscious in a way, so surely
326 somehow
327 tutor yy-y
328 student 51 so one progresses logically and knows what must be done but not consciously take
329 into consideration how children’s idea’s could be considered ((another critical
330 episode is following))

In line 313 student 51 produces an observation repertoire by telling others

that there is a water project going on. He/she uses the expression “we have”
which implies that the student is a part of the day care centre. On the other
hand, s/he uses the expression “there” which can be interpreted as a distanc-
ing cue, showing that the student is not involved in all actions. The expres-
sion “supposed” signals the approach of the criticism repertoire into which
the student moves, in line 313, with the word “but”.
However, before this criticism, the student moves to the interpretation
repertoire (line 314) and points to an earlier tutorial and to a talk about
taking the children’s ideas into consideration. The student uses the word
“stress” and so emphasises the importance of the children’s ideas and, at the
 The symbols in the transcription are: (.) =a brief pause; (2) = a pause in seconds;
*…*= a low voice; (…) = some material from the original transcript has been omitted;
((…)) = analyser’s comment.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 151

 Helvi KAKSONEN

same time, justifies the criticism he/she makes. In lines 315–318 the student
describes the questionable action in the criticism repertoire. The core of the
criticism is, on the one hand, the fact that decisions have been made before-
hand, and on the other that attention has not been paid to the children’s
thoughts in planning the project. The student repeats the concept “before-
hand” which can be interpreted as showing the importance of the phenom-
enon being objected to. At the end of the narrative description, in line 325,
laughter arises which can be interpreted as an expression of irony about the
concept of the project. This interpretation is strengthened by the expression
“in other words”, in line 325, with which the student, in a way, interprets
his/her earlier laughter. At the same time he/she is moving towards the in-
terpretation repertoire. The student indicates that the reason for the fact that
continuity is not realised, is that they are not aware of continuity. By using
the concept “become conscious” the student implies that education should
be conscious in nature. In line 328, the student softens the criticism by tell-
ing the others that the action does however progress logically. By using the
concept “must” the student feels that the action in the day care centre is
based on the orientation about what must be done. By repeating the concept
“consciousness” (line 328) the student is underlining its importance. In line
329 the student moves on to the goal-means repertoire and describes the
desired situation in which the children’s ideas are taken into consideration.
In Example 1b student 51 continues his/her earlier description.
In line 346 student 51 moves to the action repertoire and describes his/her
action as a proposition maker. At the same time, the student moves back to
the goal-means repertoire and describes, in lines 346–347, how he/she would
have liked to develop the water theme. In line 348 the student returns to
the criticism repertoire and describes, in narrative form, his/her discussion
with the nurse. The description ends in laughter which can be interpreted as
an ironic and critical response. In line 351 the student moves to the consid-
eration repertoire which is apparent in the expressions “been thinking” and
“could be”. Furthermore, the student tells the others, in line 351, using the
goal-means repertoire that the goal is to offer the children the opportunity
to play. At the end of the sentence the student moves to the criticism reper-

152 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION AS RESOURCES OF COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

Example 1b

346 student 51 I suggested that it would be nice to make, when there is such a small room, so one
347 could put in there some things related to the water theme, so one could make a
348 room, where children could play, so the nurse said that “Yes, yes, we have been
349 thinking about such a thing too, but it is not suitable for play” that there are such
350 tools so that children can visit there but they cannot touch them ((laughter)) I have
351 been thinking if it could be organised there that there would be something to play
352 with, what sense would it make to just pop in there…((discussion about tools contin-
353 ues))

368 student 51 …(.) it would be good to have such a room, that it could have been utilised then, for
369 example, for this project
370 tutor it would be good then if the play environment were changed with the project and
371 theme

toire, culminating in the strong rhetorical question “What sense would it

make …?” In line 368 the student moves on to the consideration repertoire
with a value expression “it would be good”. The consideration repertoire is
connected to the interpretation repertoire where the project is used as the
reason for the student’s intentions. The tutor indicates like-mindedness by
using the same concepts as the student (line 370) and confirming the view-
point of the student. The goal-means repertoire of the tutor is a general level
expression about how one should act in theme or project work. At the same
time, the tutor produces a conceptional justification for the goal by using the
expert terminology of early childhood education. In Example 1c means are
examined for realising continuity.
The tutor presents, in line 601, an open question in the goal-means reper-
toire. The question indicates that thinking and exploring possibilities “could
create” a change in the situation that was described earlier. In line 605 the
student enters the goal-means repertoire by means of the conditional “if”,
and states how it would be possible to act in the situation. In line 609 the
student moves on to the consideration repertoire as he/she suspects that it
might be difficult. Student 45 continues to suspect this – an attitude which
is signalled with the conjunction “and” and with the rhetorical question.
The suspicion is directed towards the personnel and their attitudes regard-
ing the matter. With the “but” conjunction in line 611, the student moves to

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 153

 Helvi KAKSONEN

Example 1c

601 tutor could continuity be created there anyway, in some way, what do you think or do
602 you others think (1) that in such situation how is it possible to get continuity (2)
603 between the situations
604 (2)
605 student 43 … if it is possible, if the following
606 matter is decided, if it possible to change a little and listen to the children, what
607 arises from them
608 tutor so
609 student 43 but it can be *difficult* in a way.
610 student 45 so and how will the others usually react, if they have decided that they do
611 everything to the end but that based of my experience I would recommend trying to
612 discuss things in small groups for example to talk somehow with the children and to
613 write on paper ((discussion of means continues))

the goal-means repertoire and, based on his/her earlier experience, recom-

mends a discussion in a small group. Thus the student refers to his/her own
action which he/she uses to argue the method recommended earlier. In the
last example (example 1d) the tutor brings conceptual explanations into the
discussion.

Example 1d

633 tutor yes, so often in that theme working is that if they really have gone to swim, then
634 it is possible to return to that experience and at the age of the preschool education
635 it is very useful, for example, just by drawing, to describe their experiences and
636 their own thinking and then it is possible to ask them about it how it was there.…
637 ((tutors talk about means continues))
---
642 tutor …so there is however, continuity if one thinks that they would draw their
643 experiences and the children could still talk about it, and if it were possible to pick
644 from it some good ideas and then it could be organised so that child-centred action
645 could take place at many levels too.

In line 633, the tutor uses the expertise terminology of early childhood edu-
cation when speaking about the theme work. He/she continues to describe
how this is achieved in the goal-means repertoire in lines 634 and 635. In
his/her argument the tutor draws on the terminology of development psy-
chology, referring to the “age of the preschool education”. In lines 642–643
the tutor continues to think up ideas for means using the goal-means reper-

154 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION AS RESOURCES OF COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

toire. Finally, he/she moves to the interpretation repertoire in dealing with

the concept of child-centred action. In this interpretation, the tutor argues
that child-centred action can be carried out at many different levels. Figure
2 describes the developing talk at the personal level.
Figure 2 is similar to Figure 1 with the exception that in Figure 2 there is
the agency repertoire instead of the observation repertoire and the difficulty
repertoire instead of the criticism repertoire. Figure 2 describes developing
talk in relation to the action of an individual. Collaborative knowledge con-
struction begins with the agency repertoire. From this repertoire the stu-
dent moves to the difficulty repertoire or to the interpretation repertoire.
After the difficulty/interpretation repertoire, the student usually moves to
the agency repertoire in which he/she describes how he/she tried to resolve
the difficult situation with action. After this he/she moves to the goal-means
repertoire and there he/she can find new means for acting in the future. It
was typical that students first described problems in the environment (Fig-
ure 1) and then difficulties in action (Figure 2).

Agency repertoire
5 1a
1b

2b
3b Interpretation repertoire
Goal-means repertoire Text repertoire Difficulty repertoire

Consideration repertoire

3a
4 2a

Agency repertoire

FIGURE 2. Displacements in developing talk in relation to the action of an individual

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 155

 Helvi KAKSONEN

Discussion

In this article I have examined collaborative knowledge construction in

tutorial discussions. First, I described the repertoires used by the students
when they talked about the subject of knowledge. Then, I described the uses
of repertoires and their integration with one another. I identified nine rep-
ertoires which described four different categories of talk: repeating, applied,
inquiring and developing talk. There were two combinations of developing
talk based on the integration of repertoires. One of these applied to the indi-
vidual level, and the other to the environmental level.
First I will interpret some separate repertoires which have appeared in
the analysis and, after this, concentrate on developing repertoires arising
from the data. The text repertoire appeared both independently and when
integrated into other repertoires. When using the text repertoire students
sometimes regarded experience as “a source of correct information”. The
importance of experience was seen in the data with regard to separate reper-
toires. The students talked about their earlier work experiences so as to offer
examples, explanations or meanings to the subjects under discussion.
The text repertoire was integrated into many other repertoires and, in
my view, this integration is a question of interaction between theory and
practice. The integration of the text repertoire with the observation and in-
terpretation repertoires signifies that a conceptual explanation is given to
phenomena. I named the two modes of explanation in connection with the
interpretation repertoire: situational explanation and conceptual explana-
tion. The situational explanation is typical of a student’s way of talking and
the conceptional explanation characterises the talk of the tutor. One pur-
pose of collaborative knowledge construction is that, in a tutorial, these two
modes of explanation ways can come together. With a contextual explana-
tion the level is that of individual cases and contexts, whereas a conceptual
explanation is at the level of general phenomena and a common understand-
ing of the subject.
In the observation repertoire the student described experiences and in-
formation that he/she had observed on the basis of seeing and hearing. I wish

156 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION AS RESOURCES OF COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

to emphasise the fact that these descriptions were not empty observations,
but included both conceptual and practical elements (Miettinen 1998, 88).
This operation was not always conscious (see Tynjälä, 1999), however. Fur-
thermore, the observations were guided by theory partly because the learn-
ing tasks involved the acquisition of information, which was based on litera-
ture about the phenomenon. The significance of the observation repertoire
is in the fact that it serves as a starting point for the critical repertoire.
In the remembering repertoire, personal experience information was
communicated to other students. I see the importance of the remembering
repertoire in tutorials as a means of maintaining and promoting the atmos-
phere and cohesion of the group. A positive atmosphere is a key aspect of
the collaborative learning (Tynjälä 1999). This repertoire serves as a sup-
plement to the information garnered from books. The remembering reper-
toire was particularity characteristic in the talk that took place during the
second study year. This was partly due to the study module where play was
the subject under examination; most students probably had clear childhood
memories of games and playing.
The talk in the criticism and difficulty repertoires revealed the safe at-
mosphere of the tutorial and students dared to talk about the problems and
difficulties they had encountered in learning at work. These repertoires also
include tacit knowledge (Polanyi 1966). Specific difficulties are encountered
in action, where the functional dimension of the knowledge becomes empha-
sised. The critical and the difficulty repertoires serve as forces that promote
and develop action. In my view, the importance of feelings will also become
evident in knowledge construction. Feelings can also be seen as promoters of
action aimed at change and development (see Mezirow 1991). In connection
with the difficulty repertoire, the mentor role was as a discussion partner
and as a support. The results of earlier observations show the importance
of mentoring in supporting the student’s reflection process (Lähteenmäki
2005).
The goal-means repertoire was directed towards the future, and in this
repertoire a normative tone could occasionally be perceived. It was a reper-
toire that also uncovered values about what needed to be aimed at and the

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 157

 Helvi KAKSONEN

kinds of methods that were appropriate. Thus, the goal-means repertoire also
contained the ethical dimension of the knowledge. Being directed towards
the future, the goal-means repertoire also included potential information
which could be used in the future. In the goal-means repertoire the adult’s
pedagogic role was emphasised – an important dimension when considering
the development of the student’s growing consciousness.
On the basis of the analysis of data, interpretation and consideration
repertoires lie at the heart of the knowledge construction process: they are
integrated into text, observation, critical, difficulty, goal-means and agency
repertoires. These can be seen as manifestations of the reflective process.
Students talk about their observations and interpretations/considerations
before action (reflection for action), during action (reflection in action) and
after action (reflection of the action) (see Poikela, E. 2005a, 24–25). It seems
that reflection after action is the most common mode of student talk in tu-
torials. The difficulty of reflection during action was expressed by some
students. In the students’ repertoires, different contexts of reflection were
produced: thinking alone, with the mentor, with the tutor and in the tutorial
group (see Poikela, E. 2005a, 22–23).
The location of reflective talk at the centre of the collaborative knowledge
construction process supports the view presented by Poikela E. (2005a, 25)
that the model of experimental learning presented by Kolb (1942) should be
supplemented with regard to reflection. Analysis of the models for develop-
ing talk reveals that cited experience does not seem to initiate developing
talk. Instead, it is the critical repertoire and the difficulty repertoire that
predominate. In this respect, I share Dewey’s (1933/1910) view that disturb-
ing the established action, in other words a problematic situation is what
initiates a reflective process.
In tutorials is it possible, through developing talk, to rise from individual
cases and situations to the level of general phenomena, and in this way, to
construct collaborative understanding. Collaborative discussion, therefore,
produces hypothetical knowledge which can be brought to bear on future
situations. The role of the tutor is significant in this reflective process (see
Poikela, S. 2003, 302). The movement to the level of general phenomena was

158 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE REPERTOIRES OF THE TUTORIAL DISCUSSION AS RESOURCES OF COLLABORATIVE KNOWLEDGE CONSTRUCTION

a bold step, facilitated by, among other factors, the consideration of questions
and conceptual explanations offered by the tutor. Sometimes this kind of
general-level talk was also performed by the student. Furthermore, I would
also point out the importance of the value dimension that was produced
in the goal-means, interpretation and consideration repertoires. It is an es-
sential part of the expertise required when working in education. (Karila &
Nummenmaa 2001; Niemi 2006.)
Looking at the results of this research, the diverse character of knowledge
is immediately apparent. Furthermore, even though the focus of my study
was the collaborative knowledge construction process, an individual model
(Figure 2) could also be identified from the analysis. In my view, individual
and collaborative knowledge construction are integrated with one another
(see Järvinen, Koivisto & Poikela, E. 2002). Therefore, the tutorial has a dual
role in the process of constructing collaborative knowledge.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 159

160 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 Satu Öystilä
University of Tampere

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS

IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING
– experiences of PBL tutors in higher education

Introduction

Successful small-group learning in problem-based learning relies on func-

tional group processes. However there has been limited research on prob-
lems experienced by PBL groups and no studies have been conducted on
problems as perceived by both students and tutors in the same context (Hen-
dry, Ryan & Harris 2006, 609). The factors behind group dynamics are rarely
researched in problem-based pedagogy. Jern and Hempel (2000, 68–69; see
also Mpofu, Stewart, Dunn & Schmidt 1998, 421–422) have studied PBL re-
search and concluded that small group dynamics have been overlooked in
the context of PBL. Most researchers interested in PBL do not emphasize the
significance of psychological phenomena within the group as a part of the
learning process and group processes as a part of a tutor’s task.
Studies underline the fact that PBL tutors have to be aware of group dy-
namics and group processes, but do not reflect on what group consciousness
means in the PBL context. The impact of the small group phenomenon has
not been identified as a part of a tutor’s expertise. Teachers and tutors often
believe that the group process will automatically develop during the PBL
cycle. As I am interested in the construction of group consciousness and the
significance of group dynamics in the successful implementation of PBL,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 161

 Satu ÖYSTILÄ

the aim of this article is to examine the experiences of PBL tutors in higher
education. I wish to explore how tutors describe their experiences of prob-
lem-based learning and the significance of group dynamics in these experi-
ences. First, I present the experiences of the PBL tutors which I have divided
into two areas: the advantages they feel PBL offers when compared with a
conventional curriculum and the challenges they face in working with PBL.
At the same time, I explore the role played by group dynamics in these ex-
periences. I also refer to other studies, whether they support my results or
not. Finally, I reflect on the significance of group dynamics as a factor in
the successful implementation of PBL and present some suggestions as to
how tutors and students can learn about group dynamics in order to develop
learning and collaboration in tutorials.

The essence of group dynamics in problem-based learning

There are many theories about the development of group dynamics, but fun-
damental to all of them is the notion of groups as social systems. A society
can be defined as a collection of individuals, and a group as a subset of these
individuals (Carley 1991, 331). Group dynamics are said to occupy ‘the mid-
dle ground’ between the person and the society, because it is the small group
which reveals the secrets of how the person forms and is formed by the so-
cial environment (Tennant 1997, 107). A system is composed of elements
in interaction. When group members interact with one another, they form
a social system, with attendant group dynamic processes. Group dynam-
ics are the forces that emerge and take shape as members interact with one
another during the life of a group. These dynamic forces are the product of
both the here-and–now interactions of group members and what members
bring to the group from the larger social environment. (Toseland, Jones &
Gellis 2004, 13.)
Group dynamics in the PBL context mean that the phenomena of the
group can be exploited in the tutorials in order to develop collaborative

162 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

learning. The PBL tutors have to take care of group cohesion, norms and
the mutual regulation of group goals and interaction. Collaborative learning
plays an important role in PBL. Interactions within the group stimulate sev-
eral cognitive processes, elaborations and co-constructions which may lead
to deeper understanding. Elaboration is the process of considering a piece of
knowledge in a richer, wider context. Co-construction of knowledge is the
shared thinking process of students supporting themselves to reach a shared
understanding by means of interaction with one another. While there is a
great deal of knowledge about these processes in PBL at an individual level,
there is little research that focuses on the cognitive interaction processes in-
fluenced by collaborative learning. (Visschers-Pleijers, Dolmans, Wolfhagen
& van der Vleuten 2004, 471.)
Tutoring in PBL has two components: facilitation skills and content
knowledge. The learner-centred approach of PBL means that, for tutors,
content knowledge should be subordinate to proficiency in group leading.
Thus, effective tutors promote student learning by creating a supportive en-
vironment which encourages active participation from all members of the
group, by monitoring the quality of learning through questions and feed-
back and by encouraging the development of students’ meta-cognitive skills.
Both knowledge of subject matter and process facilitation skills are neces-
sary but not individually sufficient characteristics for effective tutors. The
tutors with content expertise are helpful only if they also have the skills to
manage group dynamics and group learning. (De Grave, Dolmans & van der
Vleuten 1999, 901–906; see Albanese 2004, 20.)
PBL tutors have to lead the development of group dynamics that facili-
tate member participation and satisfaction while simultaneously enabling
the group to achieve its goals. A tutor has to be conscious of group processes,
including both interactive and collaborative processes. Some of these proc-
esses are rational, while others are irrational. According to Jern (1998), lead-
ership in a work group means that the leader has an opportunity to positively
affect group members’ thoughts, feelings and actions in order to achieve a
common goal. The group does not automatically promote learning; in the
worst cases it can prevent it. In the PBL context tutors have to bear responsi-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 163

 Satu ÖYSTILÄ

bility for integrating collaborative and individual learning at the same time.
(Hmelo & Evensen 2000, 5.)

The advantages and challenges of PBL as experienced by tutors in higher

education

The purpose of my research, of which this article is a minor part, is to explore

the concept of the role as a collaborative learning process, the role of the
teacher as a group leader, and to develop understanding of group dynamics
in the learning process, especially in higher education. The research problem
is how university teachers experience and describe their role as group leaders
and how this role changes during and after studies in university pedagogy. I
have 14 informants, who work as teachers at the University of Tampere. They
participated and completed a training program in university pedagogy (15
credits) in 2001 and 2003. Six of the informants are PBL tutors.
In my research I interpret the data and the meanings which emerge
from it according to the hermeneutic method. The research is based on the
premise that there are several truths and that the truth depends on the ob-
server’s standpoint. I am interested in the rules with which social realities
are constructed and the meanings which are given to them. I am not looking
for the historical truth but for verisimilitude (Bruner 1990, 19). The chosen
paradigm is social constructivism and the method of analysis is according to
hermeneutic principles. My data consists of personal learning plans, portfo-
lios, learning diaries, other independent tasks, and theme interviews which
I conducted about one year after the program. The extent of my data is 480
transcribed pages. I have coded my data using the NViVo program and cat-
egorized it using qualitative content analysis.
In the article I explore the experiences of PBL tutors in problem-based
learning. All the tutors have several years of experience both as teachers and
as PBL tutors in higher education. The data analysis from the interviews

164 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

and other empirical material led to a range of insights into the work of PBL
tutors, especially with regard to the advantages and challenges they felt PBL
offered. To guide the subsequent discussion, the main findings of the study
are presented in Table 1.

TABLE 1. PBL tutors’ Experiences of Problem-based Learning

Experiences of Problem-based Learning Described by PBL Tutors in Higher Educa-

tion
The Advantages of PBL The Challenges of PBL
Learners’ holistic self-development Learners’ inability to commit them-
• Development of learners’ self-direction selves to the collaborative learning
• Development of learners’ ability to process
work in groups • Problems in interaction between learn-
• Ability to respond to working life chal- ers
lenges • Learners’ unreadiness and non-com-
mitment
PBL tutors’ role as group leader and • Skipping phases of the PBL-cycle
learning at work
• Tutors’ learning PBL tutors’ inability to lead group proc-
• Tutors’ satisfaction and enjoyment as esses
group leaders • Tutors who are not committed and do
• Collaboration and improved teaching not understand the PBL process
• Tutors who are too careful with, or can-
Opportunities to develop the curricu- not lead, group processes
lum and relationships through dialogue • Tutors who do not understand group
• Development of the teacher-learner dynamics training
relationship
• Transparency of the learning process Problems in the PBL curriculum
• Learner-centeredness • An unsuccessful scenario
• Changing PBL groups after every study
block in order to avoid group problems

In accordance with the aim of the article, the following sections are dedicat-
ed to a discussion of the significance of group dynamics in PBL. The quota-
tions in the article, which are examples of PBL tutors’ experiences, have been
translated from Finnish into English.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 165

 Satu ÖYSTILÄ

The advantages of problem-based learning

According to tutors working in higher education, the advantages offered by

PBL can be divided into three categories:

1. Learners’ holistic self-development

2. PBL tutors’ learning at work
3. The opportunity to develop the curriculum and relationships through
dialogue

Learners’ holistic self-development

According to tutors’ experiences, the PBL curriculum developed students’

self-directed learning, their ability to work in groups, and their ability to
respond to working life challenges. All the informants had also worked as
teachers within a conventional curriculum and were well aware of the dif-
ferent roles played by learners and tutors in these two systems. According to
the tutors, PBL learners developed a superior ability to pursue lifelong learn-
ing, superior skills in the acquisition of information and a higher degree of
intellectual autonomy. The learners were also more active and motivated,
and they had developed skills in learning to learn. The PBL curriculum had
created new opportunities for empowering students. Earlier, the students
had been more passive and simply tried to memorize learning material for
examinations.
The self-directed learning pointed out by the tutors did not refer to learn-
ing alone, but to learning with and from peers. In problem-based learning
the students developed an awareness of the value of hearing different per-
spectives from a group of individuals (see Palmer & Major 2004, 130).
Somehow they are discussing things, they are discussing them more
constructively and produce and create the knowledge in a different
way in the groups than in those days when we didn’t have PBL. And
PBL has also influenced many kinds of group work and, in this way,

166 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

you can see the advantage of PBL – the students are more active and
more autonomous in creating knowledge overall. (Henriikka)

The tutors also noted that, with the PBL curriculum, the students learned
to work in groups. They developed their ability to interact and also their
group work skills. They learned with and from their peers, developed the
ability to engage in constructive dialogue and to take on roles. In contrast to
the calm environment of traditional classroom instruction, tutors described
how PBL offered opportunities to rehearse different kinds of roles. Work-
ing within these roles supported the development of interaction skills and
self-knowledge. The tutors allocated formal roles (mainly discussion leader,
recorder and, sometimes, observer) to the students participating in PBL tu-
torials. However these were not the only roles which emerged in tutorials;
role forming began as soon as the group gathered. Within the learning group
the roles can be divided into social and task-oriented roles. Both role types
improve the aim of a group, although it is rare that one person can hold both
roles at the same time. (See Hammar Chiriac 1999, 13; Alanko-Turunen &
Öystilä 2004, 115–116; Poikela, S. 2003, 64–65.)
Role skills are really developing there. What this means is that they can
always take or adopt new roles in new situations, maybe changing these
formal roles is effective and helpful as well. (Pasi)

Similar conclusions have been drawn from many studies during the past
15 years. For example, Harvard Medical School’s evaluation of a PBL cur-
riculum compared PBL students on the two-year preclinical component of
the programme with their peers who had been randomly allocated to the
traditional programme. They found that the PBL students reflected more
on their learning, memorised information less than their peers, and pre-
ferred active learning. Interpersonal skills, psychosocial knowledge, and at-
titudes towards patients were better among the PBL group and PBL students
felt more motivated and satisfied with their studies. PBL students reported
significantly greater autonomy and were surer of themselves in handling
uncertainty. (Moore, Block, Style & Mitchell 1994, 983–999.) PBL students’

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 167

 Satu ÖYSTILÄ

self directed learning skills were enhanced and basic science concepts were
better integrated into the solving of clinical problems, compared with stu-
dents in the conventional curriculum (Norman & Schmidt 1992, 557–565;
Schmidt, Norman & Boshuizen 1990, 611–621).
PBL provides a basis for networking, individual empowerment, repli-
cation of organizational behaviour and the use of higher order intellectual
skills. It is possible to develop a leadership model that focuses on the interac-
tive and collaborative skills of all members of groups and, at the same time,
on the personality of an individual learner. The students learn interactive
skills whether or not their group functions well. Acting in groups also pro-
motes learning process in situations where the groups are failures. Accord-
ing to my data some tutors emphasized the learning process in cases were the
group work was unsuccessful (e.g. Palmer & Major 2004, 120–132). Other tu-
tors, however, did not exploit the learning potential of these situations.

The PBL tutor’s role as a group leader and learning at work

All the informants described the desired role of the tutor in PBL as different
from the role of the teacher in a conventional learning system. The tutor has
to change roles from being an expert to being a group leader with a constant
focus on the students. The advantages experienced by tutors in this role were
improved learning and satisfaction, as well as collaboration with colleagues,
which served to improve teaching. The tutors noted that they had fun in
successful tutorials and that they learned both substance and pedagogy. The
tutors stated that teaching in the PBL curriculum was more challenging but,
at the same time, more interesting. Also, the lectures had become more en-
riching once the students had grown more active – learners asked difficult
questions to which there was no right answer.
All my informants accepted two essential roles for PBL tutors: facilitating
learning via motivating and activating, and leading the group processes to
ensure that the students maintain focus (see Jones, Donelly, Nash, Young &
Schwartz 1993, 207–215). However, the tutors did not share the same opinion

168 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

on how to achieve this or what the role of the tutor should be in supporting
the learning process in PBL (e.g. Dolmans & Wolfhagen 200, 253; Law 2006,
1). Some felt that the tutor was unable to exert an influence if the students
were too passive or insufficiently motivated. Others saw the tutor role as
playing a key part in the success of problem-based learning.
Then it is easy, easy for the tutor and it is fun and, most of all, the tutor
learns herself too. (Maria)
But, for example, the lectures are extremely challenging, because the
students have been activated with tutorials about the theme of the lec-
ture, and they have prepared for it and really are interrupting and ask-
ing questions. In the past everyone was able to go and give a lecture.
The person was just given the old transparencies and then he read them
out and nobody asked anything and that was it. The students just cop-
ied in a hurry. And the main problem was that there was nothing in the
lectures that you couldn’t read in the books. (Ari)

70% of students participating in a PBL course regarded the tutor’s role as es-
sential to the success of the PBL process (Zimitat, Hamilton, DeJersey, Reilly
& Ward 1994). According to research by Nieminen, Sauri and Lonka (2006,
64–71), however, the tutor role was not seen as being so essential to the suc-
cess of the learning process experienced by learners.

The opportunity to develop the curriculum and relationships through dialogue

According to my informants, the PBL curriculum improved cooperation be-

tween teachers. They had to plan and integrate studies together, and this also
increased cooperation in other areas and improved the sense of community
overall. The tutors also described the PBL curriculum as transparent and
improving the interaction between teachers and students. The tutors made
the students’ acquaintance and saw potential learning difficulties and other
problems. It was also easier for students to make contact with the teachers,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 169

 Satu ÖYSTILÄ

and they also came to talk with teachers in contexts other than learning
situations.
When I’m tutoring in problem-based learning, I don’t lapse so often
into these conventional positions. As a tutor it is easier to get more inti-
mate and have more personal contact with the students. (Pasi)
In our PBL system, the tutor sees and notices those students who have
difficulties. (Ville)
The students also come and make contact easily outside lectures. For
example, when you are just walking along corridors they come and ask
questions, but it is not always very easy to give the right answers. They
have become more motivated after using PBL. (Ari)

Also, according to other studies, PBL does not increase teaching time; rather
it changes how this time is spent. For example, using problem-based learn-
ing uses up to 40% more time in working with students (Bligh 1995, 342–
343). One effect of the transparency of a PBL curriculum is that the attitudes
of teachers and the atmosphere of cooperation create a safe and motivating
learning environment, and also increase learner-centeredness (Wolf, Ran-
dall, von Almen & Tynes 1991, 182–190).

The challenges of problem-based learning

The challenges of PBL experienced by PBL tutors in higher education can be

divided into the following categories:

1. Learners’ inability to commit themselves to the collaborative learning

process
2. PBL tutors’ inability to lead the group process
3. Difficulties within the PBL curriculum

170 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

Learners’ inability to commit themselves to the collaborative learning process

The essence of problem-based learning, according to the informants, is that

students work collaboratively on understanding the problem. Collaborative
learning relies on functional group processes, and does not result from sim-
ply meeting as a group (see Faidley, Evensen, Salisbury-Glennon, Glenn &
Hmelo 2000, 132). However, groups do not always function collaboratively or
in a self-directed manner. Tutors noted that, although students develop self-
direction, the causes of their inability to participate in collaborative learning
mostly arise from problems in interaction between students. Students have
different kinds of personalities: they may be too passive, or too dominant, or
too different in other ways from one another. Some students have a free-rider
mentality. Sometimes students receive critical but unconstructive feed back
from peers and become offended. They are unused to working in groups and
tutors are unused to helping students develop these skills.
Other reasons mentioned by tutors are students’ unreadiness and non-
commitment, and also a tendency to ignore the phases of the PBL-cycle.
Learners may not understand the reasons why the teacher does not convey
new information via lectures. They are asked to adopt a vastly different para-
digm of learning to that in which they typically feel comfortable, while at the
same time they are asked to learn new material. This may add up to a poten-
tially significant set of obstacles. These difficulties alter the way in which the
motivational benefits associated with PBL are perceived. The students may
also complain about their busy schedules and explain that they have other
activities. Sometimes they may be absent from the tutorial for no apparent
reason. At other times, they have not done their learning task because, for
them, only exams have significance in earning marks for studies. In addi-
tion, the subject hierarchy may also exert an effect on their motivation.
… and the students, they can be terribly different kinds of people, and
then conflicts easily occur. (Pasi)
In the worst case there can be eight passive students in a tutorial. And
then, it is very difficult to work as a tutor, if the whole group is passive.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 171

 Satu ÖYSTILÄ

In a small group, if there’s just one dominant student, then (…) the
others might be relieved, that’s fine, that person can do the work for
us. There’s some discussion but mainly only one person is talking, the
others don’t need to. But someone giving a monologue is not good for
their learning. (Helena)

A study by Tipping, Freeman & Rachlis (1995, 1052) reveals that the observed
group dynamics do not necessarily match those, which are reported by tu-
tors and learners. Their data, collected from observations and videotapes,
revealed a lack of interaction and involvement. Some students were totally
passive during the tutorial, with communication directed mostly towards
the tutor and, in one extreme example, a student was actually sleeping. In
one group, where there was only one female member, she was chosen every
time for the role of recorder. In these groups there was no cohesion, goals
were not articulated and there was no evidence of reflection on any aspect of
group behaviour. My data was collected almost 10 years later, but PBL tutors
at the University of Tampere reported similar kinds of phenomena. It may be
the case that in one tutorial there are eight silent and passive students. Also,
there may be no discussion about the learning goals and no reflection at all.

PBL tutors’ inability to lead group processes

The tutor’s role includes creating a supportive group climate, encouraging

the involvement of all students and addressing group problems when they
arise (see Hendry et al. 2003, 609; Moust, Volder & Nuy 1989, 737; see also
Hak & Maguire 2000, 769). However, not all tutors understand the impor-
tance of the tutor’s role in the success of group work within the PBL context.
The reasons they cite for tutors’ inability to lead group processes are tutors’
non-commitment to the PBL process and a lack of understanding regarding
the significance of the group process.
All the informants totally supported the PBL curriculum, but they knew
of other tutors who were missing ‘the good old days’ of the conventional cur-
riculum. Informants gave examples of colleagues who did not trust the stu-

172 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

dents and tried to alienate themselves from the group situation. Informant
tutors had heard stories about tutors who read newspapers during the tuto-
rial or talked on their mobile phones. Some tutors felt that it was impossible
to influence those tutors who did not understand the PBL process. Others
expressed the view that it is very difficult to simply lead the process if they
are experts in the subject area.
However the informants who had confidence in PBL were often over-cau-
tious or simply could not use the dynamics of the group. The tutors, despite
some group dynamics training, did not always facilitate reflection on group
dynamics. Such failures in group processes may be regarded as failures in
the provision of appropriate learning support concerning tutor facilitation
of group processes, and in establishing a successful psychological model of
interaction within the group.
Although the tutors expressed interest in tutoring, they were sometimes
uncertain about what tutoring involved, or felt that the function of tutor
did not correspond to their own conception of teaching. Since most teach-
ers in higher education have primarily had lecture-based experience, they
have had hardly any role models for tutoring; their expertise lies in the dis-
cipline in which they have been trained. They have been trained as lecturers
or subject-matter experts with detailed knowledge about scientific truths or
discipline-specific mechanisms, and are assumed to be able to deliver this
knowledge to students via lectures. With this background, it is understand-
able that many feel uncomfortable with the tutor role in PBL. (See Dolmans,
Gijselaers, Moust, DeGrave, Wolfhagen & van der Vleuten 2002, 173.) In this
kind of situation the tutors concentrate on what they themselves are doing.
They themselves become the focal point and activities are based around the
tutor. At the same time they cannot be aware of what is happening in the
group, and this hinders the learning process.
Some PBL tutors have misunderstood the role of the tutor, thinking that
they are not allowed to say anything. They sit totally silent, not using ges-
tures or offering verbal feedback. Eventually, they become totally uninvolved.
Giving feedback and intervening has proved very difficult, especially when
the tutor needs to give constructive criticism. Often tutors may observe the

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 173

 Satu ÖYSTILÄ

situation and think that they should intervene, but then they have remained
silent too long and the right moment has passed.
Teachers often think that they should know everything and find situ-
ations where they do not rather threatening. When they move to the role
of the PBL tutor, they know in their conscious mind that facilitating is the
main issue, but previous experience runs so deep that the role of conven-
tional teacher as an information giver surfaces unobserved and reveals their
instinctive attitude towards learning.
In tutorials the informants mainly offered students the roles of discus-
sion leader and recorder, but seldom that of observer. They chose an observer
mainly when there were problems in the group. Sometimes the tutor chose a
dominant student as an observer for one session, so that the student would
also listen to others.
Sometimes you notice, as a tutor, that there is a student in the group
who never says anything. Sometimes you have to intervene and it’s one
of the most difficult tasks, because it’s a very delicate issue. When is
someone talking too much? And there you can really see your profes-
sional skills – you are reacting too late. You notice that something hap-
pens and that you should have intervened there and then. But then you
keep following it and somehow it’s too late, it’s over. (Maria)
If the group doesn’t work, you can choose observers who will report
afterwards. But I have never been thrown into a situation where I had
to use them. Or perhaps I just couldn’t, but anyway, I haven’t noticed
that I needed to. (Ari)
I think that there are also tutors who don’t care about the group, who
are just going through the motions (…) it is a certain nonchalance.
They really don’t put their heart into the process. (Maria)

Other studies (see e.g. Dolmans & Wolfhagen 2005, 261) report similar find-
ings, which suggest that with PBL curricula attention needs to be focused on
under-performing tutors.

174 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

Difficulties within the PBL curriculum

The problems described by tutors working in the PBL curriculum were over-
easy or over-challenging scenarios, cases or starting points for tutorials. The
scenario or the starting point is very important in the success of a PBL tu-
torial. If a scenario is too easy, the tutorial becomes boring. Then again, if
a scenario is too challenging, the students do not advance in their studies
because of a lack of basic knowledge. The unsuccessful scenario was the only
challenge that was not dependent on group dynamics, which is why I do not
deal with the issue in more detail.
The other problem tutors pointed out with regard to the PBL curricu-
lum was the principle that the groups have to be changed frequently be-
cause of conflicts between group members. It is fairly common with PBL
programmes that there is an attempt to resolve group problems by chang-
ing group members. Some tutors felt that this is very useful for the group
process, while others thought that they did not have any other alternative,
there being no group expert available to assist when problems occurred with
group dynamics.
If we had the same PBL groups for a long time, then we should need help
à la Linköping. If there arise difficult conflicts, someone should come
and support us. But this can be one reason, why teachers don’t talk
very much about the problems in their own groups. They know that the
group is soon at an end, it doesn’t take a long time. (Henriikka)

Some tutors mentioned their relief when the group was disbanded; they felt
their problems were over. However, this also meant that the groups had no
opportunity to learn to resolve group problems for themselves. Differences
in opinions, disagreements and questioning create significant material for
learning in collaborative meaning negotiations (see Miflin 2004, 446–446).
In future work teams they will not be able to change groups every time con-
flicts occur, nor will they be able to change the members of the group.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 175

 Satu ÖYSTILÄ

Conclusion: the significance of group dynamics in successful

implementation of PBL

The main difficulties of PBL, which the tutors described, concerned group
dynamics. The learners or tutors have not been involved in the PBL strategy,
nor could they study in groups – either as peer members (learners) or as a
leader (tutor). According to the tutors, the principle reasons for overlook-
ing group phenomena were that PBL groups are short-term groups and that
group change would guarantee well-functioning groups (see Jern & Hempel
2000, 68–73).
Learning in groups is not a panacea for learning problems, especially if
tutors are unaware of group dynamics. The tutors stated that conflicts be-
tween individuals and contradictory situations may cause problems in PBL
which they feel powerless to resolve. Although the aim and the main prin-
ciples of PBL are to develop learners’ self-direction, this cannot take place
without group leadership and learning support. PBL lays the responsibility
and the control of the learning process essentially at the feet of the student.
In changing from a subject-based discipline to an integrated PBL curricu-
lum, it is often difficult to anticipate and accept the need for learning sup-
port in non-discipline areas, such as group dynamics.
The fear that less content may be covered if too much time is devoted to
group processes may be a measure of the difficulty associated with transi-
tion from subject-based learning approaches to PBL. Some teachers fear that
they are becoming group therapists. In any case, faculties need to accept that
PBL involves a slower start-up in terms of the discipline-based content that
is covered. This may be due to the development of important hidden skills,
which will ultimately facilitate deeper approaches to learning (see Greening
2006, 9).
Gijselaers and Schmidt (1990, 95–133) find a causal relationship between
tutor involvement in PBL and group processes, which in turn affects student
motivation towards learning. Such motivation is very important to the suc-
cessful implementation of PBL. The tutor has to have the ability to lead the

176 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

group so that every member is competent and can make important contribu-
tions to the group’s effectiveness. Individuals in the group need to feel the
satisfaction that comes from being involved with the learning process. In or-
der to activate co-construction of knowledge, the tutor has to pay attention
to encouraging students’ questions, reasoning and resolution of conflicts
within the tutorial group (Visschers-Pleijers et al. 2004, 477).
The PBL tutor’s approach influences group work in different ways. The
tutor’s approach should be characterized by a focus on the students and on
what is happening in the group, rather than on the tutor’s own actions and
thoughts, an approach Silén (2006, 373–383) characterizes as ‘presence’. The
ability to be present is possible when knowing is rooted in ‘a lived body’. The
tutor has to deeply understand the ideas of PBL and the underlying theo-
ries, and their own learning processes should be ongoing as a result of tutor
training and experiences at work. Even awareness of the physical body plays
a prominent part in achieving a deeper understanding of the embodied na-
ture of ways of being in a group. The tutor’s way of being in a group, how
the tutor treats the students as people and what is discussed and takes place
in the group is very important to the course of events and the way in which
the tutor is perceived. This, in turn, affects the students’ learning processes
– whether they tend to be passive or whether they realize that they need to
study more. The tutor who activates the learning process leads the group
without dominating or controlling and intervenes at the appropriate point.
A tutor who hinders the learning process is dominating, takes the initiative,
has difficulties in allowing the group to take responsibility, does not give
feedback, has decided what conclusion the group will reach, is unwilling to
accept criticism and suppresses the group’s views. (Cf. 380.)
Tutors need training, particularly training in group leading, in which
the most important ideas are to communicate supportive messages with the
whole body and to have the courage to intervene at the appropriate time. It is
better to devote less attention to what should or should not be said, whether
to remain silent or to think about how to intervene, and just be interested
and present. Supportive tutors question what learners say and give construc-
tive criticism. They listen but are not silent, and they trust the students. It is

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 177

 Satu ÖYSTILÄ

essential to experience the learning processes in PBL both as a learner and as

a tutor. Feedback from learners and colleagues and systematic reflection on
the tutor’s role are essential parts of the tutor’s own learning process.
Problems with group dynamics and threatening situations can be sourc-
es of learning, and to overcome them gives tutors more courage to intervene
at the appropriate time. When confronted with difficulties in group work,
teachers tend to choose solutions which are familiar from their own experi-
ence and resort to the teacher-directed model. These solutions are not effec-
tive in improving group work and negative experiences will persist. Instead,
tutors should hold on to the underlying educational philosophy of PBL when
resolving problems arising from group work by choosing actions which are
consistent with the student-directed view of education advocated by PBL.
(Dolmans, Wolfhagen, van der Vleuten & Wijnen 2001b, 884; Hmelo-Silver
& Barrows 2006, 24–25.) Tutors possessing group-dynamics skills are more
appreciated by students than tutors who lack these skills, irrespective of the
quality of a tutorial group’s performance. A tutor who evaluates group dy-
namics on a regular basis together with students is seen as performing bet-
ter than a tutor who does not. (Dolmans, Wolfhagen, Schepbier & van der
Vleuten 2001a, 473–476.)
The aim of this article was to explore the experiences described by PBL
tutors in higher education, and also how the significance of group dynam-
ics is involved in these experiences. According to my data, the significance
of group dynamics is essential in the PBL process. According to PBL tu-
tors’ experiences, the reasons for ill-functioning groups were not difficul-
ties concerning substance but with group dynamics. The only issue which
affected the success of PBL and was not dependent on group dynamics was a
poor scenario as a starting point for the tutorial. All the other issues whether
advantages or challenges, were related to group dynamics. In my data all
the informants found the main challenge in PBL to be the unworkability
of groups, either because there were very different personalities within the
group or because tutors were unable to lead group processes.
It is noteworthy that the difficulties, which the tutors described, were not
actual strategic problems with PBL, but problems with PBL implementation.

178 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GROUP DYNAMICS IN PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

The challenges tutors experienced in PBL were not caused by PBL strategy,
but by other factors which would have been avoidable had the main princi-
ples and philosophy of PBL been followed. The tutors may have had knowl-
edge of how to lead the group process but they lacked sufficient skills – and
especially courage – to intervene at the appropriate time. Tutors may also
have been aware of the significance of group dynamics, but found moments
of conflict too difficult to handle.
If the group is to work effectively, some effort must be directed towards
achieving this aim and facets of group dynamics need to be given recog-
nition within the course. PBL programmes should direct effort into tutor
training and into training students and tutors to improve group productiv-
ity. This could be achieved, for example, by prompting students and tutors
to evaluate the tutorial group’s productivity on a regular basis. Developing
a range of strategies to encourage optimal group functioning and to stimu-
late student learning should therefore be a major focus of tutor training (see
Groves, Régo & O’Rourke 2005, 2–8).
On the other hand, the advantages which all the tutors emphasized were
the development of learner-centeredness and the creation of the collabora-
tive learning culture. Although the group was not being used to its full ad-
vantage, the tutors felt that, compared with the conventional curriculum,
PBL had changed the teaching culture and advanced students’ self-directed
learning.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 179

180 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 PART III

PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING AT WORK

Cook and Brown (1999) have criticised the Western view of knowledge ac-
cording to which knowledge is perceived as something owned only by an
individual. They argue that knowledge can also be in the possession of group
or organisation, employing the term ”the generative dance” to describe how
tacit and explicit knowledge may be owned by an individual and a group.
Consequently, rather than focusing on the individual learning process, re-
cent studies on learning and professionalism have taken note of the interac-
tion that occurs between an organisation, professional teams or a network
of experts. The shared interpretations of duties and relevant core compe-
tencies, as well as the working cultures of the communities have become
subjects of interest.
Learning at work is based on the assumption that workers can learn
through work by participating in its everyday practices and by reflecting
on their experiences. Work-related conceptions and models of action go
through changes and take on meaning, especially in everyday working situ-
ations. Consequently, they form a central arena for developing both individ-
ual and socially shared interpretations of the work. The activator of learning
at work is often changes in the everyday life of the working community and
the ensuing problems which appear, for instance, as changes or lack of clar-
ity in the workers’/staff members’ job descriptions, routine and formality in
activities, or as invisibility of differing professional expertise. This raises the
need to evaluate what kind of expertise is required in each working context
and how the relevant individual and shared expertise should be developed.
Knowledge processing in the context of the work community is a very
complex and varied phenomenon. Different resources of knowledge also
include different types of knowledge which are not easily attained. Knowl-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 181

edge and knowing can be hidden and found in different activities, functions
and resources within an organisation. The real challenge for problem-based
learning is to create a curriculum and learning environment in which stu-
dents learn to reflect, to construct, to use and to evaluate the complicated
knowledge environment of work organisations. Education and work are in-
tegrated in the PBL curriculum which is cross-disciplinary and based on the
need for multi-professional competence in working life. The strategic idea
of PBL is the development of a new kind of curriculum based on problems
derived from professional work and a new way of teaching and learning in
formal education. These basic principles of PBL can also be used in develop-
ing learning at work and developing work culture. (Karila & Nummenmaa
2001.)
The aims and specific research questions concerning PBL at work were:

• How do individual and multi-professional knowledge and competence

arise and develop in everyday work situations within the context of
education and work?
• How do the processes of knowing and learning change during the pro-
fessional development of tutors?

Esa and Sari Poikela’s article ’Learning and knowing at work – professional
growth as a tutor’ deals, on a general level, with the processes of learning at
work, and then offers an analysis of the tutor’s work as a process of learning
at work.
Anna Raija Nummenmaa and Kirsti Karila describe in their article ‘Col-
laborative planning in a multi-professional day care centre’ the applications
of problem-based learning in the collaborative planning process within the
context of early childhood education.

182 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 Esa Poikela
University of Lapland

Sari Poikela
University of Lapland

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

– professional growth as a tutor

In this article, we will analyse the challenges of tutors’ work and the com-
plexity of the learning and knowing processes necessary for continuous
professional development within the framework of problem-based learning.
Firstly, we will describe the theoretical basis of learning at work from the
point of view of experiential learning (Järvinen & Poikela 2006). Secondly,
we will present the process model of learning at work based on the integra-
tion of individual, shared and organisational learning processes (Järvinen
& Poikela, E. 2001). Thirdly, we will briefly describe the special nature of
tutoring and analyse both the tutor’s work and the work community, uti-
lising the process model of learning at work (Poikela, S. 2005). Our aim is
to explore the learning and knowing processes in which knowledge is cre-
ated within the framework of problem-based pedagogy. The data was gath-
ered from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Tampere and from
the Department of Physiotherapy Education at the Pirkanmaa Polytechnic.
These were the case organisations examined in Sari Poikela’s ethnographic

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 183

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

research focusing on the development of tutor competence and knowing.

(Poikela, S. 2003.)
The term problem-based pedagogy will be approached from the teacher’s
and tutor’s perspective. PBL gives new meaning to the teacher’s role since,
within the framework of problem-based pedagogy, the facilitation and guid-
ance of learning play an important role. There is a shift in the nature of
the teacher’s work from acting as a supplier of information and manager of
learning, to becoming a facilitator, supporter and a resource for learning.
PBL also requires redefining the teacher’s work and the content of the cur-
riculum.

Experiential and reflective learning at work

The idea of experiential learning has its basis in many approaches to the
study of cognitive development, but its main roots can be located in Dewey’s
(1938) and Lewin’s (1951) views of learning. Dewey emphasised the impor-
tance of experience in the learning process, but he also described the prob-
lematic nature of the experiential process. Jarvis (1987) categorised different
types of experiences and stated that experience can be both a matter of rou-
tine, which is based on tradition, external authorities or circumstances, and
it can also be a reflective activity. Järvinen & Poikela (2006) emphasised the
“here and now” nature of experience and the key role of feedback processes
that are essential factors for understanding and guiding learning activities
at work.
Kolb described experiential learning as a process that combines educa-
tion, work and personal development. Experiential learning represents the
workplace as a learning environment which can be linked to formal educa-
tion (Kolb 1984, 4–5). The work of Dewey, Lewin and Kolb contains a cri-
tique of formal education; for them, experiential learning is a powerful alter-
native. Nevertheless, they do not actually study the informal learning that
takes place at work. In some less well known studies, however, Kolb (1988,

184 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

68–88) does present the role of experiential learning working methods in the
development processes of high-level professionals.
Experiential learning can be understood as its own theoretical orienta-
tion and, because of this, it is understood as the basic idea for understand-
ing learning at work. Experience is the starting point for learning, but also
the result of learning activity. Moreover, learning is, in itself, experience.
Recognising, conceptualising and managing learning at work is linked to
the ability of the actors to reflect, that is to observe, find and be aware of the
organisational processes that generate learning and knowing. (Järvinen &
Poikela 2006.)
Many of the developers of experiential learning theory have concluded
that reflection is the crucial stage of the experiential learning cycle, and that
it requires a thorough-going analysis (e.g. Boud et al. 1985). Reflectivity has
been studied as a major factor in the learning and development of adults
in both critical education (e.g. Mezirow 1981; Kemmis 1985) and activity
theory research (Engeström 1987). Experiential learning theory is criticised
for focusing too lightly on the reflective process, for making the relationship
of reflection with experience seem unproblematic, and for detaching experi-
ence from its socio-historical context. (Järvinen & Poikela 2006.)
Kolb (1984) describes reflective observation as one phase in the cycle of
experiential learning; it is the observation and consideration of experience at
hand or gained earlier. This can be done alone, with peers or with a facilita-
tor or supervisor. Reflective observation has a tensional relation to the learn-
er’s external function, and requires the active experimenting of learning. So,
the meaning of reflection is to maintain the learning activity between doing
and thinking. Although Kolb does not give a clear answer to the question of
whether reflection is possible during the action, it must be the case because
doing, applying or experimenting cannot lead to learning without observa-
tion. The result of the reflective learning process is a new experience which
includes resolving and rebuilding emotions and social expectations, and the
transformation of new knowledge structures.
According to Mezirow (1981; 1991) reflection is a prerequisite of learning.
Reflection starts from observation and the naming of feelings, affections and

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 185

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

emotions, and it can rise to the level of theoretical reflection. Reflection fo-
cuses on the substances and processes of function and also on assumptions,
values, beliefs and knowledge structures underlying that function. The core
of adult learning is reflection that is prerequisite for the transformation of
meaning schemas and perspectives, leading in turn to new action. Reflective
learning is not only linked to learning about previously existing objects and
functions; it is also linked to producing new knowledge.
Mezirow emphasises the meaning of reflection particularly on a person-
al level. Boud, Cressey and Docherty (2006) focus the discourse of reflec-
tion away from the personal context and stress the importance of reflection
among groups in organisations. They describe reflection as an integral part
of work, a necessary element in evaluation, sense-making, learning and in
the decision-making process in the work place context.
According to E. Poikela (2005) the key to understanding learning at work
lies in the relationship between the concepts of reflection and context (see
Figure 1).
The concept of reflection has usually been associated with individual psy-
chological factors in learning, but it can equally well describe social factors
determined by the activities of a group, organisation and even of a society. In
working life and work organisations, reflection should be defined in its ac-
tual context (Poikela, E. 1999). When this is done, reflection can be defined
more precisely as a form of thought, knowledge acquisition or knowledge

Reflection Context

Feedback Individual work

Assessment Shared work

Evaluation Organisational work

Research Society

FIGURE 1. The contexts of reflectivity

(Poikela, E. 2005)

186 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

production, depending on whether work and learning are examined in the

context of individual, group or organisational work.
Reflection and research constitute the general conceptual conditions for
the analysis of the phenomenon, learning at work. The concepts of feedback,
assessment and evaluation which are located between reflection and study
in Figure 1 are intended for the classification of learning and knowledge-for-
mation phenomena occurring within the work organisation. Without reflec-
tion it is not possible to understand the feedback, assessment and evaluation
activities. Neither can research be done without reflection, but the context
in which it belongs is society and its institutions, which produce knowledge
for organisations and people. (Järvinen & Poikela, E. 2001.)

Learning in the contexts of individual, shared and organisational work

Reflecting does not simply mean conscious thinking as Eraut (1994) as-
sumes, for example, when he denies the possibility of reflection in action.
Schön (1983) notes that action always includes gaps and situations enable
thinking. So reflection has two dimensions (see Figure 1). The first dimen-
sion is connected to immediate action and concerns reflection in action.
The second dimension is connected to the gained experience and concerns
reflection on action. Boud et al. (1985) describe reflection also as careful
planning for action. Reflection is not only involved in the phases of active
experimentation and reflective observation, but also in the phase of abstract
conceptualisation. Acquiring new knowledge, adapting concepts and their
uses, modelling and planning are essential parts of preparation for future
action. McAlpine et al. (1999) emphasise that the reflection taking place
during this preparation is reflection for action. In their model, reflection is
emphasised within meta-cognitive aspects. Also, Mezirow (1991) states the
focus of reflection is not only on the content but also on the assumptions and
beliefs regulating the action.
Kolb (1984) argues that his model is universal and suitable for learning
activities in any context, especially the context of work. The cycle describes

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 187

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

Concrete experience

Apprehension

Active experimentation/ Extension Reflective observation/

– reflection in action Intention – reflection on action

Comprehension

Abstract conceptualisation/
– reflection for action

FIGURE 2. Reflection and experiential learning

(Poikela, E. 2005, 25)

the individual’s action and is applicable for explaining learning at work in

its individual context. Because the concrete experience is both the starting
point and the outcome of the learning process, experience is rather an object
of observation, conceptualisation and experimentation than a part of reflec-
tive action. In other words, reflection is not located in the outcome or ob-
ject of action; it is embedded in action that produces learning contextualised
by time, place and situation. This also means that reflection does not only
describe the psychological conditions of individuals, but it also describes
the conditions determined by the social actions of groups, organisations and
even a society.
The above description bears an analogous relationship to Nonaka and
Takeuchi’s (1995) well-known organisational knowledge creation mod-
el. The difference lies in the perspective: instead of focusing on learning,
Nonaka and Takeuchi analyse what they call SECI processes (Socialisation
– Externalisation – Combination – Internalisation) functioning in the con-
text of shared work. Corresponding concepts (sharing members’ experiences

188 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

– dialogue or reflecting collectively – networking new knowledge – learning

by doing) can be found in some writings by Nonaka (1994) and Nonaka and
Takeuchi (1995, 70–72). They cannot be found, however, in the diagrams
they drew to illustrate their ideas, the function of which is primarily to de-
lineate the processing of knowledge.
Nonaka and Konno (1998) also tried to show the context, time and place
for the realisation of the SECI process, which they describe with the Japa-
nese term “Ba”. This refers to a physical, virtual and mental state in which
the creation of organisational knowledge becomes possible. Socialisation is
a person-to-person occurrence, in which implicit knowledge is transferred
from one employee to another in various face-to-face situations. In the ex-
ternalisation phase, the group plays the decisive role. In the combination
phase, the group systematises what they know and joins new knowledge to it
in line with common goals, and then this knowledge passes between groups
in a network. In the internalisation phase, the individual has the leading role
once more, but the new action model becomes established as a modus oper-
andi for the groups and the whole organisation, thus embracing the entire
organisational culture.
The description of shared learning developed from Nonaka and Takeuchi’s
model bears an analogous relationship to Crossan, Lane and White’s (1999)
organisational learning model. According to them, organisational learning
begins with intuition formation and continues within the subsequent stages
which are intuition interpretation, integration into shared activities and in-
stitutionalisation as an established practice.
Intuition formation is very closely connected with the latent or pre-con-
scious action processes going on in the organisation. It cannot be explained
from the viewpoint of a single individual’s action because work processes
are shared between individuals and work groups in the context of organisa-
tional work. Intuition interpretation begins with the charting of an action’s
conscious elements. The interpretation process also affects tacit knowledge,
which has to be transmuted into linguistic form. On the individual level,
interpretations contain contradictions, and these have to be resolved within
the group in a way that everyone can understand and approve.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 189

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

It is the shared language and shared interpretation which makes knowl-

edge derived from intuition the property of the organisation, which results
in the integration of the interpreted knowledge as a part of collective activ-
ity. Integration expresses the work community’s continuous internal com-
munication through shared work practices. The establishing of new work
practices results in their institutionalisation, by which is meant the routines,
structures, systems, strategies and formal frameworks which ultimately di-
rect the organisational behaviour of individuals.
Crossan et al’s model fills in what was missing from Nonaka and Konno’s
aforementioned description of Ba. The model emphasises the role of learn-
ing’s feed-forward and feedback processes, which form the links between the
levels of an individual, a group and an organisation. However, they see the
links as if they were only a matter of systematic input and feedback mecha-
nisms. In our view these links need to be understood as the processes foster-
ing learning and knowing simultaneously between and within the different
contexts of the work organisation. In the next section we will try to clarify
this view. (Järvinen & Poikela 2006.)

Learning and knowing processes in the work organisation

The models of Kolb (1984), Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995), and Crossan, Lane
and White (1999) intersect in way that makes it possible to outline the proc-
ess model of learning at work (c.f. Järvinen & Poikela 2001). Kolb’s cycle
aims at universality, in that its purpose is to explain the learning activity of
an individual in any context whatsoever. Nonaka and Takeuchi’s descrip-
tion illuminates the knowledge formation processes, which are essential for
individual and collective learning. In Crossan, Lane and White’s model the
individual’s intuition needs the group as its interpreter and transmitter, after
which the knowledge acquired can be integrated and institutionalised as the
property and a characteristic of the whole organisation. Learning at work
can be condensed into the form of a process description (see Figure 3), in
which social, reflective, cognitive and operational processes follow, affect

190 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

and refashion each other in a continuous process of learning (Järvinen &

Poikela 2006.)
The key point in production learning and knowing is not what is hap-
pening “in the levels” of the individual, group or organisation, but rather
what is happening between them. It is meaningful to talk about contexts of
individual, shared and organisational work that link the action and learn-
ing processes defined by situation, time and place. The processes producing
learning and knowing are presented as linking the corresponding dimen-
sions of the above mentioned theories (see Figure 3).

Social processes: Concrete Experience (CE) – Sharing Experience

(SE) – Intuition Formation (IF)
Reflective processes: Reflective Observation (RO) – Reflecting Collec-
tively (RC) – Intuition Interpretation (II)
Cognitive processes: Abstract Conceptualisation (AC) – Networking
New Knowledge (NK) – Integration of Interpreted
Knowledge (IK)
Operational processes: Active Experimentation (AE) – Learning by Doing
(LD) – Knowledge Institutionalisation (KI)

The social processes (concrete experience – sharing experience – intuition

formation) entail the sharing of know-how, knowledge and experience be-
tween the individual, the group and the whole organisation. Learning re-
quires participation; it also requires that the participants are able to influ-
ence developing activities.
The reflective processes (reflective observation – reflecting collectively
– intuition interpretation) encompass the factors relating to the obtaining
and giving of individual feedback, the assessment discussion of groups and
the drawing of conclusions as well as continuous evaluation for promoting
the development of the whole organisation. It is important that the managers
of learning at work ensure that the assessment practices really are used and
that they proceed smoothly.
The cognitive processes (abstract conceptualisation – networking new
knowledge – integration of interpreted knowledge) concern the production,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 191

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

CONTEXT LEARNING PROCESSES REFLECTION

CE
RO

Context of individual AE
learning AC Feedback

SE
RC
Context of shared Assessment
learning LD
NK

IF II
Context of organisa-
Evaluation
tional learning KI
IK

WORKING LIFE/ LEARNING NETWORKS RESEARCH

SOCIETY

FIGURE 3. The process model of learning at work

(Poikela, E. 2005)

sharing, transfer and recording of knowledge and new models or concepts

coming from the employee, group and whole organisation. Experience-
based knowledge, to which has been added externally acquired knowledge,
is at this stage refined into more general knowledge for the organisation’s
databases.
The operational processes (active experimentation – learning by doing
– knowledge institutionalisation) contain continual experimentation and
testing of new practices on the part of individual employees, work groups
and departments. From the perspective of the organisation, this means that
the new practices become firmly established.
The right side of a Figure 3 describes knowledge construction from
the basis of reflection – feedback, assessment and evaluation. In this set-
ting reflection has a dual meaning. On the one hand, reflecting produces
knowledge for problem solving, development and innovation. On the other,

192 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

it works as a functional source of learning and new knowing for individuals,

groups and organisations. Without knowledge, including tacit knowledge
which is the target of reflection, learning cannot occur. In the context of
individual work the driving force of organisational learning is feedback that
individuals can gain by themselves or receive from colleagues, supervisors,
clients or other actors. The assessment information produced in discussions
has especial significance as a source of ideas, choices and conclusions in the
context of shared work. It offers a way of achieving solutions to work prob-
lems owned by groups or individuals. In the context of organisational work,
systematic evaluation information is gained in the form of inquiries, surveys
and interviews which are a part of organisational knowledge creation and a
precondition for an organisation’s strategic decision making.
The examination of social processes involves the observation and assess-
ment of learners’ ability to act alone and with others, dependence on others’
support, as well as their ability to act in a group both as a member and as a
leader. Reflective processes reveal how the learner relies on different kinds
of action procedures, how able they are to face problem situations or to seek
solution models, and whether they display innovative creativity. Cognitive
processes indicate knowledge possession starting from the ability to read in-
structions and obey them, continuing with the ability to form principles for
action and use different tools, and ending with being able to manage work
in a comprehensive manner. Operational processes show the structured and
fluent performance of duties and action.
The new description produces a new kind of modelling, in which the
organisation is seen as being made up of processes rather than levels and
hierarchies. This makes it possible to understand, handle, combine and lead
processes in an appropriate way. In the following, our aim is to analyse how
simultaneous learning processes connected to an individual, group and or-
ganisation cross and intersect with one another in the context of work. A
tool for examining these elements is the typology of learning at work as so-
cial, reflective, cognitive and operational processes (Järvinen & Poikela, E.
2001). We will also analyse the interactive relations between learning proc-
esses and different types of knowledge presented by Blackler (1995). The

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 193

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

data was gathered from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Tampere
and from the Department of Physiotherapy Education at the Pirkanmaa
Polytechnic. These were the two case organisations in Sari Poikela’s ethno-
graphic research carried out during 1996–2001, a study which focused on
the development of tutor competence and knowing, and also on the core ele-
ments of their work (Poikela, S. 2003). The data gathered during 1995–1997
was based on the observation of a number of tutorials (n=18) facilitated by
five different tutors, and also on tutor interviews. In addition, three tutors
wrote journals about facilitating tutorials (n=30) during the academic year
of 1996–1997. During 2001, six experienced tutors were interviewed again.
In this article, we focus on exploring and identifying the knowledge envi-
ronment of tutors’ work.
Objective knowledge, which can be divided into encoded and embed-
ded knowledge, is not dependent on an individual. The types of subjective
knowledge, either individual or collective, are referred to as embrained and
embodied knowledge. Encultured knowledge emerges on the basis of other
types of knowledge and this is why it is both objective and subjective in na-
ture. The analysis of data is focused mainly on locating subjective and expe-
riential elements of tutors’ knowledge (embrained and embodied). However,
encoded and embedded knowledge could also be located in the descriptions
of different instructions, resources and infrastructure. If these forms of sym-
bolic knowledge remain static, they may even, in the worst cases, prevent
learning. On the other hand, if they are dynamically processed, they create
preconditions and circumstances for learning new knowledge as a group (see
Järvinen & Poikela 2001).

The processes of learning and knowing in tutorial work

Development as a PBL tutor is not only a matter of managing the techniques

of facilitating learning or of designing problems. The development of teach-
ers’ knowing and competence has seldom been analysed from the point of

194 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

view of learning at work. However, according to the research data (Poikela,

S. 2003), the essential factors proved to be how tutors acquired and processed
knowledge indispensable to their professional development, and also how
they learned at work.
The core of problem-based learning activities consists of meetings in tu-
torial groups or teams (of approximately 10 students) facilitated by a tutor
who has the status of a teacher. Tutorials are usually held once or twice a
week, and all other learning and teaching activities are constructed around
these meetings. So, tutorials can be regarded as a dynamo which drives not
only learning, but the entire PBL-curriculum. The role of the tutor is am-
biguous and not easy to define since it might consist of many simultaneous
roles and tasks that may even feel contradictory at times. As facilitators, PBL
tutors are a part of the group themselves and, in this respect, one of the
learners too. However, they are still in a position of power, acting for exam-
ple, as evaluators of the learning results. It is important to become familiar
with and to recognise the meanings and functions of tutors’ different roles.
(Poikela, S. 2003.)
When giving a lecture, teachers/tutors are experts and resources for
learning, but in tutorials they facilitate learning. Tutors do not operate
prominently and, under no circumstances, dominantly in a tutorial. They
facilitate and challenge learning mainly by asking questions. Tutoring is
probably the most challenging role the teacher can take on. This means that
fundamental questions about oneself as a human being and as a teacher need
to be carefully addressed. It is essential to evaluate the depth of one’s own ex-
pertise regarding the substance of tutorials, as well as one’s own ideas about
PBL and its theoretical background. Being able to identify and guide the
phases (or steps) of the problem-solving process is a starting point for acting
as a tutor, but knowledge of PBL should not be limited only to this. Teachers
themselves tend to see learning more a teacher-centred than a learner-cen-
tred activity, but this is no longer possible within the context of PBL. The
role of tutor may feel strange at the beginning, and feelings of uncertainty
and inadequacy are usual. Expertise is not determined only by knowledge of
the substance, but by the ability to put this expertise to work. This is done

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 195

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

by asking good questions dealing with substance, and by guiding learners to

reflect on their learning. (Silén 1996; Poikela, S. 2003.)
PBL changes the culture of learning in many ways. It changes the rela-
tion between learner and teacher, as well as the collegial relations between
teachers, and it also impacts on the organisation. In the broadest sense, all
the functions of an organisation have to be re-evaluated and re-organised
according to the principles of problem-based pedagogy and learning. Oth-
erwise, both the teachers/tutors and the students will end up in a state of
frustration. Curricular development should become a collaborative process,
continuously evolving, and integrating every single teacher into the process.
Ideals and practices have to correspond with one another at the level of ac-
tion. If the impact of these developments at the meta- and macro-levels of
an organisation is disregarded, PBL can easily be misunderstood as a static
construction arising from a doctrine or dogma, rather than as a transform-
ing educational strategy. From the teacher’s perspective, PBL demands fun-
damental reflection on one’s own values and work practices. Consequently,
development as a PBL tutor is not only a matter of managing the techniques
of facilitating learning or of designing problems. The core of PBL goes deep
into conceptions of knowledge and learning, and utilises these conceptions
as tools for comprehension.

Experience, interaction and intuition as a source of learning – social processes

Experiences were obtained, shared and produced in different ways. When

teachers started to act as tutors, the first challenge was how to establish
contact with the tutorial group. Tutors were worried about their skills in
facilitating learning, and were even unsure about their own expertise with
the substance of tutorials. In the worst cases they felt they could even harm
learning if they did not facilitate the group “in the right way”. Tutors also
speculated on the effects of their non-verbal actions. The many aspects of the
learning situation which appear in tutors’ physical movements and actions
became visible with this kind of embodied knowledge. Tutors’ uncertainty

196 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

about their new role also affected the group, which made the students suspi-
cious about their learning too. However, this occurred only during the first
two years of running the PBL curriculum. Some tutors assumed that this
was because they themselves as tutors had become more convincing, even
empowered, as facilitators of learning. At the beginning, they felt they were
more “tense and alert”. It was only little by little that they started to relax
which, in turn, led to an atmosphere of openness and trust within the group.
Tutors were able to analyse the group very skilfully, both in terms of the
emotions and the moods of its members. For example, they felt they could
sense something in the air which they could not exactly specify.
“How could I help the students come into the tutorial situation, work
there and feel relaxed? And how could I do this for myself, too?”

Deliberate control of one’s own non-verbal actions is one part of embod-

ied knowledge. One of the tutors realised she affected the interaction of the
group unduly by simply nodding her head too often. In doing this she took
too much power in the group situation, since students started to look at the
tutor and address her rather than talking directly to each other. This is a
good example of how tutors recognised the significance of tacit and embod-
ied knowledge in their actions. It proved to be hard to give a verbal form to
all the elements of subjective knowledge. So, the knowledge was more em-
bodied or involved in actions. Tutors described the ways they could influ-
ence the creation of a “strong and positive” atmosphere in tutorials. Still,
they found it hard to say aloud how their own actions could create such
an atmosphere. This was linked to intuitions regarding the joy of learning
when, at its best, the tutorial was described as a collective flow-experience
enjoyed by all participants.
Even during the early stages of implementing the PBL curriculum, medi-
cal tutors started to mentor one another. However, this was not organised or
planned in the first place, and one of the tutors described it more as “talking
over a cup of coffee”. It was soon apparent that the freshman tutors could
not be left alone, and the more experienced tutors started to establish a tutor
training system. In this way, more experienced tutors were able to guide the

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 197

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

novice tutors. The tutor training formed a very important forum for obtain-
ing, sharing and producing knowledge. Not all teachers were pleased that
they had to change their traditional style of teaching. For this reason, the
tutor training sessions also served as forums for handling and processing ac-
tive resistance to change. One of the tutors described the atmosphere of the
sessions metaphorically as “a continuing battle”. Tutors said that changing
medical education was hard, even more difficult than “moving a cemetery”.
It was important that a proportion of the tutors served as active agents for
change in curriculum reform and that they were patient enough to train new
novice tutors over several years. Some of the teachers were reluctant to par-
ticipate in tutor training, but, little by little, active resistance was changed
to acceptance. The tutor training and its development provided the most
important forums for sharing common encultured knowledge.
Another important common forum, both in medicine and physiothera-
py, was the curricular work which was a continuing process. Working alone,
isolated from colleagues, was no longer possible because curriculum work
forced all teachers to consider shared practices and procedures. Everybody
had to argue and justify their opinions. At the same time, the opinions and
thoughts of colleagues became more familiar than ever before.
“It happens in meetings, we sit down and talk things over and then we
agree what everyone needs to do next. If you share your thoughts dur-
ing the meetings then your own ideas get noticed more.”

More formal modes of cooperation were developed in medicine because

there were so many teacher involved. Acting together, curriculum-planning
groups produced collectively shared knowledge. At the start, the members of
the groups hardly knew each other, and they knew little about one another’s
areas of expertise. This sometimes led to misunderstandings and difficult
situations. Earlier, teachers’ own areas of work had been protected too care-
fully and opportunities for collegial cooperation had been underestimated.
Tutors, acting as trainers, had the idea that every novice tutor should have an
older colleague observing and commenting on how the first tutorials were
going. Some teachers did not want this because they felt it was tantamount to

198 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

inspecting their personal area of work. Little by little, however, most teach-
ers began to understand the advantages of cooperation. Tutors describe the
present situation as “positive and inspiring”. The doors of the curriculum
planning groups are open and anyone interested can join the groups they
wish to. The atmosphere of the groups is now much more open and relaxed
than in the early years.

Feedback, assessment and evaluation as a source of learning – reflective processes

Subjective knowledge is processed through reflection. Reflection can be

understood as the smallest unit of assessment in learning and producing
new knowledge. Its aim is to produce new knowledge for learning and de-
velopment (Poikela, E. 2004). The data richly revealed the elements of em-
brained and embodied knowledge described by tutors. This knowledge had
been generated through observation and assessment over many years. At the
start, tutors felt that the new kinds of practices and their new role of facilita-
tor were very difficult, and they missed their former secure role as an expert
on the substance of their subjects. This was connected with worries about
ensuring that learners learned everything necessary – a typical desire for a
teacher trying to explain everything in as much detail as possible.
“I feel that all the theories about acting as a tutor prevent my sponta-
neous action. Somebody said teachers need to find their own way of
becoming tutors and to work continuously with their own role. Maybe
I am right at the beginning and I need to accept that I am apprentice
to a tutor.”

Over the years, these doubts about being a tutor were reversed. Tutors start-
ed to feel that acting as a tutor was more meaningful than giving an expert
lecture, for example. Developing as a tutor meant passing through different
stages. The primary concern at the beginning was being able to guide the
cycle of problem-solving appropriately. Tutors felt this took most of their
energy and they had difficulties in making challenging questions or making

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 199

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

comments about the group dynamics. So, this meant that encoded knowl-
edge, which was, in this case, the cyclical model of problem-solving, sup-
ported the creation of embrained knowledge. The model, as such, was not
static because tutors said it helped them to go through the problem-solving
process smoothly and to guide the group more effectively even after several
years. The model had the status of established practice and institutionalised
knowledge, but it was submitted to a process of continuous reflection both
individual and collective.
All tutors examined, at a fundamental level, the change from their former
role as teacher to that of facilitator of learning. On the one hand, they sensed
they were finding their own ways of being tutors only little by little. On the
other, they acted with increasing fluency and felt more comfortable in their
new roles. The duties of facilitator and expert meshed more satisfactorily,
and the changes in approach forced by the new situation were not felt to be
as problematic as before. At the beginning, tutors worried most about how
they could help the learners in the best possible way. The development of
tutors’ skills can be regarded as learning through the interaction between
experimenting and changing experiences. However, experimenting was not
enough; a continuous analysis of one’s own work was needed. It was essential
to try to do better all the time. This guaranteed the creation of new intuitions
as a basis for learning at work. For example, tutors noticed that it was not
enough “to know” the processes of group dynamics; it was also important to
influence and facilitate these processes in practical situations. At first, tutors
felt helpless in the tutorial situation. This meant that symbolic embrained
knowledge had not yet been produced as knowing and competence. So, the
lessons about tutoring and acting as a tutor were not in balance. When more
experience was gained, the phenomenon of group dynamics was found to
be more interesting. Tutors also started to analyse their actions in more de-
tail as “builders of the learning environment” and “supporters of the joy of
learning”.
“Well, the spirit or atmosphere has a strong effect. Sometimes it just so
happens that everyone seems to be in a similar mood and they joke and
have a good time. Still the learning issues are dealt with and there is

200 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

real progress.”...“I think we have been able to organise the first year well
and things are functioning effectively. It gives students a sense that we,
as teachers, believe in this way of studying. I see it like that. I sure hope
it is like that and it is dependent on us.”

However, despite this experience, there were still situations in which tutors
felt their knowledge and skills to be insufficient. Helping the group to syn-
thesise and construct the new knowledge was one area that was particularly
in need of development. The key words for acting as a tutor could be char-
acterised as courage, trust and patience. Courage was needed so as not to
intervene in the actions of the group too early. Tutors needed to wait and
observe and to trust that the group was capable of rational work by itself.
Tutors learnt to consider more closely when interventions were needed and
what their purpose was. They became aware that in the worst cases tutors
could even sabotage the learning if they made an unnecessary interven-
tion. Tutors learnt to focus their interventions and noted the importance of
framing good questions. Observing tutorials facilitated by fellow tutors was
found to be an effective way of also developing one’s own facilitating skills.
After years of experience, some of the tutors saw their role more as that of
a pedagogue than an expert on substance. So, the development of know-
ing and competence was enabled through the processes of assessment and
reflection.
Many tutors used writing as a tool for personal reflection. Notes and
journals were important for assessing both their own actions and the func-
tioning of the group. Collective reflection was possible during tutor train-
ing and other common meetings. The experiences gained through training
other tutors were also felt to be significant. The systematic observation of
tutorials was even described as the most influential learning experience at
work. Tutors saw the importance of giving and getting feedback both in tu-
torials and as part of collective action with colleagues. However, both the tu-
tors and students needed to practise systematic feedback. Reflection needed
focus and a realisation of what elements were essential.
A broader evaluation was possible with the continuous development and
outlining of the curriculum which was undertaken every year. Unlike the

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 201

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

traditional curriculum, the PBL curriculum was not “carved in stone” for
several years at a time. If shortcomings were noted, they were dealt with and
corrected at once. The development of the curriculum on this new basis was
noted nationally, and both organisations received public commendation in
the form of awards for the quality of teaching.

Acquiring, creating and processing knowledge as a source of learning – cognitive

processes

The cyclical model of PBL that structures tutorial work and learning is a
representation of symbolic knowledge. During the early phase of the project,
the model offered detailed direction regarding the actions of tutors and stu-
dents. Following it gave tutors a sense of “doing things right” and, in this
way, they gained a sense of support and encouragement for their work. Tu-
tor guides and course manuals played a similar role, aiming to guarantee
that all the tutors acquired and followed the same collective rules. The tu-
tor guides were especially important in medicine because not all the tutors
reflected on their work together in collective meetings on a regular basis.
Tutors described this as “decent methodological management” and felt that
carefully following the same procedure was needed at the start. Designing
these shared instructions together was also a good indication of collective
learning.
Also, cultural knowledge was created by using metaphors and parables.
This can even be described as representing a collective state of mind inside
an organisation, involving interaction and knowledge created and shared
together. The social appearance of cultural knowledge was easier to locate
and express than the values or the tacit collective knowledge of an organisa-
tion. The creation of cultural knowledge can be compared to organisational
learning which begins with the creation of an intuition linked to the tacit
or preconscious action processes of an organisation. The intuition is modi-
fied by shared language and by collective interpretation which, in turn, inte-
grates it into the former knowledge of the organisation and institutionalises

202 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

it as part of the organisation’s collective action. According to the data, the

challenge was how collective knowledge and competence could be passed on
to “the tutors of the next generation”.
The management openly supported the curriculum change in both or-
ganisations. Although there was little increase in resources, as such, support
from the principal and management was a very important factor in the suc-
cess of the change process that took place in both institutions. However, the
process of curriculum change was carried out in different ways. The tutors
of physiotherapy guided their unit towards the problem-based curriculum
one step at a time by integrating a new part of the study programme “with
PBL” every year over a five-year period. Their unit was small and the change
mainly affected the work of about ten teachers. Tutors felt that the man-
agement gave quiet assurance and support to the change. Tutors regarded
the atmosphere of their unit as excellent and, after some initial fights, their
cooperation had proceeded fairly smoothly. In medicine, the change influ-
enced dozens of teachers simultaneously. The change became personalised
as a strong faculty dean placed his full authority behind the change process.
The differences in these change processes were linked to the ways the ele-
ments of cultural knowledge appeared in tutors’ modes of expression. For
example, the way in which implicit knowledge proceeded to explicit knowl-
edge was expressed through metaphors.
“In earlier days, the teacher was sitting alone in a fully loaded boat
almost sinking, and the poor teacher was trying to row with the last
energy s/he had. After PBL, the tutor is sitting in a boat with a group
and guiding while others are rowing and eagerly looking ahead.”

Collective cooperation and learning did not mean that everyone was in
agreement all the time. However, objections had to be dealt with and it was
understood that everyone’s opinions should be taken into account. Never-
theless, it was also the case that some teachers had to concede or accept an
idea if colleagues could reason and argue their opinions more convincingly.
The best part of cooperation was sharing both the positive and the nega-
tive experiences. Creating a good general atmosphere required the transfor-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 203

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

mation of attitudes. Everyone had to realise that old habits and procedures
needed to be changed because of PBL. There was a great deal of cooperation,
although its intensity and style varied even after some years. Being open
could be surprisingly difficult.
“Some colleagues are too critical of themselves and, because of this,
they may even hide their own competence.”

Tutors’ development as facilitators was also indicated in the way they were
capable of supporting learners’ growth with regard to autonomy, self-direct-
edness and reflection. Also important was the way in which tutors managed
to conceptualise their own actions and pass on their “know-how” to col-
leagues. Tutors themselves are also learners in the process of problem-based
learning but, at the same time, they need to guide the learning skills of the
students. If the tutor tries to give over-strict orders and instructions with
regard to the learning process, it is possible that there will not be enough
space for students’ self-directedness. So, the duty of a tutor is a very complex
one. There is a need to trust the learners’ self-directedness, support their
construction of knowledge and act as an active resource for learning. At the
same time, it is essential to take care of the individual and collective devel-
opment of expertise in problem-based pedagogy, both in terms of substance
and new ways of acting inside the organisation.

Action, cooperation and routinising as a source of learning – operational processes

The application of problem-based pedagogy and the curriculum associated

with it started to proceed more smoothly after more experience had been
gained. The other side of the coin of “managing the method” is the threat
of actions becoming too routine which, in turn, does not guarantee learn-
ing quality. This can be avoided by continuous assessment and reflection
regarding the action processes. For example, the first part of tutor training
in medicine followed a procedure tutors called “a cook book exercise”. The
aim was to gain personal experience of being a member of a tutorial group.

204 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

The second part of tutor training deepened knowing and competence using
an observation exercise followed by a process of collective reflection. The
observation exercise was developed in such a way that an observation form
helped to direct attention towards essential features of group dynamics and
tutors’ actions.
Important questions were raised when tutors considered whether a tutor
always needed to be an expert on the substance of tutorials. Almost all tutors
of medicine were practitioners of medicine themselves. Most of the tutors
in physiotherapy were also physiotherapists, but this was not emphasised
as a qualification to the extent that it was in medicine. In both organisa-
tions the work of the curriculum planning groups was carefully organised
and involved participants in different roles. All the teachers of physiotherapy
were evidently involved with PBL as tutors, expert lecturers and examiners
because of their small number (about ten).
Sometimes old procedures in medicine conflicted with new ones. It had
been mainly the professors who had earlier acted as examiners. After cur-
riculum reform they still had this same role, but only some of them actively
participated as tutors. For this reason, the question of exams and the criteria
for evaluation were sometimes in contradiction with the principles of PBL.
The former institutionalised roles as teachers and prevented the creation of
roles as tutors or facilitators of learning. However, implementing PBL led to
tutors gaining new experiences, interpreting them and, in this way, integrat-
ing new knowledge which, little by little, became institutionalised.
Fundamental organisational changes were faced by physiotherapy tutors
when the former Institute for Health Care became part of the Polytechnic.
The situation was challenging for individuals, the work community and the
whole organisation. On the one hand, tutors felt the change, which lasted
many years, was very stressful. On the other, the change was not simply a
negative phenomenon because it continually drove the process of curricu-
lum development.
“Next autumn we will have a new curriculum once again. So, this must
be the normal state. We are doing it all the time and I guess we are used
to it. Sometimes this feels like a burden. Now we are going to have a new

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 205

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

curriculum and new terms and conditions of employment for teachers.

This is the fun we have been busy with. I think we have kept everything
together surprisingly well and our gang has managed it pretty well.”

Collective processes could not be stabilised because the processes involved

in knowing and action were in a state of continuous flux and testing. Or-
ganisational changes established a strict framework for the use of teaching
resources. There were 35 teaching hours per credit at the beginning of the
PBL curriculum and this was later reduced to 18–20 hours per credit. Tutors
shared the opinion that, without PBL, they could not use that time effectively.
Unfortunately, this meant that tutors had less time for their meetings togeth-
er because they aimed to maximise the hours they were using for contact les-
sons. Changes in the terms and conditions of employment caused problems
with resources. The compulsory teaching duties were no longer based simply
on counting the amount of contact lessons, but all the duties undertaken by
a teacher. Tutors felt positive about this change because they expected it to
offer a better framework for cooperation and development work.
“We had a lot of cooperation even before, but now we do it even more.
I think it is one really good point in all of this.”

Conclusion

We have analysed the formation of tutors’ professional knowing and com-

petence from the point of view of processes of learning at work. At first,
teachers were worried about their own role both as facilitator and expert and
especially about their tutoring skills as a facilitator for the tutorial group.
However, different elements of teachership began to be combined in more
creative way as a result of tutors’ own reflections and the collective learning
process. As a result, it was possible to move from a culture of working alone
to a culture of shared work and genuine trust. The curriculum, which was
constructed together, became a tool for reforming the whole culture of an

206 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

LEARNING AND KNOWING AT WORK

educational organisation. The change affecting individuals, the work com-

munity and the whole organisation was crystallised in the successful refor-
mation of curriculum and work organisation. It was not a matter of the skills
of the individual teacher or even of effective cooperation among some of the
teachers, but a matter of fundamental development producing new peda-
gogical knowing and competence. The development work institutionalised
in the form of a new curriculum constructed on problem-based pedagogy
touched everyone in the work community.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 207

208 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 Anna Raija Nummenmaa
University of Tampere

Kirsti Karila
University of Tampere

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN A MULTI-

PROFESSIONAL DAY CARE CENTRE
– PBL as a strategy and a script for learning at work

Learning at work is often described as a continual problem-solving process.

While work is seen as a major learning context, learning at work has been
described as random, experiential, and often also invisible to the learners
themselves. For this reason, it has been considered important to pay par-
ticular attention to the learning processes in the work community that en-
able more goal-oriented and conscious learning in the everyday work. The
article discusses the applications of problem-based learning in the collabora-
tive planning process in the work community. The study is a part of a wider
research project ‘Developing multi-professional expertise in the context of the
day care centre’ (Nummenmaa & Karila 2006).
Learning at work primarily refers to people’s everyday experiences at
work. Particular attention is paid to how the various practices at workplaces
affect the employees’ learning in the context of work. Garrick (1998) links
two main suppositions to the notion of learning at work. First, the every-
day situations at work include versatile opportunities for learning. Second,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 209

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA

things learned via first-hand experience have a dynamic nature and they are
open to versatile, new combinations.
Learning at work is often characterized as informal and random learning
(Argyris & Schön 1978; Marsick & Watkins 1991; Tynjälä & Collins 2000).
Both the notions of informality and randomness refer to the often unin-
tentional nature of learning at the workplace. Experientiality is also an es-
sential part of learning at work, visible in the employees’ general difficulty
in separating work and learning at work. According to Billet (1999), a ma-
jority of adult employees considers having learned much via experiences at
work. When the employees are then further asked how this learning has
taken place, it proves difficult to put the learning experience into words, or
they start to present ideas about learning by doing, learning from others,
and observing other people’s work. According to Billet, learning is a result
of the daily thinking and activities, as well as understanding the importance
of the issues people are faced with in their lives (Billet 1999). As learning at
the workplace as an entity is a multidimensional phenomenon, and no one
approach exists to define or describe it, learning at work ought to be studied
from various perspectives, depending on the context and the frame in which
the learning is being studied (Boud & Garrick 1999).
Problem-based learning is often mentioned as the most important edu-
cational innovation of the past few decades, particularly in the area of pro-
fessional-oriented training. Even though problem-based learning originated
specifically in education, while processing issues related to working life, its
applications still remain relatively little studied. However, there is increasing
interest towards the opportunities of problem-based learning in the develop-
ment of working life. In Finland, Jalava and Vikman (2003) were the first to
introduce a wider scope of applications of problem-based learning in the de-
velopment of companies and businesses in their book concerning work and
learning in the enterprises. They justify the functionality of problem-based
learning in new organizations and working communities, for example, by
defining work that is oriented towards problem-solving as a natural part of
people’s everyday work. In their own lives, people constantly solve various
daily problems, often without realizing that a number of their solutions are

210 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN A MULTI-PROFESSIONAL DAY CARE CENTRE

problem-based. The people’s former backgrounds, experiences, beliefs, and

conceptions essentially affect this unconscious activity. In various group-
level activities in work communities and organizations, the number of solu-
tions and problems is manifold. In addition, a growing number of new di-
mensions can be reached with problem-based learning, as the people in the
groups change. In the context of work activities, solutions are often sought
for some unsatisfactory situation, which is to be eliminated or developed
into a certain direction. (Jalava & Vikman 2003.)
Bereiter and Scardamalia (1993) define expertise as gradually proceed-
ing and developing problem-solving in which the members of the commu-
nity constantly reflect on their own activities and redefine their working
practices. Problem-based learning at work can thus be primarily seen as a
pedagogical ‘script’ that guides the process of learning at work. This no-
tion contains the key processes for learning at work: the process of strong
participation, the shared discussions on the significances and relevancies,
the individual and shared knowledge formation, and developing the shared
practices (Hakkarainen et al. 2002; Tynjälä 2006; Wenger 1998). The work
process per se enables a more conscious learning process as well as making
visible the knowledge based on experience and the tacit knowledge in the
community. Problem-based learning must, however, also be seen as a more
general development strategy that enables a new kind of culture of learning
at work in the community, the evolution of the community into a commu-
nity of learners (Nummenmaa & Karila 2006).
The employees do not always consider their own job or their workplace as
a learning environment or a source of learning. Tradition has long dictated
that learning and work take place in different places and institutions: work in
the working place and learning elsewhere (Garrick 1998). For problem-based
learning and its guidance in the workplace, it is essential that the members
of the work community also learn to consider and recognize their workplace
as a learning environment and to view it from various perspectives. Learn-
ing at work can be supported, for example, by the following forms of data ac-
quisition: documenting and reflecting on their own work (for example, with
work diaries), observing the work of the colleagues, taping one’s work on

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 211

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA

video and observing it critically; having shared conversations and negotia-

tions, observing the operations of other working communities, interviewing
(for example children, parents, the other people in the work community),
familiarizing oneself with related literature and acquiring data from the In-
ternet (see Fig. 1).
The process of problem-based learning in the workplace may in practice
acquire various different shapes, depending on the organization – its basic
function and the structure of the organization. Jalava and Vikman (2003)
have applied problem-based learning in companies (for example, Nokian
Renkaat). In our research, the organization was a municipal day care centre.
The development and research object was the collaborative planning proc-
ess for creating the early childhood curriculum for the day care centre. We
sought an answer to the question of what challenges for learning at work
there are related to a collaborative planning process and how problem-based
learning can be applied in the context of work and in the processes of learn-
ing at work.
Our starting points were, among others, the research observations of
Virkkunen, Toikka and Engeström (1997) on the key challenges from the
perspective of learning and change in the work community: the crossovers
at the boundary between planning and implementation. In our research, the
key issue was the learning and the developing of a planning culture that is
oriented towards new practices, and a planning working method. With the
crossovers at the boundary between strategic reorientation and the renewing
of everyday action practices, the everyday work in the work community is
connected to developing strategic possibilities, the basis of which is formed,
among others, by interpretations shared by the community of educators on
the goals of education, on the views on the logic of the growing and develop-
ing, as well as on the importance of educational interaction and stimuli on
early development.

212 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN A MULTI-PROFESSIONAL DAY CARE CENTRE

The development context and the method

The day care centre that participated in the development study was a me-
dium-sized municipal day care centre in Finland. There were 92 children in
the centre, 15 employees with nursing and pedagogical tasks, and five groups
of children based on the children’s age. In each group of children, there were
three employees, either kindergarten teachers or nursery nurses.
Shared planning had previously been conducted on two levels in the day
care centre: on the level of the entire day care centre and in the groups of
children. These planning meetings had had clearly distinct tasks and goals
in the pedagogical planning in the day care centre. The participation and
action of the employees had also varied, and kindergarten teachers were usu-
ally responsible for pedagogical planning.
However, new challenges have emerged in the planning work in day care
centres the national basics of early childhood curricula were published in
Finland in 2003 and they operate as the national tool for guiding early child-
hood education in order to develop early childhood education arranged and
steered by society (National Curriculum Guidelines on Early Childhood
Education and Care in Finland 2003/2005). It is recommended that munici-
palities create their own specific early childhood curricula. Similarly, day
care centres are expected to create day care centre – specific early childhood
curricula. From the perspective of the working culture and the educational
practices of the community, the specific ways in which day care centres start
to proceed their plans are of particular importance.
Faced with the challenge of development, the participating day care cen-
tre started work on its own early childhood curriculum by applying prob-
lem-based learning.
The research was conducted as a case study using the methodology of a
participatory and developing action research (Keating, Robinson & Clemson
1996). The development process was launched in August 2004 and it ended
in November 2005. The goal of the research alongside the development proc-
ess was to discover elements that enable a change in the planning culture,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 213

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA

and, more generally, opportunities for learning at work and its conditions in
the everyday activities in the day care centre.
The approach of our action research was practical, participatory, and it
involved the aim of developing one’s own work. The research emphasized
communality and shared reflection. In a development work based on the re-
flective method, the organization is not given turnkey solutions, but instead,
assistance is provided for studying, analyzing, and understanding its opera-
tions and problems (Greenwood & Levin 1998).
The study also strongly highlighted participation and action. The mem-
bers of the community participated in every phase of the research. The ac-
tion research included a number of cycles of learning at work, activities, ob-
servation, and assessment (Carr & Kemmis 1986). The script that ultimately
organized the learning and the process related to the action research was the
problem-based learning cycle (see Fig. 1), and the related problem-solving
process formed a natural reflective spiral of action research (Heikkinen &
Jyrkämä 1999; Nummenmaa & Karila 2006).
The basic principles of PBL at work were:

1. Learning proceeds in groups on the basis of jointly perceived and set

problems, jointly formed conceptions and by critically evaluating pre-
viously searched information (Boud 1999; Poikela, S. 1998).

2. Learning takes place in the normal working context and the informa-
tion that is needed to solve problems is acquired in many different
ways (i.e. by documenting one’s action, reflecting, interviewing col-
leagues, from literature etc.).

3. The staff members’ diverse knowledge and competencies are resourc-

es that are taken to practice by using a guided and participative learn-
ing process – by working in tutorials.

214 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN A MULTI-PROFESSIONAL DAY CARE CENTRE

4. Common discussions and solving the problems/questions rising from

the staff members’ own work conditions motivate people to acquire
and produce new knowledge.

5. The individual knowledge and competencies of the group members

are put to use as the group negotiates and constructs a shared under-
standing and solution for the problem in question.

6. The learning process is guided, phased and assessed at every stage of

the process.

Problem solving

1. The problem scenario

2. Brainstorming

8. Clarification Assessment
➢ learning process 3. Organizing
➢ problem-sovling
➢ group process

4. Problem areas
7. Reconceptualization
5. Learning goals

6. Individual work

Various data acquisition methods

Observing the work

of the colleagues
Interviews
• children Getting to know the
• parents Shared negotiations, team literature
• the other operators meetings
in the working
Describing and documenting
communities
of one’s own work
Observing the action of other
communities

FIGURE 1. The PBL learning cycle and various methods of acquiring information

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 215

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA

7. Assessment and feedback have generally a central role in learning

processes. This is because the problems occurred e.g. in work proc-
esses usually have to be solved by sharing individual and joint experi-
ences.

Prior to the launching of the development process, the work community em-
pirically studied the basic principles of PBL and the processes of problem-
based learning at work. The basic scenario that guided the operations and
acted as the start up situation was the early childhood curriculum of the
day care centre. The PBL process was divided into two cycles and into eight
operational phases with individual goals (Fig. 1).
The work always proceeded on two levels: in the PBL sessions shared
by the entire work community, as well as in the team-specific sessions. In
the PBL process of the entire work community, the problem scenarios were
discussed with the entire work community present. The staff gathered in a
joint meeting once a month, after the work day at 5:15–5:30 PM. In the first
phase of the PBL cycle, the staff worked on the problems together. In the
phase of independent action, the action shifted from communal work to the
level of teams, which meant that the teams used various methods to acquire
information and thus proceed with the problem-solving process. After the
independent data acquisition, the work community again gathered, and the
data acquired was applied in the second phase of the cycle to reconceptualise
and clarify the learning tasks. In the mutual meetings of the work commu-
nity, researchers of the developmental research acted as PBL tutors. Teams of
three were organized and they operated independently without tutors, who
nevertheless acted as resource persons throughout the entire process.
In a PBL process that is realized as team work, teams formed of the staff
working with the groups of children in the daycare centre act as the learning
group in the scenario work. In the first phase of the scenario cycle and dur-
ing the independent action, the teams operated with the problem scenario
independently alongside everyday work. As the cycle shifted into its second
phase, the problem-solving process proceeded to the level of the entire work

216 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN A MULTI-PROFESSIONAL DAY CARE CENTRE

community, and the teams gathered to form common understanding of the

issue to be discussed – the target of learning at work.
The process proceeded from a wide problem scenario to reorganized is-
sues that operated as the learning targets for the day care centre employees
and gradually formed a guiding framework for creating the early childhood
curriculum. Table 1 describes the learning targets faced by the work com-
munity in the shared process of creating the early childhood curriculum, as
well as the main goals of working.

TABLE 1. The goals and targets of learning at work related to the early childhood curriculum

TARGETS OF LEARNING AT KEY LEARNING GOALS

WORK
1. What is the early childhood cur- To orient to the basic task of the early
riculum all about? childhood curriculum
2. What is included in the early child- To think about the contents of the
hood curriculum? early childhood curriculum
3. What is our day care centre like? To build a shared image of the day
care centre
4. What is good education like in our To study and explicate the common
group? base of values
5. What kinds of established practices To study the operational practices
are there in our team?
6. On what kinds of conceptions of To study and explicate the concep-
development and learning, as well as tions of development and learning as
nursing and education are our prac- well as the educational principles
tices based?
7. On what kinds of structures is our To start working on the group-spe-
day built, and what are its problems? cific early childhood curriculum
8. How is the day at the day care To work on the group-specific early
centre structured for each group of childhood curriculum
children?
9. What is the connection between To form a common early childhood
communally built values and targets curriculum for the day care centre
and the operational practices?

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 217

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA

The data collection was also partly integrated as a part of the PBL process.
The following data have been collected during the process.

A. The staff’s tutorial discussion was observed;

B. Individual descriptions dealing with own work practices, work ori-
entation, beliefs related to the child’s development, early childhood
education;
C. The teams’ common descriptions dealing with their work practices,
work orientation, beliefs related to the child’s development, early
childhood education.

In a separately organized data collection the following methods were used:

D. The daily activities of the teams (the community of practice) were ob-
served during the process;
E. The members of the teams were interviewed individually;
F. Each team was interviewed (group interview).

In accordance with the principles of action research, the data produced dur-
ing the PBL process has been analysed and used as a resource for learning
through the process.

Results

Figure 2 presents a summary of the learning processes that emerged during

the planning process involving the entire day care centre personnel. It is
based on the individual interviews as well as the team interviews carried out
in the closing phase of the project. Interviews were analysed using a data-
based method.
In particular, the employee interviews emphasized three major experi-
ences: mutual conversations and problem-solving had become more fre-

218 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN A MULTI-PROFESSIONAL DAY CARE CENTRE

quent, a shared language had been created in the work community, and the
participation and the commitment of the entire personnel (nurses as well
as teachers) had increased. In the employees’ reflections, the three aspects
are closely interrelated. As the number of mutual conversations increased, a
shared language also started to form. A shared language, in turn, facilitated
the commitment of the entire personnel in their contributions to the plan-
ning and implementation of the early childhood curriculum, as the issues
had been reflected and understood on a deeper level in the shared conversa-
tions.

Things learned in
the conversations
and discussions

Increased shared
conversations and
problem-solving

affects
gives

The collaborative
planning of the
affects

curriculum facilitates

The participation and

commitment of the entire helps The formation of a
nursing and teaching shared language
personnel
facilitates
produces

increases

novel views clear contents,

digestion

FIGURE 2. Learning processes that resulted from the collaborative working on the early
childhood education curriculum

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 219

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA

In a multi-professional day care centre, there are employees with different

educational backgrounds and educational levels. This means that shared
conversations and tasks also helped the members of the work community
learn from each other. The employees reported that the shared conversations
brought whole new aspects to the issues discussed and thus enriched the
operations of the work community in the day care centre.
Our development study applied problem-based learning (PBL) as a script
guiding the learning at work. In the interviews, the employees clearly em-
phasized the opportunity of learning a problem-based way of working. It cre-
ated a strong dimension of true participation and equality, challenged the
employees into the processes of learning at work, and acted as an arena for
enabling common, shared knowledge formation: ”I’m very happy about this,
in a way it has forced us in a good way, it’s given the framework and the op-
portunities for the work community.”
Solving problems related to problem-based working and the work itself
can thus be considered an inquisitive working method in which experts ana-
lyze their own work individually and together and reflect on the justifica-
tions for their solutions and the development of their working practices and
the social contexts of their work (Järvinen & Poikela 2000; Karila & Num-
menmaa 2001). Work in the fields of early childhood education is a strongly
context-bound phenomenon. Developing the everyday work, the expertise,
and learning at work cannot thus be studied as separate from their context.
Learning is seen as a relationship of experience and context as represented
by the individual ways of orientation towards the job, the individual and
communal forms of processing information, and the prerequisites created
by the organization. Individual learning is a prerequisite for group learning,
similarly to the learning of individuals and groups necessary for learning in
communities and organizations (cf. Järvinen & Poikela 2000).
Along with the opportunity of problem-based learning, the employees
also highlighted its challenging nature as a working method. From the per-
spective of developing work and solving the related problems, the challeng-
ing issue was to shift the working method and apply it as part of the everyday
problem-solving situations as a natural reflective professional practice. Inte-

220 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN A MULTI-PROFESSIONAL DAY CARE CENTRE

grating learning and problem-solving as part of everyday practices enables

individual development into an expert while working. In applying such a
method, learning and using the knowledge would thus form an intertwined
process (Tynjälä & Collin 2000).
The staff members considered important the process orientation of prob-
lem-based learning which helped the employees form positive attitudes to-
wards the continual working on the early childhood curriculum. This like-
ness to a process lies within the fundamental core of an early childhood
curriculum, as new work teams and groups of children enter the day care
centre annually. In such situations, it is important to renegotiate the working
practices and the educational principles. Meanwhile, adopting an attitude of
constant processing oriented the employees towards continual learning and
improving of one’s work. In conclusion, it can be stated that process-type
working with the early childhood curriculum deepened the staff’s under-
standing of the importance of the early childhood curriculum, the concep-
tualization of their own work, and constructing a common language in a
multi-professional day care centre community.

Some final remarks

The context of our developmental research was a Finnish day care centre.
Day care centres are multi-professional work communities where people
with different kinds of formal education and professional competences meet
and work together. The potential of multi-professionalism has, however,
not yet been taken advantage of. Instead, different kinds of educational and
experiential backgrounds of the employers have functioned to produce the
work communities more as insecurity about each occupational group’s com-
petence strengths and work tasks. (Karila & Nummenmaa 2001.)
The purpose of our developmental research has been to understand and to
model learning at work in the frame of reference of problem-based learning.
As a starting point of learning was the common planning and implementa-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 221

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA

tion process of the early childhood curriculum (ECEC). The process was
guided by the use of PBL as a script of learning. In conclusion, we can present
a few central working principles and challenges for learning at work.
First and foremost, the point of departure is the assumption that high-
quality learning develops within the context in which it is planned and im-
plemented. Early childhood curriculum development, therefore, begins with
an open examination of the prevailing situation and practices. Secondly,
the curriculum development process produces a system of learning based
on collaboration – a learning partnership. A learning partnership is an in-
ternal process of the workplace community between individuals in general,
between individuals in teams and between the teams. Thirdly, curriculum
development is based on the principles of problem based learning. The proc-
ess takes advantage of the staff’s personal experiences, through which inter-
pretations about the curriculum are collaboratively produced. According to
Wenger (1998) it is a question of learning as experience with shared meaning
making.
The implementation of the early childhood curriculum means above all
adopting new community practices – learning by doing. The curriculum de-
velopment process produces new and further develops the old tools for the
improvement of teaching, learning and the work culture. On the personal
level the most challenging learning is learning as identity work – the adop-
tion of learning at work and planning collaboratively as a part of the own
work-orientation.
Developing and maintaining a collaborative working culture requires
participation in and commitment to the shared operations to reach a cer-
tain goal. Wenger (1998) describes participation as an active process which
contains the mutual ability to recognize significances and relevancies and
to discuss them. In this process, the members of the community also con-
stantly shape each other’s conceptions. While participation shapes the expe-
riences (identity) of an individual, it also shapes and alters the communities
themselves.
According to our observations, particularly the processes of participa-
tion, discussions on the significances and relevancies, and the formation of

222 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

COLLABORATIVE PLANNING IN A MULTI-PROFESSIONAL DAY CARE CENTRE

shared expertise form the core of the creation of a working culture that is
related to collaborative planning. As a result of these processes, it is now
also possible to renew the existing practices related to the organization and
planning of the work. At the personal level, the learning process also enabled
professional development in the community, and as a result of this, new di-
mensions were found for one’s individual work.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 223

224 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 PART IV

ASSESSING FOR LEARNING AND KNOWING

The contextual and constructive perspective of knowledge requires close

examination of assessment and evaluation. If we assume that the knower
cannot be separated from the known, we need to ask what place objective,
unbiased evaluation has in the curriculum. From the point of view of self-
directed learning, the focus of assessment and evaluation is the promotion
of further learning.
Reflection and assessment lie at the core of the PBL process because the
quality and the results of learning depend on the learner’s ability (with the
help of the tutor) to set goals and to find the means for engaging in personal
and collaborative learning. Assessment is an integral part of the learning
process and primarily focuses on that process. Usually, the learning results
are evaluated when a student moves to the next step or stage of training or
to the profession as a novice. In PBL, assessment is connected with every
phase of the learning process. In this way students learn self-assessment and,
also, to set their own aims and criteria. Generally, a high quality of work
is achieved only through assessment which is focused on process (Poikela
1998, 2002; Nummenmaa & Perä-Rouhu 2001).
The development of professional competencies is based on the processes
by which they are produced. The change in the evaluation paradigm can be
noted as a transition from scientific measurement to judgemental assess-
ment (e.g. Hager & Butler 1994). Scientific measurement emphasises objec-
tive results, whereas judgement is interested in the processes producing re-
sults. Judgemental assessment is analogous to contextual analysis (Pettigrew
1985) which begins by describing the process explained by the outer and
inner contexts of organisation. One of the tasks of this analysis is to devel-
op criteria for judging learning processes and the outcomes of action. Such

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 225

judgemental criteria have been applied in some areas of vocational education
in Finland. The competence-based skill tests are developed on the basis of
contextual knowledge and learning (Nuotio & Backman & Pernu & Sisättö
2001; Poikela 2002). Those who develop skill tests and those involved in the
pedagogy of problem-based learning have a great deal to offer one another.
The aim of the project was to develop a new paradigm for assessing learn-
ing processes and evaluating competencies at work. The following research
questions were addressed:

• What is the basis and the purpose of evaluation in PBL pedagogy?

• How do we evaluate knowledge and knowing in the different contexts
of education and work, and how do we integrate assessment strategies
which deal with work and education?

Esa Poikela’s and Sari Poikela’s article ‘Developing context-based assessment

within the framework of problem-based learning’ approaches assessment and
evaluation through different paradigms and introduces the idea of context-
based assessment (CBA).
Anna Raija Nummenmaa’s, Kirsti Karila’s, Jorma Virtanen’s and Helvi
Kaksonen’s article ‘Interpretations of expertise as a framework for the PBL
curriculum and assessment’ deals with the relationship between the curricu-
lum and the assessment.

226 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 Esa Poikela
University of Lapland

Sari Poikela
University of Lapland

DEVELOPING CONTEXT-BASED ASSESSMENT WITHIN

THE FRAMEWORK OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

Our post-industrial society is increasingly becoming an auditing society

which is not only controlled by norms and financial resources, but also by
the knowledge produced by individuals and communities. Assessment too
can be seen as undergoing a transition from scientific measurement towards
judgemental assessment (Hager & Butler 1994). While, the focus of the sci-
entific paradigm lies only on results measured as objectively as possible, with
the judgemental paradigm the focus is on the process of producing results.
Hence, subjective factors should be taken into account.
Boud (2000) argues that assessment and evaluation involves identifying
appropriate standards and criteria and making judgements about quality.
The purpose and methods of assessment and evaluation should be extended
and seen as an indispensable factor in all forms of lifelong learning. These
ideas can be compared to the classification of generations of evaluation pre-
sented by Lincoln and Guba (1987).

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 227

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

What distinguishes problem-based learning (PBL) as a technique and,

even more so, as an educational strategy, pedagogy or even philosophy are
the changes needed in the whole learning environment. Defining PBL as
pedagogy implies a framework which holistically considers the organisa-
tional context, curriculum content and design, and the teaching and learn-
ing approach. Sari Poikela (2003) states the developmental work with PBL
does not end after first curricular changes but continues even after many
years. Continuous development of pedagogical processes and systems of as-
sessment and evaluation are needed. In this process, organisational factors
also play an essential role.
The aim of our article is to consider the basis for developing assessment
and evaluation in problem-based learning (PBL) both in the contexts of
higher education and learning at work. The article offers a starting point for
further development and research, making explicit good practices and qual-
ity factors connected with evaluation and pedagogy within the framework
of PBL. Empirical data referred to in the article has been gathered from four
group interviews, or rather discussions among participants, involved in a
Professional Development Programme on Problem-Based Learning (PBL-
PD). These discussions were conducted in January 2005. Each group had 5–6
members and discussions lasted from 45 to 60 minutes. The thematic struc-
ture was specified on paper for the groups, and discussions were transcribed
and then thematically analysed.

Quality assurance, assessment and evaluation

Chen (2002) emphasises the need for quality assurance in the context of
problem-based learning. His ideas have been shaped by over twenty years
of experience in implementing PBL at the University of Newcastle, Austral-
ia. Since the organisational environment around PBL is also influenced by
quality assurance demands, it is important to ensure that the responses pro-
tect and promote the PBL approach to teaching and learning. Internation-

228 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DEVELOPING CONTEXT-BASED ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

ally, PBL programs have been developed over the course of at least five “gen-
erations”. The practitioners of PBL have evolved from novices to mentors to
instructors of the next generation. This process is still in its early phases in
Finnish higher education.
When implementing quality assurance with regard to practice, it is es-
sential to articulate a number of questions: Why are we using PBL? How are
we implementing PBL? What are the objectives for our PBL approach? How
do we gather evidence that we are (or are not) achieving objectives? How do
we act on the feedback we receive about our processes and performances?
Chen states that if these issues are clear, the actual “model” of PBL that we
use becomes secondary. Quality assurance should be integrated into PBL
practice so that documented processes demonstrate quality attributes, many
kinds of data are gathered to provide evidence of performance, and practices
are monitored, reflected on and improved constantly (Chen 2002).
Parjanen (2001; 2003) analysed the problematic points in the quality as-
surance system at the university. He noted that the relations inside the system
are normally discontinuous and that this same problem also seems to affect
polytechnics. Most of the feedback information passes between teacher and
student. Although this relation is important, insufficient feedback and as-
sessment information flows between colleagues, directors and the admin-
istration. In this case, the whole assessment system becomes dysfunctional.
Squires (1997) asks a key question: “When we are evaluating teaching, are we
evaluating the right things?” It is difficult to find a unified and shared basis
for evaluation and quality if teachers see the functions of teaching in many
different ways. An effective quality system should cover all the levels of an
organisation and even the senior directors and leaders should receive feed-
back from the “grass roots” level. This means that the role of the manage-
ment is very important in enabling a functional quality system. In addition,
Parjanen recommends the continuous development of quality systems used
to evaluate teaching and learning.
Raivola (2000) presents a hierarchy of evaluation concepts. He defines
evaluation as the broadest concept, followed by accreditation, audit and as-
sessment. In international discussion this hierarchy is not always uniform,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 229

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

but it clarifies the relations between the different levels and practices of as-
sessment and evaluation. Comprehensive evaluation and auditing systems
are needed to gather information both for use in educational policy and for
developing education and learning processes. New kinds of evaluation sys-
tems are needed to face this challenge. Raivola emphasises the contextual
factors of quality and states that quality always relates to things and objects;
it is multidimensional and unique for every product and for the process cre-
ating the product.

Generations of evaluation and a paradigm shift

Lincoln and Guba (1987) divide evaluation into four historical periods or
generations. The first generation of evaluation started with the testing of
mental abilities and the performance potential of recruits to the US army
after World War I. This also led to the testing of quantitative performance
in the field of education as behaviouristic ideas about learning and teaching
increased in popularity. This first generation of evaluation still exists in vari-
ous forms of testing.
The second generation of evaluation is linked to Ralph W. Tyler and his
ideas about evaluating goals and aims which eventually became criteria for
evaluating all functions. Here, the focus of evaluation was directed towards
programs and organisations instead of the individual. Since the setting and
achieving of goals was dominated by organisations, the aim of evaluation, it
was argued, should be to describe and present the strengths and weaknesses
of the programme in relation to the goals and aims set by an organisation.
However, the relevance of these goals was not evaluated.
The third generation of evaluation began to see the evaluator him/herself
more as a judge facing the very difficult task of trying to draw clear conclu-
sions from gathered data. Concepts of “merit” and “worth” were emphasised
which led to discussion about values and the justification of evaluation from

230 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DEVELOPING CONTEXT-BASED ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

a wider perspective. Money and the comparison of costs and resources also
become essential factors for consideration.
The fourth generation of evaluation started to emerge during the 1980s as
a result of criticism directed at former evaluation procedures and practices.
It became evident that the “truth” found by an evaluator is not shared by all
the individual actors inside an organisation. For this reason, the evaluator’s
main task is to produce feedback and assessment knowledge for the audience
(actors inside an organisation) and by doing so, broaden the perspective to
include common practices. The evaluation can and should be responsive.
This means that the starting point for evaluation is the local context and the
actors inside that context.
The difference between the third and fourth generations of evaluation
is so striking that it is appropriate to call it a paradigm shift. The former
models were based on ideas of objective knowledge and a monism of values.
The fourth generation sees knowledge as a socially structured phenomenon.
Inside an organisational context, the meaning of condensed and abstract
systems of symbols and the shared meanings they hold become essential.
At its best, this leads to a deeper understanding of shared practices and to
organisational learning. (Lincoln & Guba 1987.)
Hager and Butler (1994) also describe the changes in evaluation para-
digms regarding the concept of assessment. The shift in assessment para-
digm can be seen as a transition from scientific measurement towards judge-
mental assessment. The focus of the former lies only on results measured
as objectively as possible. With judgemental assessment, the focus is on the
process of producing results, which allows subjective factors to be taken
into account. Boud (2000) argues that assessment involves identifying ap-
propriate standards and criteria and making judgements about quality. The
purpose and methods of assessment should be extended and regarded as an
indispensable factor in all forms of lifelong learning.
Esa Poikela (2003; 2004) finds an analogical relationship between judge-
mental assessment and contextual analysis. According to Pettigrew (1985),
the starting point of an analysis is in the description of the process explained
by the external societal context and by the internal organisational context.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 231

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

One of the tasks of analysis is to develop criteria for assessing activity and its
effects on the process as a whole. Poikela presents the idea of context-based
assessment (CBA) which requires that situational and contextual factors
are carefully considered. This offers a very broad perspective on assessment
process and also facilitates the development of quality systems.
The theoretical basis for developing ideas about contextual assessment
and quality systems in problem-based learning can be found in experiential
learning. This approach provides a framework and a starting point for fur-
ther development and research, making explicit good practices and quality
factors connected with evaluation and pedagogy. (Poikela, E. & Poikela, S.
2005.)

Zones and mirrors for assessment

According to Kolb (1984), reflective observation is an essential part of a

learner’s activities. In this way, reflection can be seen as a factor which unites
the processes of learning and assessment (see Poikela, E & Poikela, S. in Part
III). The learner is not only the owner of the learning process, but s/he also
owns the processes of assessment. The learner’s ability to assess his/her own
knowing is the most important factor in understanding and influencing
the situation and the context of action. Process assessment creates a basis
for guiding self-assessment and for evaluating the outcomes or products of
learning activities (see Figure 1).
The core of Figure 1 shows the cycle of experiential learning with reflec-
tive observation as an essential part of that process. Self-assessment occupies
the central zone of the core, process assessment the middle and product as-
sessment the outer zone. Between them are the boundaries needed for devel-
oping the learner’s assessment skills.
We have applied the idea of context-based assessment in planning and
implementing the Professional Development Programme on PBL (PBL-IT).
Assessment was the focus of studies which examined the constant process

232 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DEVELOPING CONTEXT-BASED ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

CONTEXT
Product

Process
3
Self 2
1

reflection

assessment

assessment

assessment

SOCIETY WORKING LIFE

FIGURE 1. The mirrors of the assessment process

assessment taking place in tutorials. Evaluative feedback was gathered dur-

ing a different phase of study, for example, with questionnaires consisting of
open questions, and reflective group discussions were organised in January
2005. There were four group discussions lasting between 45 to 60 minutes
with 5–6 participants per group. Although there was no interviewer in these
sessions, groups had written instructions for discussion and one member
was given the role of chairperson. Group members knew each other well and
we felt that the presence of an outside interviewer might restrict rather than
facilitate discussion. This proved to be the case because participants’ writ-
ten instructions included assessment themes about individual, collaborative
and organisational learning, and experiences of different types of working
methods of the PBL-PD studies were asked. Discussions were recorded and
transcribed to allow qualitative thematic analysis. Discussions took place at
the time participants were finalising their development project reports. The

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 233

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

feelings about writing the final reports were an important matter in the dis-
cussions of every group.
In the following we analyse what kinds of issues and concerns about as-
sessment and the curriculum arose in the group discussions, and how these
can be set within the framework of the zones and mirrors of assessment.

The first mirror

The boundary between self- and process assessment provides a mirror which
helps learners to develop reflective skills for assessing themselves, their per-
formances and their relations to other actors. The most essential mechanism
for reflection is feedback. Learners can observe themselves and others in ac-
tion with the help, for example, of a study or work journal. They can receive
and consider instant feedback from the supervisor, other students or work
colleagues, and from the peer group. Improving self-assessment and process
assessment skills is important both for teachers and students. Because PBL
demands skills of reflection, interaction and collaboration, effective tools
for improving the quality of individual and shared learning processes are
needed.
The most typical and acute issue regarding evaluation in group discus-
sions was the dynamics between self- and process assessment. The different
purposes of feedback and assessment were raised. At its best, it was a dia-
logue where both students and teachers alike gave and received feedback.
During the PBL-PD programme, teachers were able to gain a deep sense of
how it felt to act as a student in the process of problem-based learning. At the
same time they could experiment with giving and receiving feedback both
from the perspective of the student and from that of the teacher.
“Somehow there should be an aim for some kind of instant assessment.
So assessment would produce data for all the partners at the same time
this assessment situation takes place. I do not find any other kind of
medicine, because if it is done afterwards, I think it is not done at all.
There is really no time for that. Surely it is the most difficult thing to

234 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DEVELOPING CONTEXT-BASED ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

organise a means of assessment that would allow the whole business to

go like this.”
“I think this assessment has taken place in many ways. It has been a
concrete lesson that it is not only teacher or facilitator who does the as-
sessment, but I feel that I have gained a lot of feedback from my fellow
students. This is a new kind of thing... we have learnt to give feedback
to each other.”

Assessment produces data that both parties need. Self-assessment and proc-
ess assessment were not considered an easy task, but it came to be considered
an essential part of learning. If assessment was not conducted participants
felt something was missing.

The second mirror

The aim of the mirror between process and product assessment is to exam-
ine the means involved in setting goals and the criteria for achieving them.
Usually the setting of goals and assessment criteria is not carried out in co-
operation with the learners. Rather, it is assumed that the learners’ task is
simply to accept them and act accordingly. In order to improve motivation,
commitment and responsibility for reflective learning, the premises and
means of assessment need to be made explicit. Even if the criteria already
exist, learners need to recreate them in order to engage in the processes of
learning and assessment.
According to the group discussions, the integration of process and prod-
uct assessment in the PBL curriculum proved to be problematic. Finding
means of assessing learning outcomes was difficult. Teachers felt they should
give more feedback, but giving feedback and assessment was not sufficiently
resourced in teachers’ individual work plans. Instead, the pressure for giving
feedback as a norm was experienced.
“It is not genuine student-centeredness if, for example, evaluation is
done in such a way that it guides the student to a situation in which
only one possible way of acting is left.”

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 235

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

“All kinds of assessment material are gathered, but that’s it. What is
then done with this assessment material?”
“Well, the allocation of these certain duties, in a way, has been prob-
lematic. I think we would like to give feedback and actually we know
damn well we should give it much more.

One of the teachers stated that the authenticity of student-centeredness is

tested by the style of evaluation. The large amount of evaluation data was
considered problematic. The question was also raised as to the use of evalu-
ation data gathered, for example, with a feedback form if only one teacher
knows the content of the feedback. Documented feedback is seldom pub-
lic and shared, and it does not guide development. However, PBL demands
transparency: the processes of learning, facilitating and assessment need to
be shared with and between students, teachers and experts.
“It might be necessary that the whole process should be considered and
planned in another way. So the development should begin with evalu-
ation and not from teaching where we consider only what content is
needed. Of course this is important too, but evaluation is not often
considered from the point of view of how I could develop learning with
assessment in the best possible way.”

The boundary zone between self- and process assessment was clearly em-
phasised in teachers’ reflective discussions. There was a feeling that the
problems involved in these matters would have to be resolved before it would
be possible to move to an evaluation of the problems linked by process, out-
comes and context. There were few direct references to the boundary zone
between process assessment and outcome evaluation – such comments had
to be read between the lines.

236 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DEVELOPING CONTEXT-BASED ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

The third mirror

The third mirror exists between product assessment and contexts (society
and working life), meaning that learners are engaged in a process of relat-
ing their own actions and achievements to the requirements of working life
and society. Employers are interested in the competence of the learner. They
expect that employees are competent not only in technical skills, but also
possess social and learning skills. The main question here concerns the ex-
amination system and the ability of an examination to measure exactly what
is needed in working life.
The integration of product assessment within the context of working
life is related to students’ professional knowing and competence. Knowing
can be characterised as a process involving decision-making and problem
solving while accessing increasing amounts of tacit knowledge located in
individual, group and cultural knowing. As with explicit knowledge, tacit
knowledge is owned not only by individuals but by communities of workers
and by the whole organisation.
Measuring knowing is difficult because tacit knowledge becomes vis-
ible only in fluent personal or shared actions. Therefore, it is understand-
able that, in such circumstances, assessment is focused on measuring the
outcomes of actions. However, this kind of assessment is ineffective from
the point of view of learning. Learners are left alone with their difficulties
because they do not receive enough information about their knowing. Fur-
thermore, those involved in developing education are also left without the
relevant information they require.
An assessment concentrated on measuring qualifications has its own
mirror only between the products and contexts. This results in a control sys-
tem focusing on the individual qualifications of learners secured by very de-
tailed examination. Instead of this, an assessment system based on generat-
ing learning and knowing provides an opportunity for examining learning
processes within the whole education system, and for justifying the peda-
gogical changes needed. (Poikela, E. 2004.)

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 237

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

The dynamics between the evaluation of outcomes and context was not
much discussed in our data. However, the need to develop the assessment
and evaluation system as a whole was considered important. The purpose of
assessment as a guiding factor in learning had been clearly internalised, and
the need for development in the long term was understood. Problem-based
pedagogy was regarded as a potential source of further opportunities.
“You get to know students better and see their development and maybe
assessment is easier when it takes place over a longer period. If it is only
a one or two study week period, it is difficult to evaluate such a short
period, but over a longer period you can see the wholeness.
“Assessment and evaluation practices have been an important issue for
me. So, that you see the purpose of evaluation in learning. How impor-
tant it is in this PBL. And how is it going with us? Well I cannot say it is
forgotten, but we have not used all the possibilities available to us.”

Teachers felt a tension between existing reality and their own needs for devel-
opment. They had a greater desire for development than their organisations
allowed. The number of students in teaching groups was increasing and re-
sources of time, money and staff were being reduced. Clearly, circumstanc-
es were not very encouraging for the implementation of a new pedagogy.
Nevertheless, the implementation of problem-based learning was felt to be
meaningful. Many teachers stated that their pioneering spirit had produced
results and, little by little, they had gained space for their ideas and even re-
sources for development. Instead of complaining about the lack of resources,
attention should be focused on planning and strategies for development. The
reformation of curriculum work should start with exploring and mapping
the competence and knowing required in this specific professional field.
Assessment and evaluation is a fundamental part of the education proc-
ess, and it is essential to take them into account during the phase of plan-
ning the curriculum. The successful implementation of the PBL curriculum
needs goal oriented and persistent development work at all levels. The rocks
and pitfalls on the road to change need to be anticipated and new possibili-
ties have to be realised. In other words, assessment and evaluation should

238 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

DEVELOPING CONTEXT-BASED ASSESSMENT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

not be restricted only to the shared processes taking place between students
and teachers. It is imperative to evaluate how the work community is capable
of developing its practices and how it functions in relation to the surround-
ing work environment and to society as a whole.

Conclusion

The experiences of teachers participating in the PBL-PD programme reveal

and reinforce the need for context-based assessment and planning. Plan-
ning processes supervised from top down are seldom effective because of
the simple fact that the roles of partners and actors in the process of peda-
gogical development are not sufficiently taken into account. The problem
of programmes that are constructed to be imposed top down is in the fact
that planning work is assumed to be owned more by administrative than
pedagogical staff. Shared planning is needed at different phases and levels.
Stakeholders in the process must also include those persons whose work is
reorganised in the process. Through problem-based learning many teach-
ers are becoming genuine facilitators of learning, so it appears unlikely that
there will be a return to the earlier style of teaching.
“It is difficult to know what will happen during the next five years.
Continuing change seems to go on and certainly many other things will
be waiting to happen after five years. What will some problem-based
learning look like in five years’ time? I don’t know but I know there is
no returning to the traditional old way.”

The principles and criteria of assessment and evaluation have necessarily

to be described in the PBL curriculum. In this article a useful theoretical
tool for developing assessment practices is described as “zones and mirrors
of assessment”. This enables further research and the development of pro-
cedures for self-assessment, process assessment and the evaluation of out-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 239

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

comes, which benefit learners, facilitators and designers of curricula, as well

as developers of organisations.

240 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 Anna Raija Nummenmaa
University of Tampere

Kirsti Karila
University of Tampere

Jorma Virtanen
University of Tampere

Helvi Kaksonen
University of Tampere

INTERPRETATIONS OF EXPERTISE AS A FRAMEWORK

FOR THE PBL CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENT

The starting point for the development of the kindergarten teacher educa-
tion curriculum has been the interpretation of expertise and knowledge that
is required in the field of early childhood education. In problem-based learn-
ing, assessment has been seen as an important factor that guides the learning
process, both in the contexts of education and working life. Although, the
primary focus of assessment is on the learning processes, the assessment
processes that empower students are also emphasised. And it is here that
reflection and self-assessment play an important role. During the periods
of learning at work, in other words practical training periods, mentors give

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 241

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA & Jorma VIRTANEN & Helvi KAKSONEN

students feedback about their knowledge and competencies. This feedback

is not only important for the students’ learning process, it has also played an
important role in developing the curriculum.
In this article we will describe the general framework of the curriculum.
In addition, we will present results from our empirical study dealing with
assessment. The data comprise the students’ (n=42) self-assessments of their
knowledge and competencies during the previous practice period. Students’
self- assessments will then be compared with the assessments made by their
mentors (n=21).
The present study is a part of a larger evaluation study on curriculum
development, in connection with which we have gathered systematic data
from the evaluations of four student groups and their mentors. The research
also covers the students’ placements in working life and offers an assessment
of problem-based learning from the perspective of the challenges posed by
working life.

The research case

The curriculum is defined, here, as advance planning of the goals and objec-
tives of teaching, the content of instruction and the organisation of teaching,
methods and assessment. The curriculum becomes concrete in various mod-
els of curricula that implicitly include different assumptions about knowl-
edge and learning, and that usually result in different pedagogical decisions
and assessment methods. The starting points, objectives and principles in-
cluded in a curriculum influence the learning environment and the assess-
ment of learning. (Bernstein 1990; Goodson 1989; Pinar et al. 1995.) When a
curriculum is developed from the perspective of learning processes, what is
described, in addition to the basic goals and content, are the learning proc-
esses that the instruction aims to bring about. In this case, a curriculum is a
sort of a “miniature world of learning”, an environment where the learning
processes gradually change, teach and educate an individual. (Ropo 1991.)

242 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

INTERPRETATIONS OF EXPERTISE AS A FRAMEWORK FOR THE PBL CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENT

Allan (1996) has described the general qualifications that university edu-
cation ought to offer students. He divides these into three groups: subject-
based knowledge and competencies, transferable skills and general academic
competencies. Transferable and general academic skills include competen-
cies such as critical thinking, reflection, knowledge management, group
work abilities and communication skills. These competencies are also quali-
ties that experts are expected to have in working life (see also Atkins 1995).
The basis for developing the problem-based curriculum used in kinder-
garten teacher education has been the interpretation of early childhood edu-
cation as a science and as a practice. The aim of a university education is to
develop students’ scientific thinking. This enables an expert to understand
working life situations theoretically and to use research-based information
in dealing with real-life challenges. Scientific thinking also makes it possible
to develop new working methods, which will be one of the most important
challenges for expertise in the future. Scientific thinking, orientation to-
wards the future and competencies for working in a changing environment
are important core areas of expertise.
The core knowledge and competencies of a kindergarten teacher include
interpretation of the social and cultural contexts of early childhood educa-
tion. This requires an understanding of the social and philosophical starting
points of education, as well as their evolution throughout history and also
of future developments. With the help of such understanding, an expert in
early childhood education is able to clarify his/her own pedagogical think-
ing and the values they are based on, and to combine his/her views with
those of others working within the education community, such as parents
and co-workers.
Seeing education as a socially and culturally changing phenomenon helps
kindergarten teachers to use their expertise in education to build towards a

 The bases of curricula have been described in the article Karila, K. & Nummenmaa,
AR. (2002). Asiantuntijuuden ja oppimisen opetussuunnitelmalliset tulkinnat. In
AR. Nummenmaa & J. Virtanen (toim.) Ongelmasta oivallukseen. Ongelmaperus-
tainen opetussuunnitelma. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 17–31. Our descrip-
tion of expertise is based on this article.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 243

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA & Jorma VIRTANEN & Helvi KAKSONEN

successful future. Special attention must be paid to the changes in the work
of kindergarten teachers, and therefore, one of the central issues of the cur-
riculum is that students learn knowledge that will enable them to analyse
changes in their future work as experts, and become aware of the need to
develop competencies and knowledge.
Working in complex and quickly changing situations requires an expert
in early childhood education to have a strong ethical orientation. As a teach-
er of young children it is necessary to make constant choices and to take
responsibility for them. Therefore, the development of reflective thinking
is essential for developing the expertise required by a kindergarten teacher.
Being aware of one’s own values, reflecting on one’s actions and questioning
these helps an expert to see alternative solutions and to make decisions, even
in situations involving conflicting viewpoints.
Understanding early childhood education as a pedagogical phenomenon
sets certain requirements regarding competencies. Pedagogical expertise is
one of the core areas of expertise demanded by early childhood education.
Kindergarten teachers are expected to have knowledge about learning con-
tent that supports children in building their view of the world, and about how
to pedagogically use this in a way that is appropriate for each age group. In a
productive learning environment, children can create their view of the world
by working actively together – either with other children or with adults.
Early childhood education is a cooperative activity. In every situation,
the kindergarten teacher works in an educational interaction with other
adults and in the educational culture built by them. This means forming
educational partnerships with the families of children and cooperating with
other experts and professionals. Table 1 summarises the central competence
areas and the core competencies of kindergarten teacher education (Karila
1997; Karila & Nummenmaa 2001, 33).

244 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

INTERPRETATIONS OF EXPERTISE AS A FRAMEWORK FOR THE PBL CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENT

TABLE 1. The central knowledge and competency areas and the core competencies

Central knowledge and competency Core competencies

areas
Contexts of early childhood education Contextual competencies
Early childhood education Educational competencies
Competencies in caring
Pedagogical competencies
Cooperation and interaction Interaction competencies
Cooperation competencies
Continuous development Reflective competencies
Knowledge management

During the various stages of the education programme, students, tutors,

teachers and mentors have assessed the students’ development, competen-
cies and knowledge in the central areas of expertise required by early child-
hood education. Particularly important, from the perspective of learning,
have been the various self-assessment processes involving students (Rust,
Price & O’Donovan 2003).
According to Savin-Baden (2004), assessment is one of the most con-
troversial questions in the research on problem-based learning today (see
also Boud & Feletti 1997). The central question seems to be the relation-
ship between learning and assessment. Even though assessment is, accord-
ing to Boud (1995), the most important incentive for learning, it is often
described in curricula only superficially and with technical terms such as
exam and essay. Furthermore, curricula all too seldom pay attention to how
objectives, learning methods and assessment methods interact with one an-
other. To achieve congruence, one must consider what notions the relation-
ship between learning and assessment is based on. Biggs (1999) notes that
instruction should be a balanced system, where every component supports
another.
Researchers studying learning have lately directed particular attention
towards the relationship between learning and context. In terms of assess-
ment, the relationship between assessment and context has been an impor-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 245

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA & Jorma VIRTANEN & Helvi KAKSONEN

tant focus of discussion. Assessment that combines the processes of learning

and knowing means, according to E. Poikela (2003), that current modes of
assessment based on measuring qualifications will be replaced by assess-
ment that takes into consideration the contextual nature of knowledge and
the context dependency of learning. The purpose of assessment is to produce
information for everyone who requires it, including learners, teachers, tutors
and those planning learning processes, as well as those developing working
life (see Poikela, E & Poikela, S. ‘Developing context-based assessment within
the framework of problem-based learning’).
When developing the problem-based curriculum of kindergarten teach-
ers, a series of principles were listed with regard to assessment. First, the
assessment system must be compatible with the approaches to knowledge
and learning that the curriculum is based on. Second, the primary objective
of assessment must be to promote students’ learning and the development of
understanding. In addition, assessment must be performed from different
perspectives using a range of methods appropriate to the goals of different
study periods (self-assessment, peer assessment, written assignments, and
measuring what has been learned). (Nummenmaa & Perä-Rouhu 2002.)
In evaluating knowledge and competencies, an important role was played
by the practice periods, students’ self-assessment and assessment by their
mentors. During the practice periods, assessment was strongly context-
based, which increased the ecological validity of assessment.

Method and data

At the end of the 2003 spring term, the first students to complete their stud-
ies within the problem-based learning curriculum (n=42), along with their
mentors (n=21), evaluated their knowledge and competencies in the central
areas of early childhood education (see Table 1). The students’ self-assess-
ments focused on the kinds of knowledge and competencies that were de-
veloped during their education. The mentors’ assessments were based on the

246 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

INTERPRETATIONS OF EXPERTISE AS A FRAMEWORK FOR THE PBL CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENT

kind of impression they had of students’ knowledge and competencies in the

authentic work context, as demonstrated during the final practice period.
The assessment was carried out in the form of a questionnaire. Knowl-
edge and competencies were rated on a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 signified
very little and 5 a high level. The following chapter describes the assess-
ments of students and mentors in the form of group averages (* p<.05; **
p<.01;***p<.001).

Results

Table 2 presents the assessments of students and mentors regarding contex-

tual knowledge and competencies, i.e. understanding the contexts and the
basic tasks of early childhood education

TABLE 2. Contextual knowledge and competencies

Contextual knowledge and competen- Students Mentors
cies (n=42) (n=21)
x s x s
Awareness of the social and cultural 4.00 .58 3.70 .66
basics of early childhood education
Understanding the functions of social 3.31 .72 3.32 .89
institutions
Cultural literacy 3.17 .73 3.40 .68
Understanding the everyday life of a 3.69 .75 3.33 .86
child and their family
Awareness of the legislation steering 3.12 .99 3.60 .82*
work
Awareness and knowledge of the sig- 4.24 .43 3.89 .66*
nificance of quality work

According to the students, their strengths were an awareness and knowl-

edge of the significance of quality work in early childhood education, and

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 247

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA & Jorma VIRTANEN & Helvi KAKSONEN

an awareness of the social and cultural basis of education. The mentors also
regarded these competencies and knowledge as student strengths. On the
other hand, students regarded their awareness of the legislation concerning
work and cultural literacy as their weakest area. In these areas, however,
the mentors’ assessments of the students’ knowledge and competencies were
higher than those made by the students themselves.
A summary of students’ self-assessment concerning knowledge and com-
petencies in early childhood education (Table 3) highlights that students felt
their education provided them with competencies useful for reflective work
– an awareness of their views and beliefs about education, an awareness of
the significance of the values that education is based on and also an aware-
ness of ethical issues. The mentors also regarded these competencies as a
particular strength of the students, and judged the students’ competencies in
these areas more highly than the students did themselves. The differences in
assessments were most significant when it came to educational interaction,
which the mentors rated more critically than the students did.

TABLE 3. Knowledge and competencies in early childhood education

Students Mentors
(n=42) (n=21)
x s x s
Educational knowledge and competencies
Awareness of one’s beliefs and views on 4.02 .60 4.20 .70
education
Awareness of the significance of the 3.88 .71 4.26 .56*
values education is based on
Orientation towards the future 3.40 .83 3.71. .64
Educational interaction 3.93 .68 3.38 1.16*
Awareness of the quality of one’s 3.63 .70 3.62 1.07
interaction
Ethical awareness and responsibility as 3.86 .65 3.85 1.07
an educator

248 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

INTERPRETATIONS OF EXPERTISE AS A FRAMEWORK FOR THE PBL CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENT

Knowledge and competencies regarding the child/learner

Knowledge of child development 3.79 .72 3.76 .70
Knowledge of the special characteris- 3.86 .81 3.57 .60
tics of young children’s learning
Identifying different learners 3.49 .86 3.52 .75
Understanding developmentally ap- 3.45 .77 3.33 .80
propriate practices
Learning theory and content knowledge
Awareness and assessment of one’s un- 3.90 .62 4.05 .85
derstanding of learning and knowledge
Knowledge of key learning theories 3.74 .59 4.05 .78
Knowledge of key contents of early 3.90 .62 3.84 .69
childhood pedagogy
Knowledge of key contents of pre- 3.98 .72 3.67 .84
school teaching
Knowledge of designing learning envi- 3.79 .75 3.63 .83
ronments for young children
Guiding a child’s learning
Knowledge of steering documents 3.50 .80 3.80 .83
regarding planning
Knowledge and competence of cur- 3.31 .87 3.70 .80
riculum planning
Guiding the learning processes of 3.26 .80 3.30 .80
children
Guiding the learning processes of a 3.76 .58 3.25 .91
group of children
Knowledge of the appropriate assess- 3.10 .76 3.53 .87
ment methods for children of various
ages
Competencies for developing appropri- 3.60 .70 3.35 .88
ate learning environments for young
children

The students’ assessments of their competencies and knowledge regarding

the child/learner were lower than their assessments of their contextual com-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 249

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA & Jorma VIRTANEN & Helvi KAKSONEN

petencies and knowledge and those of their educational competencies and

knowledge. As their strongest area of competencies and knowledge, students
cited their knowledge of the special characteristics of young children’s learn-
ing, and as their weakest, they pointed to understanding the appropriate
practices for each development stage. In these areas there were no signifi-
cant differences between the assessments of students and mentors. Although
the students’ self-assessments about learning theories and content knowl-
edge were fairly high, mentors rated their theoretical knowledge still more
highly.
Teaching young children and acquiring the competencies and knowledge
required to do this is one of the special areas of expertise that separates kin-
dergarten teachers from other people working in the field of day care. To
master this area, students felt that their education needed to provide them
with more understanding of appropriate assessment methods for particular
age groups and more knowledge of curriculum design work. Here too, how-
ever, mentors rated students’ competencies and knowledge more highly than
they did themselves. On the other hand, students regarded their competen-
cies for teaching groups of children more positively than their mentors did.
To summarise, it can be said that kindergarten teachers are required to
have pedagogical competencies that enable them to guide a child’s develop-
ment and learning in the environment of early childhood education as well
as those of pre-school and primary school teaching (Karila & Nummenmaa
2002). However, this seems to be the very area in which graduating kinder-
garten teachers experience most uncertainty.
Education is a social phenomenon and is best realised when education
is regarded as a learning partnership (Karila 2005). Working with parents,
staff members and other partners requires competencies in cooperation and
negotiation. In partnership situations a common language is also needed.
Students felt that their education had provided them with competen-
cies that would help them work within a team of professionals from differ-
ent fields (see table 4). However, mentors’ assessments with regard to these
competencies were not so high. The competencies required for working with
parents, in particular, were seen as weaker. Cooperation with parents may

250 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

INTERPRETATIONS OF EXPERTISE AS A FRAMEWORK FOR THE PBL CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENT

be particularly challenging for those kindergarten teachers who are younger

than the children’s parents. Therefore, it is understandable that assessments
in this area were lower than in others. This could also be seen in regard to
interaction competencies, where competencies for interacting with differ-
ent adults were rated more severely than in other areas of interaction. On
the whole, however, the interaction competencies provided by the education
process were judged positively.

TABLE 4. Knowledge and competencies in cooperation and interaction

Students Mentors
(n=42) (n=21)
x s x s
Cooperation competencies
Competencies in cooperating with 3.19 .94 3.10 1.18
parents
Competencies in teamwork 3.93 .71 3.48 1.12
Competencies in developing effective 3.38 .82 3.33 .91
cooperation relationships
Verbal mastery of the work in coopera- 3.57 .58 3.52 .87
tion situations
Interaction competencies
Awareness of the significance of one’s 4.24 58 3.71 1.19
interaction
Competencies in interacting with dif- 3.93 .71 3.90 .70
ferent children
Competencies in interacting with dif- 3.69 .78 3.67 1.02
ferent adults
Competencies in giving and receiving 3.93 .80 3.81 1.12
feedback

Competencies and knowledge regarding continuous development have become

important in changing working environments. Interaction and cooperation
competencies as well as information retrieval and management are so-called

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 251

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA & Jorma VIRTANEN & Helvi KAKSONEN

transferable competencies that are required in various working environ-

ments. According to the current view, education can provide students only
with a basis on which to develop vocational competencies or expertise. The
changing context of work and the rapid increase in information have shifted
the focus from the development of expertise, competencies and knowledge,
to learning at work. Evaluating one’s own work requires reflective compe-
tencies and knowledge. The rapid increase in information regarding early
childhood education and the redundancy of earlier information as a result
of recent research require that staff have competencies in information ac-
quisition and processing. This also includes adopting a critical approach to
information management.
A problem-based learning and information environment demands active
and independent information acquisition and processing from students. Ac-
cording to students, their education provides them with particularly strong
knowledge and competencies in this area (Table 5).

TABLE 5. Competencies and knowledge regarding continuous development

Students Mentors
(n=42) (n=21)
x s x s
Reflective competencies
Critical reflection and assessment of 4.43 .63 4.10 .94
one’s work
Reflection and assessment of the work 4.07 .68 3.95 .86
and goals of the work community
Developing work on the basis of as- 4.00 .70 3.81 .87
sessment
Information management competencies
Knowing/being able to use important 4.36 .62 4.05 .74
information acquisition methods
Interest in updating one’s knowledge 4.40 .59 4.24 .83
Using information to develop work 4.07 .71 4.20 .83

252 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

INTERPRETATIONS OF EXPERTISE AS A FRAMEWORK FOR THE PBL CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENT

The students’ education seems particularly to develop critical reflection and

assessment of their work, interest in updating their knowledge, and com-
petencies for using suitable methods for acquiring new information – all
of which are needed in rapidly changing working environments. The men-
tors’ assessments also showed these competencies to be among the students’
strengths.
In addition, students evaluated their competencies and knowledge in
terms of early childhood education research. According to their self-assess-
ments, students felt that their education had provided them with high level
competencies for small-scale research (x=4.36; s=-66) and for applying in-
formation gained from research in practice (x=3.81; s= .80). According to
students, their knowledge of key educational research methods was fairly
good (x=3.83; s=.62), and they felt the same was true of the research tradition
in early childhood education (x = 3.62; s= .66).

Discussion

In this article we have examined the interpretation of knowledge and com-

petencies that is required by the expert kindergarten teacher. This forms the
basis of the problem-based learning curriculum that students pursue. In ad-
dition, we have compared, in the light of empirical data, the assessments of
the students and their mentors, made just before the completion of studies,
regarding the competencies and knowledge provided by the education pro-
gramme. The aim of the present study has also been to provide the depart-
ment with assessment information which will allow further development of
the curriculum. The extensive data and the context-based assessment meth-
od will facilitate general consideration of questions relating problem-based
learning and assessment.
The methods used for evaluating learning are based on various assess-
ment paradigms and various approaches to learning and knowledge. Poikela
(2003, 229) describes the change in assessment paradigm as a shift from sci-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 253

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA & Kirsti KARILA & Jorma VIRTANEN & Helvi KAKSONEN

entific measurement towards judging assessment. While scientific measure-

ment focuses on the objectivity of results, judging assessment focuses on the
processes that bring about results and takes into consideration the subjec-
tive factors that influence these processes. Boud (1995) notes that evaluat-
ing competencies and knowledge and authentic assessment represent a new
paradigm – an approach where the learning goals are described in the cur-
riculum more clearly than before and where the assessment is considered
from an appropriate perspective.
A problem-based learning and information environment is organised
so that the focus is on the student as a constructor of knowledge, and the
significance of the learning context and experience of learning is empha-
sised. Assessment is considered to be one of the central factors that guide
the learning process. The experiential, collaborative and contextual nature
of learning requires assessment of these processes, a task which requires
self-assessment, peer assessment and contextual assessment (Poikela, E. &
Poikela, S. 2005). These differing forms of assessment have been strongly
present in the problem-based learning environment of kindergarten teacher
education (Nummenmaa & Perä-Rouhu 2002).
Research on the assessment of problem-based learning often focuses on
measuring students’ competencies and knowledge. Such research typically
compares a problem-based curriculum or teaching method to some other
curriculum or method. Empirical studies on the effectiveness of problem-
based learning have, according to one meta-analysis (Dochy et al. 2003), fo-
cused on measuring students’ knowledge and analysing the processes that
possibly bring about learning. From the meta-analysis of assessments, re-
searchers conclude that problem-based learning particularly facilitates the
learning of various competencies, while conceding that the knowledge level
of students who studied according to PBL principles earned lower scores. In
such studies, a formal assessment paradigm based on external measurement
is usually applied.
The data in the present study consisted of students’ self-assessments that
described experiential knowledge about their competencies and the way in
which these were interpreted in a working life context (a practice period).

254 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

INTERPRETATIONS OF EXPERTISE AS A FRAMEWORK FOR THE PBL CURRICULUM AND ASSESSMENT

These were mirrored by assessments from their mentors; the main features
of the assessments were rather similar. The results of the present study show
that the students felt their education had provided them with good (≥ 3)
or excellent (≥ 4) competencies and knowledge in all the key areas of early
childhood education. Interaction competencies, reflection competencies
and knowledge management competencies were considered to be particu-
larly strong areas. These are the competencies that are built-in to the ped-
agogical practices of problem-based learning – working together in small
groups, solving problems in cooperation with others, seeking information
independently and giving feedback. These competencies are also transfer-
able skills that students will later be able to use in various working environ-
ments. A well-developed awareness of education and an ethical approach
to work reveal a reflective work orientation, which also helps the student
to adapt to changing conditions. Learning theories and content knowledge
were also considered to be relatively strong areas. Mentors also regarded the
above-mentioned competencies and knowledge areas as being among the
students’ strengths.
According to students’ self-assessments, their education had not been
quite so effective in developing knowledge and competencies regarding
pedagogical and educational practices. Students were uncertain about such
matters as designing curricula, guiding a learning process, utilising prac-
tices appropriate to a particular development stage, and cooperating with
parents. These activities mostly involve competencies that develop and im-
prove through the process of learning at work. When education has provided
students with strong reflective skills and a researcher’s approach to work,
along with effective interaction and cooperation competencies, it can be as-
sumed that they will continue active learning and development in the work
environment. From the perspective of developing education, the assessment
of students’ knowledge and competencies in a working life context offers
valuable information for curriculum development work.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 255

256 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 PART V

TELLING STORIES ABOUT PROBELL

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 257

258 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 Esa Poikela
University of Lapland

Sari Poikela
University of Lapland

ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH

This article describes the origins, ideas, activities and research results of
the research group for problem-based learning in Finnish higher education,
ProBell. Although, the name ProBell has no special meaning as a word in
Finnish, it does signify something in English. The first part of the name,
“Pro” can refer to progress or the advantages offered by PBL. The second
part, “Bell” can suggest a bell ringing out the good news that there are new
ways of bridging education and work, theory and practice.
The flow between theory and practice is twofold, and this is also the
aim of ProBell. On a theoretical level, the group researches how to develop
knowledge and competence in a changing society. Its aim is to shed light on
the epistemological basis of PBL and on its implementations in education
and learning at work. This is linked to a broader discussion about the duties
of universities in today’s society. On a more practical level, ProBell wants to
develop PBL practice. This article outlines our theoretical framework and of-
fers examples of our recent research findings. We also describe briefly some
of the more practice-oriented development projects we have been involved

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 259

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

in, including the launching of long-term training programmes (PBL-PD &

PBL-IT) for practitioners of PBL and curriculum development in different
fields.
This article deals with following themes: the start of PBL in Finland and
the birth of ProBell; the university as a community of academic experts;
PBL and ideas about knowledge; some examples of ProBell’s research and
development projects; and finally, future perspectives on the research and
development of PBL.

The start of PBL in Finland and the birth of the ProBell research group

PBL has spread worldwide across many disciplines in higher education

including economics, law and engineering; it has impacted other levels of
education; and it is transforming the area of learning at work. The first im-
plementation of PBL in Finland began during the 1990s in medicine at the
University of Tampere and, shortly afterwards, in physiotherapy at the Pir-
kanmaa Polytechnic. Some years later (1999), PBL was introduced into the
education of kindergarten and primary school teachers at the University of
Tampere. Interest in PBL has increased rapidly in numerous fields of voca-
tional higher education, especially in polytechnics. (Poikela & Poikela 1997;
2001; 2005; Poikela, S. 2003; Nummenmaa & Virtanen 2001.)
The ProBell group was set up at the end of 2000 at the University of Tam-
pere when we invited a number of researchers and teachers interested in
PBL to gather around the same table. This promptly led to a decision to or-
ganise a national meeting which would bring together more practitioners
of PBL. The first national meeting on PBL was convened in April 2001 in
the city of Tampere. It immediately became an annual event gathering each
year some 70–100 teachers, researchers and developers of higher education
from different fields and disciplines. Every conference has also had an in-
ternational keynote speaker, including Karin von Schilling from McMas-
ter University, Canada, Gaynor Sadlo from the University of Brighton, UK,

260 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH

Terry Barrett from Dublin University College Ireland, and also Madeleine
Abrandt-Dahlgren, Charlotte Silèn and Lars-Owe Dahlgren from Linköping
University, Sweden. In June 2005 ProBell organised an international PBL
conference in cooperation with Lahti Polytechnic (see www.lamk.fi/pblcon-
ference) gathering more than 200 participants from all around the world.
The PBL conference in June 2006 was once more a joint project returning
to Tampere, where the theme was “Constructing Knowledge in an Informa-
tion Society”. The task of organising the event was shared with the WebSeal
research group which includes members from the fields of both information
science and education. The PBL conference for 2007 is entitled “Understand-
ing Problem-Based Learning”.
During 2001 the members of the ProBell group developed and focused
their research ideas. In 2002 the group was awarded a prize by the University
of Tampere for “innovative work in researching, developing and implement-
ing problem-based learning”. During recent years, the Ministry of Educa-
tion has awarded national prizes for quality to programmes influenced by
members of the ProBell group: Physiotherapy Education at Pirkanmaa Poly-
technic; the International Business Program at Helia Polytechnic and Early
Childhood Education at the University of Tampere. We began the develop-
ment of a joint research plan in 2001 and succeeded in obtaining funding
from the Finnish Academy as part of a multi-scientific national research
programme “Life as Learning” (LEARN) which took place from 2002–2006
(see www.aka.fi/learn). So far, two doctoral dissertations has been complet-
ed and published (Poikela, S. 2003; Alanko-Turunen 2005) and another four
doctoral theses will shortly be completed. Members of the ProBell group
have also written a number of textbooks about PBL in Finnish, and several
articles and conference papers both in Finnish and English (see www.uta.
fi/eduta/probell).
Most of the ProBell researchers have been concurrently involved in many
development projects in different organisations concerned with pedagogical
development at university and at work, tutor training and mentoring, and
also curriculum development, evaluation and assessment. These develop-
ment projects have been organised through the Eduta Institute which is a

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 261

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

consultation and training unit in the Faculty of Education at the University

of Tampere. PBL has become the major “product” or a brand of Eduta. Two
of the largest projects aimed at practitioners of PBL have been “PBL-PD”,
Professional Development Studies in PBL (60 ECTS credits) during 2002–
2005 and “PBL-IT”, PBL and Interactive Technology (25 ECTS credits) dur-
ing 2004–2006. The projects were funded by European Social Fund and by
the State Provincial Office of Southern Finland. Participants were mainly
teachers from polytechnics in different parts of Finland. These projects have
supported teachers in their aim to develop their both work and the institu-
tions in which they work on the basis of ideas arising from problem-based
learning.
In the following part of the article we will take a closer look at applying
ideas from PBL in the contexts of research, development and teaching at the
university. The starting point is nothing more or less than to change the uni-
versity’s mission and function in our rapidly moving post-modern society.
Universities have been assigned a new task, the so-called “third task”, which
refers to the services universities provide for society. This direction is closely
in line with the activities of ProBell, since we do not only carry out research
and teaching, we are also committed to development.

The university as a community of practice

The university is no longer simply an institution which conducts research

and provides teaching; it is expected to function as an active partner in dif-
ferent local, national and even global development projects. Different kinds
of research orientation bring different perspectives to partnerships. These
research orientations are (1) traditional academic orientation, (2) market ori-
entation (affecting technical sciences), (3) administrative orientation (grow-
ing in the social sciences) and important but vulnerable (4) civil society ori-
entation (Hakala, Kaukonen, Nieminen & Ylijoki 2003).

262 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH

However, there is a conflict between academic and market orientation.

The main difficulty is that faculties and departments cannot make “either
or” choices between these orientations, but have to live in a continuing
“both” situation. Conflicts and tensions need institutional decisions. The
ideal situation would be to act within the traditional academic orientation
where a reasonable level of state funding would free researchers from the
worry of financing their projects. Such a situation would also guarantee that
it affordable to do basic research for its own sake. However, this is not the
current situation, and universities are faced with societal accountability in-
cluding demands for a certain profit.

The significance of the new task

The new situation challenges academic institutions to reconsider not only

the relations between research, teaching and services but, most of all, their
identity as a society of experts. Etzkowitz and Leydersdorff (2000) claim the
division between academic research and teaching is fading while the impor-
tance of the third task, societal services, is rising to the level of research and
teaching. This means that the entrepreneurial way of doing things also needs
to be accepted by universities.
Discussions about academic revolution and the third task can be seen as
a rhetorical opening for reconsidering the duties of the university. It might
also seem that the change is not a very fundamental one but, even so, rela-
tions and authorities between faculties, departments and staff need to be
renegotiated. The university’s third task has a long historical tradition with
roots in an action known as the university expansion movement. For exam-
ple, the starting point of this movement was liberal education during the
1900s in Great Britain. The modern version of this is the Open University
created about one hundred years later. In the United States, this movement
aimed to offer professional and practical benefits from the very beginning.
The Australian version of the expansion of universities appeared in vari-
ous forms of distance education. In Finland, university expansion has been

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 263

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

developed in the form of liberal education, summer universities and further

training institutes. (Poikela, E. 1983.)
What this means is that the third task is neither a new development nor a
fundamental change. Nevertheless, it does touch “the most holy part” of the
university, the core process which is more than just research or teaching. It is
not only a question of what kind of research challenges and problems society
poses, it is also a question of how the necessary expertise is produced inside
the university itself. How are academic core competences, discipline spe-
cific qualifications and skills and the knowledge needed at work learnt and
taught? On what kinds of pedagogical foundation do teachers build their
own and shared teaching? Do they facilitate students to learn and research,
or do they just teach substance and methods?
The academic division of work has meant that researchers (assistants and
professors), teachers (lecturers) and trainers (educational planners and con-
sultants) have traditionally worked separately. However, this is not the way
to answer the challenges of a society which emphasises expertise. All the
members in a society of academic experts should be experts in their own dis-
cipline and be able to research, teach and develop according to an academic
standard. In this way, professional identification would no longer be based
on the idea that some do research, some teach, some do development work,
while others act as leaders. The core of academic competence could be ex-
pertise in a university pedagogy which integrates all the factors mentioned
above (see Figure 1). This kind of expertise in university pedagogy is based
on research, teaching and development work. It can be gained only in the
long-term through professional development and career planning.
The heuristic diagram above aims to describe integration based on the
university’s three tasks: 1) research, including leading research groups and
supervising doctoral students; 2) teaching, which includes facilitating learn-
ing groups, lecturing and guiding exercises; and 3) development, which
involves participating in the university’s societal services, various kinds of
development projects and also being active in the development of one’s own
department.

264 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH

Teaching
Facilitating the learning – learning groups
process – students
Further education
– learning by inquiry – delivering knowledge
– collaboration – mediating expertise

Research
– research
projects Development
University pedagogy
– development
– producing learning and
projects
knowing
– producing academic
competence and
Consultation services
scientific expertise
– developing by research
– pedagogical leadership
– acting as a process
expert

FIGURE 1. The core elements of university pedagogy

One area in which research and teaching partly overlap could be the facilita-
tion of learning processes – a notion that is based on the idea that research
is best learnt by doing. This is why both researchers and teachers should
be able to facilitate both group processes and individual learning based on
problem solving. Teaching connected to societal services has produced so-
called traditional further training, where expert knowledge is delivered to
working life and other areas of need mooted by society.
One upshot of the new situation is that work life organisations wish to
contribute to research which takes the form of research-linked development.
This is akin to producing consultation services for the external and internal
needs of university. The key area here is university pedagogy, which can be
regarded as the academic core competence and includes basic expertise and
knowledge of research, teaching and development. It is evident that this kind
of expertise requires time and experience in order to develop. And it is dur-
ing this development that the specific nature of pedagogical leadership can
be honed. Pedagogical leadership should characterise the leading style of any
institution that produces learning, knowing and competence. (Poikela, E.
2005.)

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 265

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

The challenge of problem-based learning

Traditionally, education has been organised according to the logic of sepa-

rate disciplines and subjects. However, because professional practice and
individual learning processes do not follow such divisions, this has led to
a widening gap between education and professional practice at work (Boud
1985; Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 1997; Poikela, S. 2003.) PBL gathers and inte-
grates many elements regarded as essential for effective, high quality learn-
ing, such as self-directed or autonomous learning, critical and reflective
thinking skills, and the integration of disciplines. Back in 1938, John Dewey
noted that strategies of learning can be characterised by inquiry and prob-
lem solving. Facing new situations, dealing with them and drawing conclu-
sions is a directed and controlled process for forming knowledge.
Barrows (1996) describes six core characteristics of PBL which relate to
learning. First, learning is student-centred (not teacher-centred as earlier).
Second, learning has to occur within small student groups under the guid-
ance of a tutor. Third, the tutor is a facilitator and a guide (and has the status
of a teacher). Fourth, authentic problems are encountered in the learning se-
quence without any preparation or study. Fifth, problems are used as tools to
achieve required knowledge and the problem-solving skills necessary to deal
with a problem. Sixth, new information and knowledge is gained through
self study (including lectures, information seeking, laboratory work, work-
shops etc.) A recent meta-analysis reports the positive effects of PBL for
learning results (Dochy, Segers, van den Bossche & Gijbels 2003), reinforc-
ing earlier well-known meta-analyses on the subject (Albanese & Mitchell
1993; Vernon & Blake 1993). In short, all these studies emphasise that PBL
makes students more competent in applying skills, retrieving information
and making sense of what has been learnt when compared to students who
have been following a so-called traditional curriculum.
Problem-based learning (PBL) has often been understood only as a meth-
od of learning. Even Barrows’ definition above emphasises PBL as a method.
Consequently, many kinds of pragmatically-based pedagogical applications
and development projects are called PBL. However, using PBL only as a

266 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH

method or delivery model for education changes little. What distinguishes

PBL as a technique, and especially as an educational strategy, or even a phi-
losophy, are the changes needed in the whole learning environment (Chen
2000).
The focus of ProBell’s research is on the epistemological, pedagogical
and curricular bases of PBL. The prerequisites of developing education and
professional practices are connected to general processes of change and so-
ciety’s educational systems. Societal changes and the idea of lifelong learning
demand a redefinition of relationships between research, education and pro-
fessional practices. Working life demands new kinds of competencies and
this is the strength of PBL which gathers and integrates many elements re-
garded as essential in effective high quality learning and working, including
self-directed or autonomous learning, critical and reflective thinking skills,
and the integration of disciplines. (Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 2004; 2005.)

The function of ProBell

The mission of the ProBell research group is to encourage the research,

teaching and development of problem-based learning in higher education
in Finland. In the following, we will describe the way ProBell functions in
accordance with these tasks.

Research project

The research programme of ProBell is entitled “Problem-based learning as a

strategy for developing knowledge and competence in the context of educa-
tion and work”. The aim is to analyse the benefits of PBL at different levels of
education and to evaluate changes in learning and working cultures. Several
sub-themes and aims can also be identified, each of these involving 2–4 re-
searchers:

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 267

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

• Redefining the concept of learning – the aim is to analyse learning

and knowledge from a contextual point of view
• The social and cultural context of learning – the aim is to describe
and to evaluate the construction of learning in different kinds of so-
cial and virtual environments.
• Knowledge creation – the aim is to analyse the process of producing
and constructing knowledge in PBL tutorials and to evaluate their
connection to developing professional expertise.
• Working environments – the aim is to analyse the relationships be-
tween contexts of education and work from different points of view:
development of the curriculum, organising and facilitating learning,
PBL and organisational change
• New teachership – the aim is to describe and analyse the professional
development and transformation of a teacher/tutor within the frame
of a work community as an environment for creating and processing
knowledge.

The main findings of these subprojects are closely reported as individual

articles in this book.

The Professional Development Diploma, PBL-PD

One example of the development projects – and so far the largest – was the
“Professional Development Diploma on Problem-Based Learning (PBL-PD)”
designed for teachers in different fields of professional higher education in
Finland. The programme consisted of 60 ECTS credits and was carried out
during 2002–2005. The twin aim of the program was to provide a continuous
professional development programme in PBL for teachers in higher educa-
tion, and to put our theoretical and empirical research into practice (Poikela,
E. & Poikela, S. 1997; Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 2001; Poikela, S. 2003). The
idea for the programme arose in autumn 2001 when we noticed ESR-funding
was available for development projects offering further training for teachers.

268 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH

We felt that it was not enough simply to write about PBL; instead we should
use these ideas as a basis for planning and organising long-term pedagogi-
cal training. The students of PBL-PD (29 started and 24 persons completed
the programme) represented Finnish professional higher education across a
range of fields, including health sciences, forestry, business, engineering and
domestic sciences.
PBL-PD studies focused on the understanding of PBL and the opportu-
nities it offers for developing professional expertise and knowing. The aim
was to increase and deepen the skills required for acting as a tutor who can
facilitate learning and transform the curriculum and evaluation practices in
accordance with the principles of PBL. One of the aims was also to increase
both national and international collaboration and networking with PBL prac-
titioners in different fields and levels of education. This latter goal proved to
be very fruitful, and positive feedback was given regarding the challenging
opportunity to work as a learner in group of people from varied professional
backgrounds. However, this was not easy because individual ways of act-
ing and thinking were challenged in multi-professional groups. Since these
studies were organised according to the principles of PBL, knowledge and
knowing was processed, produced and shared in tutorial groups guided and
facilitated by a professional tutor. Gaining experience of being a learner in a
tutorial group was felt to be very important – something teachers do not very
often get the chance to do. All the modules included face to face tutorials,
lectures or workshops and independent study supported by WebCT.
Feedback and assessment information was gathered from the partici-
pants. Our aim was also to analyse how students have developed their pro-
fessional expertise as practitioners of PBL. The data consisted of a question-
naire with open questions (October 2003) and reflective group discussion
(January 2005). Results show that the program successfully achieved its aim
of supporting not only the individual empowerment of teachers, but also the
development of organisations and the reform of curricula. The core of the
feedback could be summed up in one participant’s comment:

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 269

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

“The way the modules have been done has supported my development
as a tutor and, as a whole, the programme has strengthened my previ-
ous thinking and taught me the basics and, through this, it has helped
me ‘to be strong’ in my very heterogeneous work community and also
in the curriculum work.”

In the small group discussion participants reflected what the program had
offered them. Interestingly, many felt that the formal professional teacher
education (50 ECTS credits) was like a starter kit with which to begin teach-
ing. However, it was not enough for the lifetime professional development of
a teacher. As a result, participants felt it was necessary to have support for
professional development. Some thought that the PBL-PD programme had
gave them special “empowerment” in their work. The following comment
expresses these feelings in a nutshell:
“A pedagogue has arisen inside us”.

Participants of PBL-PD carried out many kinds of development projects in

their own organisations, which were described in the form of project reports.
Some examples of these projects are:

• Implementation of PBL in engineering education, PBL curriculum in

Mechatronics
• Change agents, not victims of change – Preparing for change to PBL
in Forestry
• Developing a virtual study guide for the PBL programme in Business
• What kind of assessment does problem-based learning demand? A
case study of the social care programme
• Developing assessment and evaluation in the problem-based curricu-
lum – Experiences from physiotherapy education and clinical prac-
tice
• Maintaining, over the years, the positive spirit of tutoring in physi-
otherapy
• Designing a new PBL curriculum in Business

270 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH

• Starting PBL in Nursing

• PBL opportunities in Fashion and Textile Design

Some of these projects reports have been published (Poikela, E. & Poike-
la, S. 2005; Loikkanen 2005; Kärmeniemi, Lehtola & Vuoskoski 2006) and
most have been presented at conferences nationally and internationally. Ab-
stracts and full papers submitted to the June 2005 conference, “Problem-
Based Learning – Bridging Work and Education” held in Lahti, Finland,
are now available (www.lamk.fi/pblconference). PBL-PD also encouraged
participants to network in their own professional field. So, even though the
programme has now finished, several networks will continue. The PBL-PD
programme was also an empowering experience for us, the writers of this
article. We are convinced that the PBL approach offers an excellent starting
point for the further education for adults.

PBL and Information Technology, PBL-IT

From 2004–2006 the ideas and experiences of the PBL-PD programme were
developed and another long-term training programme “Information Tech-
nology and Problem-Based Learning, PBL-IT” was designed and imple-
mented at the Eduta Institute. The PBL-IT programme consisted of 25 ECTS
credits and it was partly financed by the State Provincial Office of Southern
Finland and EU Structural Funds. The participants of the programme were
mainly lecturers from Finnish polytechnics.
The course had three modules: (1) Problem-based learning, (2) Technol-
ogy and mediated cultures of action, and (3) Groups and tutoring in online
environments. These modules created a continuum without clear bounda-
ries. All themes were interwoven and were discussed in parallel. The way in
which the course was implemented matched the subject of the studies, and
all subjects that were studied theoretically were first applied in practice. The
main learning task for all students was to meet the challenge of combin-
ing problem-based learning and online learning with suitable technologies.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 271

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

The course started with traditional face-to-face tutorials and other activities
during the in-service training days. During the phase of information ac-
quisition, the groups used online learning environments such as WebCT or
Moodle as asynchronous tools for discussion and sharing information.
This blended structure, of course, could be described as computer-sup-
ported traditional PBL. Wikis and blogs rose to prominence during the
course, and wiki, in particular, seems to be a totally new type of tool for
shared collaboration. After the main procedures of PBL had been internal-
ised, new technologies were presented. During in-service training days, the
students simulated totally distributed tutorial settings using synchronous
tools such as chat and whiteboard, which used features of tools such as Web­
CT and CmapTools. This enabled synchronous collaboration and could also
be used for tasks like brainstorming and modelling. (Donnelly & Portimo-
järvi 2006.)
Different tools and software for audio conferences were tested. Skype and
TeamSpeak, for instance, had potential as types of software, which could
be easily combined with shared visual tools such as whiteboards or shared
documents. These technological solutions made it possible to have tutorial
meetings online. The next phase of this development involved improved
implementation of personal conferencing. For instance, Marratech enables
real group meetings with advanced tools for collaboration. This was used for
personal desktop conferencing, and with it, the tutorial meetings became
similar to face-to-face meetings, where everyone could hear and see one an-
other, present materials and work collaboratively on the shared whiteboard.
This same software was also used for distance lectures and the involvement
of national and international guest experts. Combined with the use of the
asynchronous Moodle environment, this formed the basis of the technologi-
cal solutions used during the course. (Donnelly & Portimojärvi 2006.)
In the wake of technological developments and the exploration of pos-
sible software solutions, Donnelly and Portimojärvi (2006) argue that the
optimal approach to online PBL is a blended solution. Face-to-face meetings,
desktop conferencing tutorials, distance lectures, asynchronous discussion
and digital learning materials can be used to create a single entity. It could

272 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH

be described as a puzzle in which each part completes the others. PBL-IT

resulted in many development projects that participants conducted in their
work places. Some examples of these are:

• Problem-based learning (PBL), computer mediated communication

(CMC) and leadership.
• Supervising scholarly theses in the open learning environment
• Analysing triggers from the students’ perspective in health care edu-
cation
• Scaffolding tutorial information seeking in virtual learning environ-
ments
• Studying medical care virtually
• Specialising in first aid within a problem-based virtual learning envi-
ronment
• Interaction in synchronous on-line tutorials

These projects are reported in the forthcoming book “The Net of Problem-
Based Learning” published in Finnish and edited by PBL-IT’s project leader
and ProBell researcher Timo Portimojärvi.

Eduta and further training functions

The Eduta Institute, the further training and consultation unit inside the
Faculty of Education at the University of Tampere, has acted as a home base
for many of ProBell’s training functions. The idea of such a unit arose ten
years ago from a group of teaching staff exploring “the development of teach-
ing through research”. The new unit was established in 1998 and named the
Eduta Institute in 2002. The aim of the Eduta Institute is to train, develop
and research the processes of learning, facilitating and evaluating in work
organisations.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 273

 Esa POIKELA & Sari POIKELA

The task of the Eduta Institute is two-fold. Firstly, it focuses on producing

training services for society and working life. Secondly, it produces training
services inside the university by, for example, developing university peda-
gogy and providing pedagogical training for university teachers. Eduta’s
activities are based on pedagogical knowing and expertise. It is essential
that all development is functionally linked to research conducted inside the
Faculty of Education, which is why, for example, the steering group consists
of professors and researchers in education. The most important clients are
universities, polytechnics, schools, vocational colleges and other public and
private organisations.
ProBell researchers have actively supported the development of the Eduta
Institute and have planned and implemented the training and mentoring
of PBL in numerous organisations working in a variety of different fields.
ProBell’s research results have been applied in many practical tests over the
years. One of the first PBL courses was organised in spring 1999 for the staff
of the University of Tampere, and included participants from different facul-
ties and disciplines. Some of the most active participants came from the Unit
of Early Childhood Education. They started to renew their curriculum soon
after having learned the basics of PBL. Their journey towards an integrated
PBL curriculum has now taken seven years and has not been an easy one
(Nummenmaa, Karila, Virtanen & Kaksonen 2005).
ProBell and Eduta have been active together in creating and maintain-
ing national networking within the area of PBL. The aforementioned PBL-
PD programme alone gathered participants from eight polytechnics: Häme,
Kemi-Tornio, Kymenlaakso, Lahti, Mikkeli, Pirkanmaa, North Carelia and
Tampere. Further organisations involved in long-term PBL training projects
include Helia, Turku and South Carelia Polytechnics, the National Police
School and the Vocational College of Lapland.

274 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING ABOUT RESEARCH

Conclusions – the present and the future of ProBell

PBL is no longer considered a radically new approach. The use of PBL has
been expanded across curricular, pedagogical and organisational levels, and
has become formally recognised in Finland. Since PBL has, in some sense,
become “institutionalised” in recent years, we face new challenges both in
research and development work.
For the members of ProBell, organising and participating in national
and international meetings has been important for generating ideas. Both
national and international networks have been expanding rapidly, and our
working international connections include Linköping University in Sweden,
Dublin University College in Ireland, Newcastle University in Australia and
the University of Brighton in the UK.
In this article, we have described the start of the ProBell research group
and its activities in which research, development and teaching all play a cen-
tral role. Educational research, it has sometimes been claimed, exists in iso-
lation from the real world of practice. ProBell has proven that educational
research and practice can and must be closely connected. ProBell started on
a voluntary basis as a group of educators interested in problem-based learn-
ing. We could not have developed the group without actively interacting with
different fields of education and without being involved in several training
projects. Up to this point ProBell has been a research group but, from now
on, it will continue as the newly established ProBell Research Society.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 275

276 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 Sari Poikela
University of Lapland

Marja-Leena Lähteenmäki
Pirkanmaa Polytechnic

MENTORING TUTOR’S PROFESSIONAL GROWTH

Research on Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is usually reported from the

students’ point of view. There is far less research concerning teachers’ de-
velopment as tutors. ProBell researchers have been educating and mentoring
practitioners of PBL in several organizations. Our article describes one of
these cases. It is qualitative case study conducted during two semesters at
Pirkanmaa Polytechnic in Finland. The data consists of observations of 20
tutorials and notes from 20 mentoring discussions with ten physiotherapy
tutors. Both writers were actively involved in these activities, one as a mentor
for experienced tutors and the other educating novice tutors.
We focus on a number of points: how the problem solving process and
group dynamics in tutorials are best facilitated, how tutors’ find their roles
and how they develop themselves as tutors. Our findings indicate that devel-
oping expertise as a PBL tutor is learning and developmental process which
includes acting as a tutoring teacher and co-operating with colleagues and
students. It is a process that takes many years and needs continuous support.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 277

 Sari POIKELA & Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

The aim to also to offer ideas how mentoring process can support tutors
work and professional growth.
The special nature of the tutors’ role and work, and their perspectives on
the facilitation process have not been widely investigated (Moust, DeGrave &
Gijselaers 1990; Neville 1999; Savin-Baden 2000; Barrett 2001; Miflin 2001;
Poikela & Poikela 2001; Poikela, S. 2003). The aim of our article is to shed
light on how tutors’ professional growth can be supported and to identify
how tutorials can be successfully facilitated. We analysed the experiences of
ten teachers who have acted as tutors of physiotherapy at Pirkanmaa Poly-
technic, Tampere, Finland. The professional development of these tutors was
systematically supported with mentoring sessions during two semesters in
the academic year 2001–2002 (Poikela, S. & Lähteenmäki 2002).
In general, mentoring is open and confidential dialogue between men-
tor and person mentored. Mentoring needs engagement and it needs to be
collaborative (see Juusela, Lillia & Rinne 2000; Zachary 2000). Mentoring
can be even a powerful growth experience and has been used as method for
introducing novice teachers to work (e.g. Jokinen & Sarja 2005). In our case
the aim of mentoring was to help even experienced tutors to help reflect
their action.
Problem based learning has been used as a pedagogical approach to
physiotherapy education at Pirkanmaa Polytechnic for eight years. Most of
the tutors were already working at the organization when the PBL was in-
troduced. The process of moving towards a fully integrated PBL curriculum
started in 1995, when physiotherapy teachers visited Linköping University,
Sweden where the PBL had been in use since 1986. From 1995–1996 teachers
from Pirkanmaa Polytechnic took part in an educational programme that
introduced them to PBL, and it was during this time that the basic modu-
larised structure for the PBL curriculum was formulated. Teachers began to
deliver the new curriculum in 1996, but within a few months they found that
the curriculum needed some rewriting. Further changes were introduced as
the following intake of students began their studies with a curriculum which
increased integration between different disciplines.

278 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

MENTORING TUTOR’S PROFESSIONAL GROWTH

Teachers worked in close cooperation from the very beginning. This col-
laboration included regular meetings to discuss each module, and additional
meetings aimed at furthering the development of the curriculum. Some of
the teachers were also active in international cooperation, taking part in PBL
conferences, teacher exchange programmes and curriculum development
programmes. In the year 2000, the physiotherapy programme was awarded
a grant from the Finnish Ministry of Education for outstanding quality. The
extra funding this award brought to the program made possible to organise
the systematic mentoring for tutors that our report describes.
In September 2001, at the beginning of the mentoring process, the men-
tor and the teachers gathered together for a planning meeting. Later, during
the two semesters from 2001–2002, the mentor observed two tutorials from
each teacher and made detailed notes on every tutorial. After each tutorial,
the mentor discussed the session with the tutor and gave feedback on what
they had observed. These discussions also provided the tutor with an oppor-
tunity to raise issues that concerned her. Then, in the middle of the year, the
mentor and the teachers met for a plenary discussion to share their experi-
ences. At the end of the academic year, the mentor presented their conclu-
sions in a final paper which the teachers discussed at their staff meeting.
The empirical material of this article consists of the mentor’s observation
notes about tutorials, notes about private discussions with tutors, and mem-
os from meetings where the mentor met with all the teachers. The teachers
have given their permission to use this data. This article will also refer to
the tutor education process that was organized at the same polytechnic for
nursing teachers.

The tutor as a guide

Taylor, Marienau and Fiddler (2000) describe the tutor’s role in relation to
the learner, as being like that of a guide. They mostly deal with tutoring in
the contexts of education and work, describing the tutor’s role as that of a

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 279

 Sari POIKELA & Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

guide. This concept usefully describes the tutor’s role in relation to students
within the framework of PBL. The concept of tutor as guide usefully de-
scribes the tutor’s role in relation to students within the framework of PBL.
Prepare the student for the journey: The tutor is not a travel agent who has
to take care of everything for the student. It is not always easy or pleasant
to tread new and challenging paths. Travelling can occasionally be difficult,
and sometimes the goal may seem to recede into the distance rather than
draw nearer. A good guide, like a good tutor, anticipates rather than under-
estimates possible difficulties. He or she is able describe the goal which is
represented by the destination of the journey. The guide’s role is to encour-
age the learner to move forwards, because a mountain always looks highest
from the lower slopes. The temptation to give up is strongest right at the
beginning of the journey.
Blaze the trail and offer a map: The guide helps the learner to find various
routes towards the goal. He or she also helps the learner to recognize differ-
ent stages of the journey so they are aware of their progress, and marks the
stages as they are accomplished. Because the guide understands the stages
of educational development and growth, they are in a position to help the
student both cognitively and emotionally. As a result, the guide can help the
student to face difficult stages of the learning process and any feelings of
discouragement that may be associated with them.
Let the learners set the pace: Although the guide may wish to hurry the
learner, he or she should remember that it for the learner to decide how fast
to proceed. The guide may become frustrated if the learner’s goal changes
during the journey or if he or she stops before achieving the goal. A good
guide has to respect the learner’s own decisions. Perhaps the journey will
proceed more smoothly on another day.
Provide a lifeline: The guide may be the only person who understands
all the different challenges the journey offers. It is for this reason that the
guide has to be available and listen to the learner without criticism. When
the learner stumbles or is in danger of falling, the guide may rescue the situ-
ation.

280 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

MENTORING TUTOR’S PROFESSIONAL GROWTH

Support and challenge: During some phases the learner may not need as
much support as earlier. However, support is only one part of the guide’s
responsibility. Equally important is to challenge the learner to take more de-
manding routes. An effective combination of support and challenge fosters
the learner’s development. It is important to help the learner to identify the
areas that he or she needs to develop and also to congratulate them on their
achievements.
To become an effective tutor involves more than simply mastering the
content of a subject area. Tutors have to share a common language with
learners, possess a sense of empathy, and encourage students to be open-
minded in their approach to learning. (Schmidt & Moust 1995.)

The phases of problem solving in a tutorial

Tutorials followed the same eight-step PBL cycle used at Linköping Univer-
sity, Sweden (Silén et al. 1993). All tutorial groups were given a general intro-
duction to the various phases of the approach at the outset. The cycle began
with reviewing the problem and creating a shared perspective with regard
to it. However, students did not always want to follow all the phases. For
instance, the second phase of brainstorming was considered compulsory by
some groups, while others simply refused to do it. The reasons behind this
difference of opinion were interesting. Some students claimed that brain-
storming was unproductive in cases where a topic was new and unfamiliar,
since they lacked previous knowledge about it. Such a perception, howev-
er, ignores a key goal of brainstorming in which the intention is to clarify
former knowledge about a topic, even when it in unfamiliar.
The third step involved categorizing issues that arose during the brain-
storming. In some groups the students wished to proceed directly to setting
up the learning task. In these cases, the tutor had to recommend that the
group went through a longer process which involved analysing more precise-
ly those items that had come up during discussion. This forms an important

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 281

 Sari POIKELA & Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

basis for learning something new. It is also a way of becoming familiar with
the theme, forming a commitment to the learning task, and developing the
motivation required for independent study.
Many tutorials and mentor-tutor meetings discussed the importance of
formulating the learning task. A number of key questions arose from this
issue: How does one formulate the learning task in a way that is sufficiently
concrete, avoiding an over-general approach? How should the learning tasks
relate to the goals of each module? How can the tutor guide the students in
formulating learning tasks that cover enough of the subject without being too
broad? How does the learning task guide the gathering of information? If the
learning task was too general it was found to have a direct influence on stu-
dents’ independent studies, making it difficult for them to proceed. When
seeking information, students became rapidly frustrated if they noticed that
the learning task was insufficiently focused. (cf. Lähteenmäki 2001.)
During independent studies, students seemed mainly to use those sourc-
es that were mentioned in the module guides, or material that was otherwise
easy to find. On a couple of occasions one student spoke about an article they
had located themselves and this received special acknowledgement from the
group. The group appreciated the fact that one of their members had discov-
ered a new source and brought interesting information to the session. In dis-
cussions with the mentor, many tutors expressed the view that students used
articles too seldom. This raised the question of how the tutors could encour-
age students to use them more systematically. In some modules the students
could be recommended to use certain journals which could be nominated as
primary sources. It might also be important to remind the students, every
now and then, of the many different ways there are to obtain information.
During the second tutorial the different levels of success achieved by stu-
dents and even by whole tutor groups in their independent studies became
apparent. The difference were especially evident in the way students were
able to use new information in their arguments. Several tutors observed
that students have to be encouraged to reason their findings rather than
presenting opinions as knowledge. Tutors felt that well-focused questions
were important in bringing this about. During one tutorial a student who

282 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

MENTORING TUTOR’S PROFESSIONAL GROWTH

had presented an interesting article finished by saying that this was simply
one opinion. However, the article in question was written about some dou-
ble-blind empirical research, and therefore the information did not consti-
tute only one opinion. Clearly students need to learn to recognize different
sources and assess their reliability and validity.
There were also differences in the ways students shared their knowledge
with others. To some extent this seemed to result from poor preparation but
it was also partly due to students choosing to keep information to them-
selves. It is especially important that the tasks set for students who are absent
will result in contributions that will benefit the group as a whole. Students
actively sharing information with one another form the basis for learning
effectively in the group.
Assessment lies at the heart of the problem solving process, and this was
carried out differently in the various tutor groups. In some groups the stu-
dents started the assessment process by themselves, but, in most tutorials,
the groups needed the tutor’s initiative. Even if a group has no time for as-
sessment at the end of every tutorial, it should not be routinely forgotten.
Von Schilling (2001) points out the significance of assessment both in learn-
ing subject matter and in developing the learning process. Assessment also
functions as an instrument for self-directed learning, and it is essential for
the development of cooperation and communication skills. A key aim of as-
sessment in professional education is to develop students’ abilities to work as
a professional in multi-professional teams. (von Schilling 2001, 40–43.)
Students found the personal feedback given by a tutor very important.
On the subject of students’ self-assessment, however, tutors raised questions
about how they could lead the groups away from vague comments about
tasks having progressed smoothly. One strategy is to change the way assess-
ment is arranged, since different procedures help to avoid falling into rou-
tines. It is worth pointing out that students can also learn to give detailed
feedback to one another. During this project, nearly all the assessment was
undertaken by the tutors who seemed to feel it was their responsibility.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 283

 Sari POIKELA & Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

Students and the tutor in the group

In each tutorial the students selected one member of the group to work as
a chairperson, one as a secretary and one as an observer in most of the tu-
torials. Although the chairpersons did not always act systematically, other
group members were quick to comment on the way in which the chairperson
led the discussion and the learning process. In a couple of groups an inef-
fective chairperson was passed over, and another student took over the role.
These kinds of situations were not analysed further in groups, although an
open discussion on this topic with the whole group would have been helpful
in developing communication skills.
A key area meriting further discussion was the way in which students
in different roles communicate both verbally and nonverbally. For instance,
it would be useful to examine the group’s reaction when the chairperson
expresses negative feelings: “I am completely confused … I can’t remem-
ber any of this … It just doesn’t stay in my mind … I don’t think we’ll find
anything else about this …” Since these kinds of statements have the effect
of undermining the atmosphere for learning in the group, it would be profit-
able for the tutor to examine such comments in discussions at the end of the
tutorial.
The role of secretary was not seen as very important in any of the tutori-
als. Indeed, in some situations this role seemed to have been entirely forgot-
ten. The results of brainstorming were written on the board for everybody,
but it would also have been useful to do the same with the learning task. The
secretary could further contribute by writing, every now and then, a syn-
thesis of new information for instance in the form of a compact mind map.
During some tutorials the secretary made notes which were not a part of the
group discussion at the end of the situation. To support the learning process,
it is important that the secretary writes down the key points the group raises
in their discussion. It should not be only the tutor’s duty to ensure that the
notes the secretary has made are available to the whole group.
The observer did not play an active role in all tutorials. Some groups felt
that the role of observer was unnecessary, while others made use of the ob-

284 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

MENTORING TUTOR’S PROFESSIONAL GROWTH

server when processing feedback about working in the group. Some tutors
maintained that the observer should not take part in the discussion, since
they felt that this would prevent them from making detailed and varied ob-
servations. Other tutors felt that the observer could play a partial role in the
discussion. Despite tutors’ requests, the observers adopted a very low-key
approach when giving feedback to the group. One strategy for making the
observation more varied would be to vary the target of observation in differ-
ent tutorials. Such targets might include, for example, the PBL-cycle, work-
ing in different roles, the amount of time different speakers spend talking, or
the content of the discussion itself. This develops the students’ self-reflection
skills, and also offers them practice in both giving and receiving feedback,
which will benefit them in their professional lives.
The groups’ responsibility for sharing what they had learned varied con-
siderably. In some groups the students ended up with a common outcome
that either the chairperson or the secretary had put together at the end of
the cycle. Then, there were other groups in which students looked at their
watches, stood up and stated, “this is enough”. In a couple of tutorials groups
seemed to direct responsibility for the outcome at the tutor with comments
such as, “Now the tutor is satisfied.” or “How are we going to learn the right
things?”

Supporting learning as a tutor

There is no fixed role for a PBL tutor, and, during this project, every tutor be-
gan from their own personal starting points. The PBL cycle offered a certain
structure and a procedure to follow for the tutorials. While it is important
to follow the model, it is possible to vary it a little when appropriate. The
rules that had been agreed together proved to be important factors both for
the work carried out in tutorials, and for developing cooperation among the
teachers. The role of the tutor is essential to the success of the whole process
and he or she should never be simply a silent observer outside the group’s

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 285

 Sari POIKELA & Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

discussion. The tutor can and should make interventions when necessary.
However, a certain amount of patience is needed because the tutor should re-
sist the temptation to hurry the group in “the right direction“. Usually, after
a while, the learners themselves noticed difficulties the tutor had been aware
of a little earlier. During this project we did not encounter situations where
tutors had been so active that his or her actions had disturbed the tutorial.
If the tutor is very silent during the tutorial it may encourage the group
to work “too independently”. In situations like this the group may begin to
think that the tutor is not needed at all, and students may develop a tendency
disregard the tutor’s comments. This easily leads to confrontations with the
next tutor as occurred in one of the tutorials observed. One group, having
become accustomed to a more silent tutor, were offended when the tutor
tried to guide them or comment on their discussion. Sometimes students
turned to the tutor with a direct question but did not even listen to the whole
answer before continuing with their own discussion. The students’ action
was a straightforward signal to the tutor to be quiet and not to intervene.
Naturally, the tutor felt unhappy with the situation since she felt that the
group was trying to dismiss her contributions.
This situation parallels the findings of Charlotte Silén’s study (1996). She
points out that the assumption that a tutor need not interfere in a group’s
work if it appears to be progressing well, shows a misunderstanding of the
tutor’s role. The tutor’s task is always to lead the group towards deeper reflec-
tion. Without reflection and discussion the self-directed approach may lead
students into becoming “cue-seekers rather than learning to trust themselves
in solving problems and developing a clear awareness of situations in which
they do need help and guidance. Independent and critical thinking skills
need to be practised, reflected on and evaluated by other group members as
well. The problem solving process itself needs a great deal of practice. To be
able to handle a problem one needs to develop critical thinking skills, the
ability to assess what is essential and the ability to draw conclusions. It also
required the development of abstract, convergent and divergent thinking
skills. If tutors guide the students into routine and superficially self-directed

286 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

MENTORING TUTOR’S PROFESSIONAL GROWTH

work, then it is likely that this pattern will be repeated in their professional
lives. (Silén 1996, 120.)
A key topic the mentor discussed with tutors was the ability to frame
questions. The tutors noted the importance of clear questions, and felt that
a short single question was more useful than a long explanatory one or a
number of questions one after another. Sometimes tutors noticed that they
started to offer too much explanation to students and ended up repeating the
question. On many situations the tutor formulated a very exciting question,
but the group were initially uninspired by it, although this did sometimes
change over time. Successful questions started with ‘how’ or ‘why’, and they
challenged students to argue and clarify issues.
Tutors made a variety of interventions during group work which included
clarifying, empowering and encouraging students. Tutors did not criticise
students’ work, although in some groups this would have been useful when
the discussion was at a very superficial level. For example, students might be
talking about the subject but they were failing to adopt a critical standpoint
or focus on problems.
Tutors often acted spontaneously as a resource person. The equipment in
some classrooms made this a fruitful option. One tutor, for example, used a
model of a skeleton to activate the group in a discussion about its structure.
The tutor’s work as a resource person did not seem to disturb the group
during these situations. On the contrary, it served to benefit the learning
process. In some situations the group asked the tutor to work as a resource
person. In these cases the tutor might announce that they were going to be
an expert teacher for a short while to enable the group to work further. These
moments did not last long and the teachers did not actually start lecturing.
The tutors turned out to be active and attentive listeners who seemed to
have a clear awareness of the group’s progress. Tutors consciously tried to
avoid giving hints to the students by avoiding nonverbal communication, for
instance nodding the head On the other hand, nonverbal communication
can be used as a strengthening factor. An example of this was seen in one
tutorial organised in English where the tutor used a great deal more non-
verbal communication than they had when facilitating a tutorial in Finnish.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 287

 Sari POIKELA & Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

The foreign language guided not only the students’ work but also that of the
tutor. Offering detailed explanations in Finnish was easy for the tutor to do,
but answers given in a foreign language tended to be short and to the point.

The journey continues – conclusions

PBL can be seen not only as a strategy for changing education but also as a
way of thinking; it is a philosophy which changes the definition of knowl-
edge, learning and knowing. This presents enormous challenges for research
in this area. (Poikela, S. & Poikela, E. 1997; Poikela, E. & Nummenmaa
2002.) Silén (2001) investigated the work of medical tutor groups during the
second term of their studies. She noted that students showed clear motiva-
tion for their studies as well as the ability to reflect, make choices, and think
critically. These are the skills that are required of professionals in the future,
and it is therefore essential that the tutor has the ability to support students’
growth into critical, active, responsible professionals who are able to develop
themselves as well as their chosen professions.
Back in the 1940’s Charles J. Gragg wrote that the duty of subject teach-
ers, besides being experts in their field, was to activate students to reflect on
issues that arise from education. He emphasized the joint responsibility of
teachers and students and especially the creativity and ingenuity required of
teachers in supporting learning. (Gragg 1940.) This comes close to Norman
and Schmidt’s observations (1992, 559) about the psychological basis of PBL,
and the importance of small group discussions in activating new knowledge
which can then be drawn on at a later time.
The move to PBL prompted different, often conflicting, feelings in teach-
ers. Karin von Schilling (2001, 46) points out that feelings of uncertainty
easily lead both teachers and students into tutorial work which is heavily
tutor-led. Students may gain a sense of security from being given learning
tasks that they feel are “real and important”, while teachers may feel safe in
continuing in their old role as teachers. By sticking to teacher-oriented edu-

288 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

MENTORING TUTOR’S PROFESSIONAL GROWTH

cation and to pre-established contents, groups fall back into old routines. In
such cases students do not learn to trust their own thinking, relying instead
on the teacher’s opinion about what they need to learn. Teachers unable to
abandon their former role as an authority will have difficulties supporting
and activating learning.
The continuous development of teachers’ and tutors’ work is a prerequi-
site for successful learning outcomes and also for giving meaning and chal-
lenge to the teachers’ own work. It is important that tutors have opportuni-
ties to observe one another’s tutorials and regularly share feedback with one
another. Tutors should also gather feedback on their own way of working, for
instance by video-recording tutorials and analysing the tapes later. Teachers
starting with PBL have to prepare themselves for a new kind of teachership,
a process that should be carefully supported. They need to learn the basics of
PBL and they also need some understanding of group dynamics. The educa-
tion of PBL tutors offers an important forum for meeting and overcoming
teachers’ fears and prejudices.
While the mentoring project was being undertaken, PBL tutor education
was organised for about 30 health care teachers (at the same polytechnic).
This education included three orientation and discussion sessions and two
organised opportunities to observe tutorials in physiotherapy education. Ob-
serving the tutorials prompted teachers to think about the need for changes
in their own approach to teaching. Many tutors noticed that they needed to
learn to trust the students and to allow them more space, while they them-
selves needed to learn when to be quiet. A primary ability for tutors seemed
to know when to make appropriate interventions during the tutorial in order
to assist the students’ learning.
The results of our study show that it is not possible to become an effective
tutor through formal training alone. It is important to be able to share the
knowledge, understanding and competence of more experienced PBL-tutors
and teachers. By working together in this way, both experienced teachers
and novices can develop their expertise as PBL tutors. It also seems to be
extremely important to reflect on experiences that arise from the process of
tutoring and facilitating. This creates an opportunity to conceptualise the

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 289

 Sari POIKELA & Marja-Leena LÄHTEENMÄKI

essential elements of tutorial process and the tutor’s role within it. Tutors
work in a complex environment where they need to utilise and construct
different types of knowledge. It is for this reason that development as a PBL
tutor must be understood and analysed in the context of learning at work.

290 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

 Anna Raija Nummenmaa
University of Tampere

PROCESS-ORIENTED SUPERVISION
IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION

In the context of a general evaluation of the doctoral student education in

Finnish universities, an extensive survey research was made for doctoral stu-
dents. One of its main results was that there is a specific need to develop a
functional supervision system for doctoral education and, in general, pay
attention to the supervision of doctoral students (Dill et al. 2006). In this
article I will discuss especially the supervision of doctoral education and
general work processes of a dissertation. This development work has been
one of the subprojects of our research project and its development ideas have
been published in a book (Nummenmaa & Lautamatti 2004) and several
articles (Nummenmaa 2004; Lautamatti & Nummenmaa 2004; Nummen-
maa 2005a; 2005b; Nummenmaa & Lautamatti 2005). The wider theoretical
context of process-oriented supervision is education as an activity directed
to the future and the factors influencing that process. Socio-dynamic coun-
selling theory is the background of supervision. I will first describe process-
oriented supervision on a general level. Then I will reflect on the supervision
processes of the doctoral students of our research group.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 291

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA

Doctoral education in general and preparing the doctoral thesis as one of

its sub-processes are activities directed to the future. Activities that are di-
rected to the future and the thinking related to that are described as a three-
phase process which consists of motivation, planning and evaluation. These
interact with the students’ images of their future and themselves. Education
always takes place here and now – in some social context, which is formed by
the doctoral student’s phase of life, general situation in life and the scopes for
action related to that. (Nurmi 1991.) Students set themselves different goals
while planning their future post-graduate education. These goals are formed
through comparing information about one’s own motives, interests and val-
ues as well as anticipated future events with each others. The various antici-
pations include, among others, assumptions of oneself as a student and as a
writer of a dissertation, assumptions of one’s own know-how, own strengths
etc. The anticipation also includes assumptions of the surrounding environ-
ment, such as future working life and visions and plans for life in general.
Doctoral education and dissertation are a part of the wider context of life.
Its basic structures are the student’s phase of life, personal situation in life,
position of studies and the training process and meaningfulness of studies
realised in them. The students’ general situation of life consists of their hu-
man relationships, free time and hobbies, family life, residential situation, fi-
nancial situation and more and more participation in working life alongside
studying. The position of studies in the university consists of department
and education cultures which change according to the subject (Ylijoki 1998).
It also includes the general organisation of post-graduate studies as well as
the teaching and supervision received by the students etc. The students’ life
situation and position of studies construct a structure of possibilities, which
can make studying a meaningful process. (Aittola & Aittola 1985; Aittola
1995.) Hands-on experiences have shown that there is plenty of variation in
students’ target-oriented activities and motivation, planning and self-evalu-
ation related to that. According to our experiences, these are essential pre-
requisites for studying and intertwine in many ways also with the concept
of adult learning. We suggest that the clarification of these focal phenomena
and concepts helps the supervisor understand what the work processes of a

292 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROCESS-ORIENTED SUPERVISION IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION

student are about and how directed supervision can help the progress of a
student’s work (Nummenmaa & Lautamatti 2004).
The supervision of doctoral students has traditionally focused on guid-
ing the product, dissertation. Thus the main issues of supervision have been
the scientific problem solving process related to the contents and methods
of one’s own field and scientific writing. Doctoral education as an overall
process has received less attention. In doctoral education and research also
work processes that are general in nature and field independent are needed
alongside the work related to the field. These kinds of work processes include
various planning, motivation, information gathering, reflecting and assess-
ment processes as well as study and learning processes. The field independent
work processes that I call general work processes often cause problems and
can therefore be the reason of the interruption of dissertation or doctoral ed-
ucation. In the work of a doctoral student these scientific and general work
processes are closely connected in the preparation of the thesis. The starting
point of process-oriented supervision is the basic assumption that the super-
vision of post-graduate education should, alongside scientific problem solv-
ing process, be directed also to so-called general work processes (motiva-
tion, planning, information gathering, evaluation and study processes) The
primary target of supervision in general work processes is not “dissertation
as an object” but dissertation and study processes and a student as a living,
feeling and acting subject.
Whereas a dissertation and research process are often described as logical
and linear, temporal work processes overlap, recur and relate to each other
in unexpected ways. The goal of the supervision of general work processes is
the mobilisation of the learner’s own resources. Peer groups form an essential
resource for supervision for this purpose. The aim is also to construct a new
socio-cultural space for studying and learning in the supervision of work
processes. The Japanese would call it ba and the Swedish the third space: an
open social space that supports being together, free brainstorming and thus
comprehensive learning. (Nummenmaa & Lautamatti 2004.)

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 293

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA

Beginning and agreement

The beginning of doctoral education and dissertation as lengthy, future-ori-

ented activities activate the motivation, planning and self-evaluation proc-
esses from the start. The students contemplate whether their interest lasts,
can they and are they able, how they plan their education to be a part of their
lives, time management etc. The instructor’s attitude to this is crucial. When
the instructor understands how intricate and important the beginning is for
the future work of the students she can consciously utilize it by contemplat-
ing with a student or/and student group the general and personal goals of
studying, such as: What kinds of goals I set for my doctoral education? How
am I going to reach these goals? What kinds of expertise and know-how I try
to achieve and develop during the doctoral education? How will I develop this
know-how and expertise? What kinds of career plans I have at the moment?
It is useful in the beginning for students to also think about their dis-
sertations as a part of the post-graduate education process. Possible thought
patterns are: What kinds of thoughts and plans I have about the forthcoming
dissertation process? What kind of a timetable plan do I have? How do I plan
my time and other resources in practice? How will my dissertation support
the development of my know-how and expertise? Discussion about these is-
sues helps students to discern their own doctoral education as a target- and
future-oriented process. It also creates a basis for the tentative post-gradu-
ate education plan prepared by the student and the instructor. It is good
to discuss the expectations and commitments in the start. The supervisor
might expect, among others, the following of the student: she is prepared
when arriving in the supervision situation, she continuously produces writ-
ten material and distributes draft material, she is regularly in contact with
the instructor and completes the tasks reconciled and scheduled together.
The student, on the other hand, might expect from the instructor regular
supervision, oral and written feedback and getting feedback within a reason-
able time. Also discussion about the so-called general work conventions is
needed in the beginning. First, it is important that the supervisor explains
her work methods to the students and clarifies how the students’ needs fit

294 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROCESS-ORIENTED SUPERVISION IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION

into them. Possible practical questions related to supervision include: how

often the meetings are held, what is the best time for a meeting, some agenda
agreed beforehand, contact practices, yearly supervision cycle etc. It is im-
portant to make the principles related to the publishing practices visible in
the beginning especially in research projects that prepare joint publications
to avoid unnecessary disappointments. (Delamont 1997.) As the supervision
of especially dissertations generally include a lot of personal supervision, it
is advisable that the instructor and student make an supervision agreement.
The agreement is psychological in nature and the instructor and student
briefly write into it the jointly set goals, responsibilities of supervisor and
student, the time the student uses to make the dissertation, the time super-
visor reserves for supervision, agreements on contacting and meeting prac-
tices etc. (see e.g. Lindholm-Ylänne & Nevgi 2003).

Motivational processes

An interest to one’s own study and maintaining it are the prerequisites for
the eventual completion of the dissertation. Students often mention that per-
sonal interest in the research subject is an important motivator but they find
it hard to know how long this kind of initial interest will last. Students also
differ from each other according to what kinds of factors motivate them in
their current situation of life – what amount of the motivation is directed
by interior factors, such as personal interests, and what amount is directed
by exterior factors and, for example, is dependent on career development
or the possibility to focus on the research. Students are usually aware of the
strength of their motivation while working, but not necessarily, for instance,
why it sometimes weakens. The more the motivating factors – external and
internal, belonging to a group, professional needs – are related to the work
situation the more probable it is that the study progresses. On one hand,
the work process in itself can strengthen motivation if the student feels that
doing research empowers her personally and provides her with general and

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 295

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA

academic working life skills. On the other hand, even a motivated student
has to be prepared for the fact that the working rhythm changes. However,
a well constructed motivation helps to get through the slower periods. Vari-
ous theories of motivation provide various explanations of what motivation
is, but the origin of motivation is harder to explain. The issue of motivating
students in supervision seems to be more complicated. Since motivation is
about the whole person and her whole life, the fact that supervision gives the
chance to study oneself and one’s own relationship to the study from differ-
ent viewpoints both in time and various perspectives of work can prevent
the birth of motivational problems or help to find possibilities to overcome
obstacles. Supervision can support motivation in at least two ways. First, it
can help the student to recognise her own motivational state and the factors
that affect it. Second, supervision in its different forms can increase the ele-
ments that maintain motivation. A well functioning group or support that
the group members offer each other in various ways can have this kind of an
effect. Various methods can be utilized in this kind of work, such as meta-
phor work, visualization, recognition of work rhythm and learning styles
etc. These often help students to recognise the obstacles of work or own
strengths and possibilities (Nummenmaa & Lautamatti 2004; Lautamatti &
Nummenmaa 2004).

Planning processes

It is said that all work is done at least twice: first in thoughts and then in
the final form. This applies especially well to dissertations. While writing
their dissertations, students learn new things, work with complex concepts
and the result is realised structurally in a clearly regulated form. The use of
thinking that involves planning and guided imagination is very important.
Also, in this context it is useful to make the same kind of separation between
process and output as in research usually. Both the planning process and the
plans themselves have their own rules. A student preparing her dissertation

296 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROCESS-ORIENTED SUPERVISION IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION

should know the ways she usually plans things and the measures that pro-
mote planning. She should also know what form of plans it is necessary to
prepare to promote the study. She needs at least plans related to the structure
and contents of the study and plans regarding its progress. It is advisable
that the students think what kind of a form of the plans is the most helpful
to them. Plans can be very different, related to, for example, the study or
dissertation process or more widely to personal life situation. In the follow-
ing, I introduce two such plans that are usually needed: research plan of the
topic and structure of the dissertation and a plan of time management which
includes progressing stages. Supervisors are familiar with the research plan
and plans related to its various phases but it is good also to instruct the stu-
dents to plan their time management with different timetables. They can be
prepared for different purposes, for both long-term and short-term periods,
but it is advisable to regard them as tools. A change or modification of time-
tables helps students revise their assumptions of the time needed for the var-
ious operations and thus better predict forthcoming stages. Timetables are
a source of planning, self-knowledge and brainstorming. Time management
plans vary in scope – the overall timetable of the study with its phases, year
plan, month plan, week plan etc. Prepared models are available to discern
the overall schedule, but there are also more creative and perhaps for some
students more motivating alternatives. What kinds of tasks the timetable
includes is a personal matter. It is advisable that the week plan of a student
includes a peaceful moment of thinking every morning when things can be
put into an order of importance. In harder phases it is good to have space
for matters to work out by themselves. The subconscious seems to work best
when it has time to be alone. This method also has its own name: the Chi-
nese concept of Wu Wei refers to restraining oneself of action until the right
moment comes. In addition, the editors of the book ‘Matkaopas joutilaisu-
uteen’ (Guide to Inactivity) state in its foreword: “[---] we are satisfied to give
the one and same advise that is found in all inactive thinking: Do nothing. At
least do nothing that you do not like. Let things work out by themselves [---]”
(Hodgkinson & De Abaitua 1996, 21).

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 297

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA

Assessment and feedback

Students often feel that they get too little supervision and feedback to sup-
port their dissertation work. However, the supervisors describe the situation
as an eternal question – sometimes there is enough supervision and some-
times there is not and, on the other hand, students do not always use the su-
pervision available. It is also a well-known fact that learning is dependent on
the feedback students get and quick and developing feedback is very useful
for them. In addition, students benefit from feedback and assessment if they
are actively committed to the evaluation process of their own and others’
studies (Boud 1995). On the other hand, it is also true that instant feedback is
harder to be given when the supervisor has several different groups. Doctor-
al students get feedback from their study either in a personal discussion or in
a group situation. The factors of interaction in these affect the significance
of feedback. The atmosphere of supervision discussion and given feedback
is important. In feedback situation the student faces a person who has the
power of an institution, has personal expertise and in certain framework
can influence her progress. There fore, being the target of evaluation might
arouse fear. Fear can then prevent the reception of the supervisor’s messages
or otherwise harm the reception of feedback. It is advisable to create as fa-
vourable exterior setting for the feedback discussion as possible. Also word
choices can have a bigger meaning for the student than the supervisor might
think. As in every situation that involves interaction there should be enough
time and peaceful space – the supervision gets disturbed if the instructor, for
example, receives telephone calls at the same time. References to the super-
visor’s own hurries, as well as non-verbal signs of a lack of interest, might tell
the student that her case is in the end less important in the instructor’s work.
Since we supervisors are all people with hurries and tiredness, it is inhu-
man to demand that we could always act as if we were unhurried or strong.
Thus we can look for a solution by developing more varied evaluation and
constructing it to be a part of learning situations. We can get help from con-
tinuous evaluation and forms of feedback that individualize students. Then,
everything does not depend on one or two feedback discussions. Group and

298 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROCESS-ORIENTED SUPERVISION IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION

peer feedback alongside the instructor’s feedback also clarifies the several
perspectives of evaluating a student’s progress and restores a healthy sense
of proportion. It is easier to give feedback when it is consciously constructed
to consecutive elements that serve different purposes. The awareness of the
construction of the feedback discussion – the chain of reflecting, guiding
and assessing feedback – might make the task easier and more natural. In
addition, the instructor’s work is easier if the students tell her the things that
they especially want to get feedback on. In giving feedback, it is advisable to
check how the student has understood it. There are often misunderstandings
in this and the study begins to go into a wrong direction.
When supervision is implemented in a group setting it is easy to connect
it with peer assessment. Students might find it difficult to evaluate each oth-
ers’ writings in the beginning but learning to do it is a valuable skill. The
typical stiff opposing and examination situations can be prevented when
students have learned from the beginning to give constructive feedback with
respect to the others’ studies but talking openly. In the phase when research
plans or completed dissertations are discussed in the seminar the students
should be instructed to the correct evaluation or opposing practice. Then the
supervisor transfers her own expertise for the use of the students: she tells
about the evaluation criteria of the field applied to the seminar work, pres-
entation principles of evaluation, scales and use of grades etc. Thus students
also get information about the way their theses will be evaluated and are able
to utilize it when preparing them.

ProBell – in group and together

In the expertise discussion of recent years attention has been paid to the col-
laborative nature of expertise. It is becoming more and more unusual that
experts would act alone in the analysis of work situations, solving of work-
related problems and development of their work. The working life requires
nowadays more often multidisciplinary, shared expertise that breaks the

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 299

 Anna Raija NUMMENMAA

boundaries of the various fields. Expertise is seen as a collaborative phe-

nomenon alongside its individual dimension. Thus it has been considered
important to construct elements that help people to learn collaborate and
share creation of information in also the doctoral education processes. This
is possible in multidisciplinary research projects the kind of which also our
ProBell research group has been. Collaborative activities and intelligent ac-
tion that develops from them is described, among others, with the collabora-
tive partnership concept: construction of a ladder that helps the tightly in-
teracting participants to solve more difficult problems than they could solve
individually (Hakkarainen 2003; John-Steiner 2000). Our ProBell research
group as a multidisciplinary group has formed a creative forum for the de-
velopment of shared expertise. This partnership has also been a strength
supporting our research group. The cooperation and supervision relations
have been diverse. Our research group includes senior researchers, who have
done their own research projects related to our project, as well as doctoral
students. The diversity and diverse relationships of the project group have
been a strength but also somewhat brought in learning challenges for both
us supervisors and doctoral students. The supervision of our doctoral stu-
dents has taken place mainly as group supervision in the regular meetings of
the project group and in seminars. Our research group has formed a genuine
group in the sense the researchers of group operation define it: our group
has had shared goals and interests; participants have felt to be a part of the
group and the group has been experienced to be rewarding; the operation of
the group is described by strong interaction and the group has had mutual,
although loose, working rules (Johnson & Johnson 1982; 1987). All this has
also enabled the use of group as a supervision resource. The core of doctoral
education is the dissertation process. Thus also the target-oriented work
with scientific questions has been in the centre of the supervision process.
However, this work has been supported simultaneously by paying attention
the above-described general work processes. By participating in various ac-
tivities that make work processes visible and support them, as well as think-
ing about one’s own and others’ solutions our doctoral students have become
more aware of, for example, their own timetable planning, evaluate their

300 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROCESS-ORIENTED SUPERVISION IN DOCTORAL EDUCATION

own know-how or study their ways of receiving feedback. Common reflec-

tion and collegial feedback have in many ways been the core of supervision.
In conclusion, but not the least important, “space” and its meaning
should be mentioned. We have consciously created different “spaces”, which
the Japanese call ba and the Swedish third space. These different “spaces” of
being have been open to the formation of the social interaction of the group,
they have supported togetherness and creative brainstorming.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 301

302 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 REFERENCES

Abrandt Dahlgren, M. & Öberg, G. 2001. Questioning to learn and learning to

question: structure and function of problem-based learning scenarios in
environmental science education. Higher Education 41 (3), 263–282.
Ahola, S. 2004. Korkeakoulutus ja työelämä – lähtökohtia ilmiöön ja sen tut-
kimiseen. In P. Tynjälä, J. Välimaa & M. Murtonen (eds.) Korkeakoulutus,
oppiminen ja työelämä. Pedagogisia ja yhteiskunnallisia näkökulmia. Juva:
Ws Bookwell Oy.
Aittola, H. 1995. Tutkimustyön ohjaus ja ohjaussuhteet tieteellisessä jatkokou-
lutuksessa. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä studies in education psychology and social
research 111.
Aittola, H. & Aittola, T. 1985. Yliopisto-opiskelun mielekkyyden kokeminen
opiskelijoiden elämismaailman perusrakenteet. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yli-
opiston kasvatustieteiden tutkimuslaitoksen julkaisuja 359.
Aittola, H. & Kallio, E. 1991. Traditioiden merkitys kvalitatiivisessa tutkimuk-
sessa. Suomen kasvatustieteellinen aikakauskirja. Kasvatus 22 (5–6), 365–
376.
Alanko-Turunen, M. 2005. Negotiating interdiscursivity in a problem-based
learning tutorial site. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 1082. Tampere: Uni-
versity of Tampere.
Alanko-Turunen, M. & Öystilä, S. 2004. PBL-tutor tutoriaaliryhmän proses­sien
ohjaajana. In J. Onnismaa, H. Pasanen & T. Spangar (eds.) Ohjaus am-
mattina ja tieteenalana 3. Ohjaustyön välineet. Jyväskylä: PS-kustannus,
104–124.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 303

Albanese, M.A. 2004. Treading tactfully on tutor turf: does PBL tutor content
expertise make a difference? Medical Education 38 (9), 916–920.
Albanese, M.A. & Mitchell, S. 1993. Problem-based learning: a review of litera-
ture on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine 68
(1), 52–81.
Allan, J. 1996. Learning outcomes in higher education. Studies in Higher Educa-
tion 21, 93–108.
Argyris, C. & Schön, D.A. 1978. Organizational learning: A theory of action
perspective. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Arvaja, M. 2005. Collaborative knowledge construction in authentic school
contexts. Jyväskylä: University Printing House.
Atkins, M. 1995. What should we be assessing. In P. Knight (ed.) Assessment for
learning in higher education. London: Kogan Page, 25–34.
Ausbel, D.P. 1968. Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt,
Reinhart and Winston.
Autio, T. 2002. Teaching under siege. Beyond the traditional curriculum studies
and/or didactic split. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 904. Tampere: Tam-
pere University Press.
Autio, T. 2003. Postmodern paradoxes in Finland: The confinements of rational-
ity in curriculum studies. In W. Pinar (ed.) International handbook of cur-
riculum research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum associates, 301–330.
Bakhtin, M.M. 1986. Speech genres & other late essays. Austin: University of
Texas Press.
Barab, S.A. & Duffy, T.M. 2000. From practice fields to communities of practice.
In D.H. Jonassen & S.M. Land (eds.) Theoretical foundations of learning
environments. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Pub-
lishers, 25–55.
Barab, S.A. & Roth, W-M. 2006. Curriculum-based ecosystems: Supporting
knowing from an ecological perspective. Educational Researcher 35 (5),
3–13.
Barab, S.A., Thomas, M.K., Dodge, T., Squire, K. & Newell, M. 2004. Critical
design ethnography: Designing for change. Anthropology & Education
Quarterly 35, 254–268.
Barnett, R. 2000. Supercomplexity and the curriculum. Studies in Higher Edu-
cation 25 (3), 255–265.
Barrett, T. 2001. Philosophical principles for problem based learning: Freire’s
concepts of personal development and social empowerment. In P. Little &
P. Kandlbinder (eds.) The power of problem-based learning. Experience,
empowerment, evidence. Australian PBL Network. Australia. University
of Newcastle, 9–18.

304 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Barrett, T. 2005. Understanding problem-based learning. In T. Barrett, I. Mac­

Labhraim & H. Fallon (eds.) Handbook of enquiry and problem-based
learning. Irish case studies and international perspectives. Galway: AISHE,
All Ireland Society of Higher Education & National University of Ireland,
13–25.
Barrett, T. (forthcoming) Students’ talk about problem-based learning in PBL
tutorials: Illuminative concepts. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Coventry:
Coventry University.
Barrows, H. 1985. How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclini-
cal years. New York: Springer.
Barrows, H. 1986. A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical
Education 20, 481–486.
Barrows, H. 1989. The tutorial process. Springfield Illinois: Southern Illinois
University School of Medicine.
Barrows, H. 1996. Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: a brief over-
view. In L. Wilkerson & W.H. Gijselaers (eds.) New directions for teaching
and learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 3–11.
Barrows, H. 2000. Foreword. In D.H. Evensen & C.E. Hmelo (eds.) Problem-
based learning. A research perspective on learning interactions. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, vii–ix.
Barrows, H. & Tamblyn, R. 1998. Problem-based learning. An approach to
medical education. New York: Springer.
Bereiter, C. 2002. Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ: Erl­
baum.
Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. 1993. Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the
nature of expertise. Chicago: Open Court.
Bernstein, B. 1990. The structuring of pedagogic discourse: Vol IV, Class, codes
and control. London: Routledge.
Biggs, J. 1999. Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: Society
for Research Into Higher Education. Open University Press.
Billet, S. 1999. Guided learning at work. In D. Boud & J. Garrick (eds.) Under-
standing learning at work. London: Routledge, 151–164.
Blackler, F. 1995. Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations, an overview
and interpretation. Organization Studies 16 (6), 1021–1046.
Bligh, J. 1995. Problem based, small group learning. http://bmj.bmjjournals.
com/cgi/content/full/311/7001/342. Read 8 August 2006.
Block, D. 2001. ‘McCommunication’ A Problem in the frame for SLA. In
D. Block (ed.) Globalization & language teaching. Florence, KY: Routledge,
117–133.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 305

Bolton, N. 1977. Concept formation. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Boud, D. 1985. Problem-based learning in perspective. In D. Boud (ed.) Prob-
lem-based learning in education for the professions. Sydney: HERDSA,
13–19.
Boud, D. 1995. Assessment and learning. In P. Knight (ed.) Assessment for
learning in higher education. London: Kogan Page, 35–48.
Boud, D. 2000. Sustainable assessment: rethinking assessment for the learning
society. Studies in Continuing Education 22 (2), 151–167.
Boud, D. 2006. From problem-based learning to work-based practice: New is-
sues to be confronted. A key note presentation in international conference
on PBL 20 July 2006 Lima, Peru.
Boud, D., Cressey, P. & Docherty, P. (eds.) 2006. Productive reflection at work:
Learning for changing organization. London: Routledge.
Boud, D. & Feletti, G. 1997. Changing problem learning. Introduction to the
second edition. In D. Boud & G. Feletti (eds.) The challenge of problem-
based learning (2nd edition). London: Kogan Page, 1–14.
Boud, D. & Feletti, G. 1991. The challenge of problem-based learning (1st edi-
tion). London: Kogan Page.
Boud, D. & Feletti, G. (eds.) 1997. The challenge of problem-based learning
(2nd edition). London: Kogan Page.
Boud, D. & Feletti, G. 1999. Ongelmalähtöisen oppimisen muuttuvat kasvot. In
D. Boud & G. Feletti (eds.) Ongelmalähtöinen oppiminen. Uusi tapa oppia.
Helsinki: Terra Cognita, 15–30.
Boud, D. & Garrick, J. 1999. Understanding learning at work. London:
Routledge.
Boud, D., Keogh, R. & Walker, D. 1985. What is reflection in learning? In
D. Boud, R. Keogh & D. Walker (eds.) Reflection: Turning experience into
learning. Worcester: Billing & Sons Limited, 7–17.
Bowers, C.A. 2005. The false promises of constructivist theories of learning. A
global and ecological critique. New York: Peter Lang.
Bruner, J. 1990. Acts of meaning. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Univer-
sity Press.
Buber, M. 1995. Minä ja sinä. Porvoo: WSOY.
Burbules, N.C. 1993. Dialogue in teaching. Theory and practice. Advances
in contemporary educational thought, 10. New York: Teachers College
Press.
Burbules, N.C. & Bertram, C.B. 2001. Theory and research on teaching as dia-
logue. Unpublished article for Handbook of research on teaching. http://
faculty.ed.uiuc.edu/burbules/papers/dialogue.html. Read 22 April 2005.

306 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Burnard, P. 1987. Towards an epistemological basis for experiential learning in

nurse education. Journal of Advancing Nursing 12, 189–193.
Burnard, P. 1991. Experiential learning in action. Avebury. Newcastle upon
Tyne: Athenaeum Press Ltd.
Burr, V. 1995. An introduction to social constructionism. London: Routledge.
Cameron, D. 2001. Working with spoken discourse. London: Sage.
Carley, K. 1991. A theory of group stability. American Sociological Review 56,
331–354.
Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. 1986. Becoming critical. Education, knowledge and ac-
tion research. London: The Falmer Press.
Chen, S.E. 2000. Problem-based learning – educational tool or philosophy. In
O.S. Tan, P. Little, S.Y. Hee & J. Conway (eds.) Problem-based learning:
Educational innovations across disciplines. A collection of selected papers.
2nd Asia-Pacific conference on problem-based learning. Singapore: Te-
masek Centre for Problem-based Learning, 210–219.
Chen, S.E. 2002. Quality assurance in PBL. Keynote paper. 4th Asia-Pacific con-
ference on problem-based Learning. 11-13 Dec 2002. Hat Yai, Thailand.
Chen, S.E., Cowdroy, R.M., Kingsland, A.J. & Ostwald, M.J. (eds.) 1994. Reflec-
tions on problem-based learning. Sydney: Australian PBL Network.
Clark, H.H. & Brennan, S.E. 1991. Grounding in communication. In L.B. Res-
nick, J. Levine & S.D. Teasley (eds.) Perspectives on socially shared cogni-
tion. Washington, DC: American Psychology Association, 127–149.
Cole, M. 1985. The zone of proximal development. In J.V. Wertch (ed.) Cul-
ture, communication and cognition. Vygotskian perspectives. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 146–162.
Collin, K. & Tynjälä, P. 2002. Koulutuksen ja työelämän rajoilla – työnteki-
jöiden ja opiskelijoiden kokemuksia työssä oppimisesta. In L. Lestinen &
M. Saarnivaara (eds.) Kohtaamisia ja ylityksiä. Pedagogisia haasteita yli-
opisto-opetukselle. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yliopistopaino, 23–55.
Colliver, J.A. 2000. Effectiveness of problem-based learning curricula: Research
and theory. Academic Medicine 73 (3), 259–266.
Conway, J. & Little, P. 2001. Problem-based learning: A strategy for entrapment,
enslavement or empowerment. Proceedings from the 3rd Asia Pacific con-
ference of problem-based learning.
Cook, S.D. & Brown, S.J. 1999. Bridging epistemologies: the generative dance
between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organiza-
tion Science 10 (4), 381–400.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 307

Cowdroy, R.M. 1994. Concepts, constructs and insights: the essence of problem-
based learning. In S.E. Chen, R.M. Cowdroy, A.J. Kingsland & M.J. Ost-
wald (eds.) Reflections on problem-based learning. Sydney: Australian PBL
Network.
Crossan, M.M., Lane, H.W. & White, R.E. 1999. An organizational learning
framework: from intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review
24 (3), 522–537.
Crump, N. & Costea, B. 2003. Pedagogical objects in management education:
A cultural-historical critique. Lancaster University Management School
Working Paper 2003/046.
Daft, R.L. & Lengel, R.H. 1986. Organizational information requirements, me-
dia richness and structural design. Management Science 32 (5), 554–571.
De Grave, W.S., Dolmans, D.H.J.M. & van der Vleuten, C.P.M. 1999. Profiles
of effective tutors in problem-based learning: Scaffolding student learning.
Medical Education 33 (12), 901–906.
Delamont, S., Atkinson, P. & Parry, O. 1997. Supervising the PhD. A guide to
success. Baltimore: Open University Press.
DeLuca, D. & Valacich, J.S. 2005. Outcomes from conduct of virtual teams at
two sites: support for media synchronicity theory. Proceedings of the 38th
Hawaii international conference on system sciences.
Dewey, J. 1933 (1910). How we think: A restatement of the realation of reflective
thinking to the educative process. Boston: D.C. Heath and Company.
Dewey, J. 1938. Experience and education. New York: Macmillan Publishing.
Dewey, J. 1999 (1929). Pyrkimys varmuuteen: tutkimus tiedon ja toiminnan
suhteesta. Translator into Finnish Pentti Määttänen. Helsinki: Gaudea-
mus.
Dill, D., Mitra, S., Jensen, H., Lehtinen, E., Mäkelä, T., Parpala, A., Pohjola, H.,
Ritter, M. & Saari, S. 2006. PhD training and the knowledge-based society.
An evaluation of doctoral education in Finland. Finnish Higher Education
Evaluation Council.
Dillenbourg, P. 1999. Introduction: What do you mean by collaborative learn-
ing? In P. Dillenbourg (ed.) Collaborative learning: Cognitive and compu-
tational approaches. Oxford: Pergamon, 1–19.
Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P. & Gijbels, D. 2003. Effects of prob-
lem-based learning: a meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction 13 (5), 533–
568.
Dolmans, D.H.J.M., Gijselaers, W.H., Moust, J.H.C., De Grave, W.S., Wolf-
hagen, I.H.A.P. & van der Vleuten, C.P.M. 2002. Trends in research on the
tutor in problem-based learning: conclusions and implications for educa-
tional practice and research. Medical Teacher 24 (2), 173–180.

308 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Dolmans, D.H.J.M., de Grave, W., Wolfhagen, I.H.A.P. & van der Vleuten,
C.P.M. 2005. Problem-based learning: Future challenges for educational
practice and research. Medical Education 39 (7), 732–741.
Dolmans, D., Snellen-Balendong, H., Wolfhagen, I. & van der Vleuten, C. 1997.
Seven principles of effective case design for a problem-based curriculum.
Medical Teacher 3 (19), 185–189.
Dolmans, D.H.J.M. & Wolfhagen, I.H.A.P. 2005. Complex interactions between
tutor performance, tutorial group productivity and the effectiveness of PBL
units as perceived by students. Advances in Health Sciences Education.
Springer Netherlands 10 (3), 253–261.
Dolmans, D.H.J.M., Wolfhagen, I.H.A.P., Schepbier, A.J.J.A. & van der Vleu-
ten, C. 2001a. Relationship of tutors’ group-dynamics skills to their per-
formance ratings in problem-based learning. Academic Medicine 76 (5),
471–476.
Dolmans, D.H.J.M., Wolfhagen, I.H.A.P., van der Vleuten, C.P.M. & Wijnen,
W.H.F.W. 2001b. Solving problems with group work in problem-based
learning: hold on to the philosophy. Medical Education 35 (9), 884–889.
Donnelly, R. 2005. Using technology to support project and problem-based
learning. In T. Barrett, I. Mac Labhrainn & H. Fallon (eds.) Handbook of
enquiry & problem based learning. Galway: CELT, 157–177.
Dummond-Young, M. & Mohide, E.A. 2001. Developing problems for use in
problem-based learning. In E. Rideout (ed.) Transforming nursing educa-
tion through problem-based learning. Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publish-
ers, 165–191.
Ellsworth, E. 1997. Teaching positions difference, pedagogy and the power of
address. New York: Teachers College Press.
Engeström, Y. 1987. Learning by expanding. An activity-theoretical approach to
developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.
Eraut, M. 1994. Developing professional knowledge and comptence. London:
The Falmer Press.
Eriksson, P. 1999. The Process of interprofessional competition: A case of ex-
pertise and politics. In D. Browlie, M. Saren, R. Wensley & R. Whittington
(eds.) Rethinking marketing towards critical marketing accountings. Lon-
don: Sage, 188–204.
Eskola, J. & Suoranta, J. 1996. Johdatus laadulliseen tutkimukseen. Rovaniemi:
Lapin yliopisto.
Etzkowitz, H. & Leydersdorff, L. 2000. The dynamics of innovation: From na-
tional systems and ”mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-gov-
ernment relations. Research Policy 29 (2), 109–123.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 309

Faidley, J., Evensen, D.H., Salisbury-Glennon, J., Glenn, J. & Hmelo, C.E. 2000.
How are we doing? Methods of assessing group processing in a problem-
based learning context. In D.H. Evensen & C.E. Hmelo (eds.) Problem-
based learning: A Research Perspective on Learning Interactions, Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 109–135.
Fairclough, N. 1995. Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language.
London: Longman.
Fairclough, N. 2001. Language and power (2nd edition). Harlow: Pearson Edu-
cation Limited.
Fairclough, N. 2003. Analysing discourse textual analysis for social research.
London: Routledge.
Fenwick, T. & Parsons, J. 1998. Boldly solving the world: A critical analysis of
problem-based learning as a method of professional education. Studies in
the Education of Adults 30 (1), 53–67.
Flechter, J.K. 1996. A relational approach to the protean work. In D.T. Hall (ed.)
The career is dead – long live the career. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Freire, P. 1972. Pedagogy of the oppressed. Harmonndsworth: Penguin Books.
Freire, P. 2005. Sorrettujen pedagogiikka. Tampere: Vastapaino.
Fyrenius, A. 2003. En kombination av scenarier – möglig väg till fördjupning?
In A. Fyrenius & C. Silén (eds.) Utgångspunkter för basgruppsarbete i PBL.
Linköping: Linköpings Universitet, 9–22.
Garrick, J. 1998. Informal learning at work. Unmasking human resource devel-
opment. London: Routledge.
Gibson, J.J. 1977. The theory of affordances. In R.E. Shaw & J. Bransford (eds.)
Perceiving, acting, and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology. Hills-
dale, NJ: Erlbaum, 67–82.
Gibson, J.J. 1986. The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillslade, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gijselaers, W. 2005. Putting minds at work. Keynote Paper. International con-
ference on PBL 9-11 June, Lahti, Finland.
Gijselaers, W.H. & Schmidt, H.G. 1990a. Development and evaluation of a caus-
al model of problem-based learning. In A.M. Norman, H.G. Schmidt & E.S.
Ezzat (eds.) Innovation in medical education: an evaluation of its present
status. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Gijselaers, W.H & Schmidt, H.G. 1990b. Towards a causal model of student
learning within the context of problem-based curriculum. In Z.N. Nor-
man, H.G. Schmidt & E.S. Ezzat (eds.) Innovation in medical education:
An evaluation of its present status. New York: Springer Verlag.

310 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Glauser, B. 1997. Street children: Deconstructing a construct. In A. James &

A. Prout (eds.) Constructing and reconstructing childhood (2nd edition).
London: Falmer Press, 145–164.
Goodson, I.F. 1989. “Chariots of Fire”: etymologies, epistemologies and the
emergence of curriculum. In G. Milburn, I.F. Goodson & R.J. Clark (eds.)
Re-interpreting curriculum research: images and argument. London: The
Althouse Press, 13–25.
Goodson, I. 1998. Storying the self: Life politics and the study of the teacher’s
life and work. In W.F. Pinar (ed.) Curriculum. Toward new identities. New
York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 3–20.
Goodson, I. 1999. Studying curriculum: towards a social constructionist per-
spective. Journal of Curriculum Studies 22 (4), 299–312.
Greening, T. 1998. Scaffolding for success in problem-based learning. Medical
Education Online. http://www.med-ed-online.org/f0000012.htm. Read 3
August 2006.
Greenwood, D.J. & Levin, M. 1998. Introduction to action research. Social re-
search for social change. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Grey, C. 2005. A very short, fairly interesting and reasonably cheap book about
studying organisations. London: Sage.
Groves, M., Régo, P. & O’Rourke, P. 2005. Tutoring in problem-based learning
medical curricula: the influence of tutor background style on effectiveness.
BMC Medical Education 5 (20), Published Online http://www.biomedcen-
tral.com/1472-6920/5/20. Read 2 August 2006.
Hackley, C. 2001. Marketing and social construction; Exploring the rhetorics of
managed consumption. Florence, KY: Routledge.
Hackley, C. 2003. ’We are all customers now....’: Rhetorical strategy and ideo-
logical control in marketing management texts. Journal of Management
Studies 40 (5), 1326–1352.
Hafler, J.P. 1997. Case writing: Case writers’ perspectives. In D. Boud & G.
Feletti (eds.) The challenge of problem based learning. London: Kogan
Page Limited, 151–159.
Hager, P. 1999. Know-how and workplace practical judgement. In K. Forrester,
N. Frost, D. Taylor & K. Ward (eds.) Researching work and learning. A
first international conference. University of Leeds: Conference Proceed-
ings, 645–653.
Hager, P. & Butler, J. 1994. Problem-based learning and paradigms of assess-
ment. In S.E. Chen, R.M. Cowdroy, A.J. Kingsland & M.J. Otswald (eds.)
Reflections on problem-based learning. Sydney: Australian PBL Network.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 311

Hak, T. & Maguire, P. 2000. Group process: The black box of studies on prob-
lem-based learning. Academic Medicine 75 (7), 769–772.
Hakala, J., Kaukonen, E., Nieminen, N. & Ylijoki, O-H. 2003. Yliopisto – tieteen
kehdosta projektimyllyksi? Yliopistollisen tutkimuksen muutos 1990-lu-
vulla. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
Hakkarainen, K. 2003. Kollektiivinen älykkyys. Psykologia 38 (3), 384–401.
Hakkarainen, K., Lonka, K. & Lipponen, L. 2005. Tutkiva oppiminen. Järki, tun-
teet ja kulttuuri oppimisen sytyttäjinä. Porvoo: WSOY.
Hakkarainen, K., Palonen, T. & Paavola, S. 2002. Kolme näkökulmaa asiantun­
tijuuden tutkimiseen. Psykologia 37 (6), 448–464.
Hall, S. 1980. Encoding/decoding. In S. Hall, S. Baron, M. Denning, D. Hobson,
A. Lowe & P. Willis (eds.) Culture, media, language: Working papers in
cultural studies 1972–79, London: Hutchinson, 128–138.
Hammar Chiriac, E. 1999. Basgruppshandledaren – kameleont och meningsska-
pare. In H. Hård af Segerstad & C. Silén (eds.) Handledning av lärprocesser.
CUP-rapport Nr 4. Linköping: Linköpings universitet, 9–31.
Hannafin, M. & Land, S. 1997. The foundations and assumption of technol-
ogy-enhanced student-centered enviroment. Instructional Science 25,
167–202.
Hannula, A. 2000. Tiedostaminen ja muutos Paulo Freiren ajattelussa. Sys-
temaattinen analyysi sorrettujen pedagogiikasta. Kasvatustieteen laitoksen
tutkimuksia 167. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto.
Harland, T. 2003. Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development and problem-
based learning: linking a theoretical concept with practice through action
research. Teaching in Higher Education 8 (2), 263–272.
Heikkinen, H. & Sarja, A. 2006. Mentorointi uusien opettajien tueksi. In A.R.
Nummenmaa & J. Välijärvi (eds.) Opettajan työ ja oppiminen. Koulutuk-
sen tutkimuslaitos. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yliopistopaino, 183–198.
Heikkinen, H.L.T. & Jyrkämä, J. 1999. Mitä on toimintatutkimus? In H.L.T.
Heikkinen, R. Huttunen & P. Moilanen (eds.) Siinä tutkija missä tekijä.
Toimintatutkimuksen perusteita ja näköaloja. Juva: Atena, 25–62.
Helle, L., Tynjälä, P. & Vesterinen, P. 2004. Työelämäprojekti oppimisym-
päristönä. In P. Tynjälä, J. Välimaa & M. Murtonen (eds.) Korkeakoulutus,
oppiminen ja työelämä. Pedagogisia ja yhteiskuntatieteellisiä näkökulmia.
Jyväskylä: PS-kustannus, 255–273.
Hendry, G.D., Ryan, G. & Harris, J. 2003. Group problems in problem-based
learning. Medical Teacher 25 (6), 609–616.

312 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Hesketh, J. 2005. A management studies curriculum for free thought: Why

problem-based learning is inadequate. Paper submitted for SAARDHE
Conference, 2005: The African University in the 21st Century. www.inter-
action.nu.ac.za/SAARDHE2005/full%20papers/HESKETH,%20J.doc Read
6 September 2006.
Hmelo, C.E. & Barrows, H.S. 2006. Goals and strategies of a problem-based
learning facilitator. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learn-
ing 1 (1), 21–39.
Hmelo, C.E. & Evensen, D.H. 2000. Introduction. Problem-based learning:
Gaining insights on learning interactions through multiple methods of in-
quiry. In D.H. Evensen & C.E. Hmelo (eds.) Problem-based learning. A
research perspective on learning interactions. Mahwah, New Jersey: Law-
rence Erlbaum, 1–18.
Hodgkinson, T. & De Abaitua, M. 1996. Matkaopas joutilaisuuteen. Jyväskylä:
Gummerus.
Holliday, A. 2002. Doing and writing qualitative research. London: Sage.
Holstein, J.A. & Gubrium, J.F. 1994. Phenomenoly, ethonomethodology, and
interpretive practice. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (eds.) Handbook of
qualitative research. London: Sage, 262–272.
Hung, D. 2002. Situated cognition and problem-based learning. Implications
for learning and instruction with technology. Journal of Interactive Learn-
ing Research 13 (4), 393–414.
Iedema, R. & Scheeres, H. 2003. From doing work to talking work: renegotiating
knowing, doing and identity. Applied Linguistics 24 (3), 316–337.
Isaacs, W. 2001. Dialogi ja yhdessä ajattelemisen taito. Uraauurtava lähestym-
inen liike-elämän viestintään. Jyväskylä: Kauppakaari.
Jackson, N. & Shaw, M. 2002. Conceptions and visual representations of the
curriculum: Part 1 Visual representations and conceptual imagery in cur-
riculum making. Available at http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources.
asp?process=full_record&section=generic&id=49
Jalava, U. & Vikman, A. 2003. Työ ja oppiminen yrityksissä. Ongelmista ratkai-
suihin. Helsinki: WSOY.
Jarvis, P. 1987. Adult learning in the social context. New York: Groom Helm.
Jenlink, P. & Carr, A.A. 1996. Conversation as a medium for change in educa-
tion. Education Technology, 31–38. http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~lsherry/
courses/jenlink.html Read 14 October 2004.
Jern, S. 1998. Den välfungerande arbetsgruppen. En genomgång av forskning
och praktikererfarenheter. In K. Granström, S. Jern, J. Näslund & D. Stiwne
(eds.) Grupper och gruppforskning. FOG Samlingsvolym 1. Lingköping:
Linköpings universitet, 31–110.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 313

Jern, S. & Hempel, A. 2000. PBL-grupper som grupper: gruppdynamiken en
förbisedd faktor? 4:e Universitetspedagogiska konferensen vid Linköpings
universitet. CUP-rapport nr. 7.
Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R. 1982. Joining together: Group theory and group
skills (2nd edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R. 1987. Learning together and alone. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
John-Steiner, V. 2000. Creative collaboration. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Jokinen, A., Juhila, K. & Suoninen, E. (eds.) 1993. Diskurssianalyysin aakkoset.
Tampere: Vastapaino.
Jones, R.O., Donelly, M.B., Nash, P.P., Young, B. & Schwartz, R.W. 1993. The
ongoing development of a problem-based surgery clerkship: year three.
Medical Teacher 15 (2/3), 207–215.
Juusela, T., Lillia, T. & Rinne, J. 2000. Mentoroinnin monet kasvot. Käytännön
esimerkkejä mentoroinnin soveltamisesta. Jyväskylä: Gummerus.
Järvilehto, T. 1996. Tietoisuus, yhteistyö ja valta. Tiedepolitiikka. 6. http://www.
stakes.fi/palvelut/palvelujen_laatu/storycrafting/_disc4/00000029.htm
Read 15 April 2005.
Järvinen, A., Koivisto, T. & Poikela, E. 2000. Oppiminen työssä ja työyhteisössä.
Helsinki: WSOY.
Järvinen, A. & Poikela, E. 2000. Työssä oppimisen reflektiivisyys ja kontekstuaa­
lisuus. Aikuiskasvatus 4 (20), 316–324.
Järvinen, A. & Poikela, E. 2001. Modelling reflective and contextual learning at
work. Journal of Workplace Learning 13 (7/8), 282–289.
Järvinen, A. & Poikela, E. 2005. The learning processes in the work organiza-
tion: From theory to design. In E. Antonacopoulou, P. Jarvis, V.H. An-
dersen, B. Elkjaer & S. Hoeyrup (eds.) Learning, working and living. Map-
ping the terrain of working life learning. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan,
271–294.
Karila, K. 1997. Lastentarhanopettajan kehittyvä asiantuntijuus. Lapsirakkaasta
opiskelijasta kasvatuksen asiantuntijaksi. Helsinki: Oy Edita Ab.
Karila, K. 2005. Vanhempien ja päivähoidon henkilöstön keskustelut kasvatus-
kumppanuuden areenoina. Kasvatus 36 (4), 285−298.
Karila, K. & Nummenmaa, A.R. 2001. Matkalla moniammatillisuuteen: ku-
vauskohteena päiväkoti. Helsinki: WSOY.
Karila, K. & Nummenmaa, A.R. 2002. Asiantuntijuuden ja oppimisen opetus­
suunnitelmalliset tulkinnat. In A.R. Nummenmaa & J. Virtanen (eds.)
Ongelmasta oivallukseen. Ongelmaperustainen opetussuunnitelma. Tam-
pere: Tampere University Press, 17–27.

314 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Keating, C., Robinson, T. & Clemson. 1996. Reflective inquiry: a method for
organizational learning. The Learning Organization 3 (4), 35–46.
Kelly, A.V. 2004. The curriculum. Theory and practice (5th edition). London:
Sage.
Kemmis, S. 1985. Action research and the politics of reflection. In D. Boud,
R. Keogh & D. Walker (eds.) Reflection: Turning experience into learning.
London: Kogan Page, 139–163.
Kent, M.L. & Taylor, M. 2002. Towards a dialogic theory of public relations.
Public Relations Review 1 (28), 21–37.
Kliebard, H.M. 1995. The Tyler rationale revisited. Journal of Curriculum Stud-
ies 27 (1), 81–88.
Knowlton, D.S. 2003. Preparing students for educated living: Virtues of prob-
lem-based learning across the higher education curriculum. New Direc-
tions for Teaching and Learning 95, 5–12.
Kolb, D. 1984. Experiential learning. Experience as the source of learning and
development. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Kolb, D. 1988. Integrity, advanced professional development and learning. In
Srivastva and Associates. Executive integrity. The search for human values
in organizational life. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 68–88.
Konno, N., Nonaka, I. & Toyama, R. 2000. SECI, ba and leadership: a unified
model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Planning 33 (1), 5–34.
Korpiaho, K. & Päiviö, H. 2004. Liiketaloustieteellisen koulutuksen haasteet. In
P. Eriksson, J. Hearn, M. Jyrkinen, S. Meriläinen, J. Moisander, H. Niemi,
K. Rolin, S. Vanhala, E. Henttonen, M. Hiillos, S. Katila & T. Tallberg (eds.)
Sukupuoli ja organisaatiot liikkeessä. Gender and organizations in flux?
Helsinki: Yliopistopaino, 241–254.
Kärmeniemi, P., Lehtola, K. & Vuoskoski, P. 2006. Arvioinnin kehittäminen
PBL-opetussuunnitelmassa – Kaksi tapausesimerkkiä fysioterapeuttikou-
lutuksesta. Mikkeli: Mikkelin ammattikorkeakoulu, julkaisusarja A: Tut-
kimuksia ja raportteja.
Launis, K. & Engeström, Y. 1999. Asiantuntijuus muuttuvassa työtoiminnassa.
In A. Eteläpelto & P. Tynjälä (eds.) Oppiminen ja asiantuntijuus. Helsinki:
WSOY, 64–81.
Lautamatti, K. & Nummenmaa, A.R. 2004. Visualisointi – ikkuna opiskelijoiden
merkitystenmaailmaan. In M. Taajamo (ed.) Suunnistuksia. Tiede, kasva-
tus, taide. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yliopisto, koulutuksen tutkimuslaitos, 81–
90. Marjatta Saarivaaran juhlakirja.
Law, M. Roles in a problem-based learning environment. http://www.slack-
books.com/excerpts/35635/35635.asp. Read 6 September 2006.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 315

Lave, J. 1988. Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday
life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J. 1993. Situating learning in communities of practice. In L.B. Resnick
(ed.) Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington, DC: Ameri-
can Psychological Association.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. 1991. Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participa-
tion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leontjev, A.N. 1978. Activity, consciousness and personality. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lewin, K. 1951. Field theory in social sciences. New York: Harper & Row.
Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. 1987. But is it rigorous? Thrustworthiness of authenticity
in naturalistic evaluation. In W. Shadish & C. Reichardt (eds.) Evaluation
studies. Review Annual. Vol 12. Newbury Park: Sage.
Lindholm-Ylänne, S. & Nevgi, A. (eds.) 2003. Yliopisto- ja korkeakouluopet-
tajan käsikirja. Helsinki: WSOY.
Loftus, S. & Higgs, J. 2005. Reconceptualising problem-based learning in a Vy-
gotskian framework. Focus on health professional education. A Multi-dis-
ciplinary Journal 7 (1), 1–14.
Loikkanen, A. 2005. Semmosta selviämisen halua. Opettajien kokemuksia val-
mentautumisesta ongelmaperustaiseen oppimiseen. Tampere: Tampereen
ammattikorkeakoulun julkaisuja. Sarja A. Tutkimuksia 3.
Longacre, R.E. 1992. The Discourse Strategy of an Appeals Letter. In W.C. Mann
& S.A. Thompson (eds.) Discourse Description: Diverse Linguistic Analy-
ses of a Fund-raising Text Pragmatics & Beyound Series 16, Amsterdam:
Benjamins, 109–130.
Luke, A. 1995. Text and discourse. An introduction to critical discourse analysis.
In M. Apple (ed.) Review of research in education 21 1995–1996. Washing-
ton: American Education Research Association, 3–48.
Luke, A. 1997. Theory and practice in critical discourse analysis. In L. Saha (ed.)
International encyclopedia of the sociology of education. London: Perga-
mon. http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/courses/ed253a/Luke/SAHA6.html Read
30 August 2006.
Lähteenmäki, M-L. 2000. Problem-based learning – ongelmaperustainen oppi-
minen ammatillisessa koulutuksessa ensimmäisen opiskeluvuoden aikana.
Pirkanmaan ammattikorkeakoulun julkaisusarja A. Tutkimuksia ja selvi­
tyksiä. Nro 1. Tampere.
Lähteenmäki, M-L. 2001. Problem-based learning during the first academic year.
In P. Little & P. Kandlbinder (eds.) The power of problem-based learning.
Experience, empowerment, evidence. Australian PBL network. Australia.
University of Newcastle, 73–84.

316 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Lähteenmäki, M-L. 2005. Reflectivity in supervised practice: conventional and

transformative approaches to physiotherapy. Learning in Health and So-
cial Care 4 (1), 18–28.
Lähteenmäki, M-L. 2006. Reflektiivinen dialogi ongelmaperustaista koulutusta
rakentavassa yhteistyössä. Esimerkkitapauksena fysioterapeuttien koulu-
tus. Aikuiskasvatus 2 (26), 84–95.
Maranhao, T. 1991. Reflection, dialogue and the subject. In F. Steier (ed.) Re-
search and reflexivity. London: Sage, 235–249.
Margetson, D. 1993. Understanding problem-based learning. Educational Phi-
losophy and Theory 25 (1), 40–57.
Margetson, D. 1994. Current educational reform and the significance of prob-
lem-based learning. Studies in Higher Education 19 (1), 5–20.
Margeston, D. 2001. Can all education be problem-based: can it afford not to
be? Problem-based learning forum, Hong Kong Centre for Problem-Based
Learning, 29 September.
Markova, I. 1990. Introduction. In I. Markova & K. Foppa (eds.) The dynamics
of dialogue. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Marsick, V.J. & Watkins, K. 1991. Informal and incidental learning in the work-
place. London: Routledge.
McAlpine, L., Weston, C., Beauchamp, J., Wiseman, C. & Beauchamp, C. 1999.
Building a meatacognitive model of reflection. Higher Education 37, 105–
131.
McSweeney, B. 2002. Hofstede’s model of national cultural differences and their
consequences: A triumph of fate – a failure of analysis. Human Relations
55 (1), 89–118.
Merriam, S.B. 1988. Fallstudien som forskninsmetod. Lund. Studentlitteratur.
Meyer, J. & Land, R. 2003. Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge:
Linking to ways of thinking and practicing within disciplines. In C. Rust
(ed.) Improving student learning: Improving student learning theory and
practice-ten years on. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning De-
velopment.
Mezirow, J. 1981. A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Edu-
cation 32, 3–24.
Mezirow, J. 1991. Transformative dimensions in adult learning. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Miettinen, R. 1990. Koulun muuttamisen mahdollisuudesta: analyysi ope-
tustyön kehityksestä ja ristiriidoista. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 317

Miettinen, R. 1998. Miten kokemuksesta voi oppia? Kokemus ja reflektiivinen
ajattelu John Deweyn toiminnan filosofiassa. Aikuiskasvatus 18 (2), 84–
97.
Miflin, B. 2001. Mediating a leap of faith: Lessons from the experience of pre-
paring teachers for problem based learning. In P. Little & P. Kandlbinder
(eds.) The power of problem-based learning. Experience, empowerment,
evidence. Australian PBL network. Australia. University of Newcastle,
85–98.
Miflin, B. 2004. Small groups and problem-based learning: are we singing from
the same hymn sheet? Medical Teacher 26 (5), 444–450.
Miller, J. & Seller, W. 1985. Curriculum. Perspectives and practice. New York:
Longman.
Milligan, F. 1999. Beyond the rhetoric of problem-based learning: Emancipatory
limits and links with andragogy. Nurse Education Today 19 (7), 548–555.
Moore, G.T., Block, D.D., Style, C.B. & Mitchell, R. 1994. The influence of the
new pathway curriculum on Harvard medical students. Academic Medi-
cine 69 (12), 983–999.
Moust, J., DeGrave, W., Gijselaers, W. 1990. The tutor role: a neglected variable
in the implementation of problem-based learning. In Z.M. Norman, H.G.
Schmidt & E.S. Ezzat (eds.) Innovation in medical education: evaluation of
its present state. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Moust, J.H.C., De Volder, M.L. & Nuy, H.J.P. 1989. Peer teaching and higher
level cognitive learning outcomes in problem-based learning. Springer
Netherlands. Higher Education 18 (6), 737–742.
Mpofu, D.J.S., Stewart, M.D.T., Dunn, E. & Schmidt, H. 1998. Perceptions of
group dynamics in problem-based learning sessions: a time to reflect on
group issues. Medical Teacher 20 (5), 421–427.
National curriculum guidelines on early childhood education and care in Fin-
land 2003/2005.
Neville, A.J. 1999. The problem-based learning tutor: Teacher? Facilitator?
Evaluator? Medical Teacher 4 (21), 393–401.
Niemi, H. 2006. Opettajan ammatti – arvoja ja arvottomuutta. In A.R. Num-
menmaa & J. Välijärvi (eds.) Opettajan työ ja oppiminen. Jyväskylä: Jy-
väskylän yliopistopaino, 73–94.
Nieminen, J., Sauri, P. & Lonka, K. 2006. On the relationship between group
functioning and study success in problem-based learning. Medical Educa-
tion 40 (1), 64–71.
Nonaka, I. 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Or-
ganization Science 5 (1), 14–37.

318 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Nonaka, I. & Konno, N. 1998. The concept of “ba”: Building a foundation for
knowledge creation. California Management Review 40 (3), 40–54.
Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. 1995. The knowledge creating company. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Norman, G.R. & Schmidt, H.G. 1992. The psychological basis of problem-based
learning: a review of the evidence. Academic Medicine 67 (9), 557–565.
Norman, G.R. & Schmidt, H.G. 2000. Effectiveness of problem-based learn-
ing curricula: theory, practice and paper darts. Medical Education 34 (9),
721–728.
Nummenmaa, A.R. 2004. Akateemisen opiskelun työprosessien ohjaus. In A.
Järvinen, A.R. Nummenmaa, E. Syrjäläinen & T. Takala (eds.) Puheenvuo­
ro­ja kasvatusalan yliopistokoulutuksen kehittämisestä. Tampereen yli-
opiston kasvatustieteiden tiedekunnan 30-vuotisjuhlakirja. Tampere: Tam­
pereen yliopisto, Kasvatustieteiden tiedekunta 2004, 111–124.
Nummenmaa, A.R. 2005a. Henkilökohtainen ohjauskeskustelu. In A.R. Num-
menmaa, M. Lairio, V. Korhonen & S. Eerola (eds.) Ohjaus yliopiston op-
pimisympäristöissä. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 89–102.
Nummenmaa A.R. 2005b. Ohjaus moniammatillisena osaamisena. In A.R.
Nummenmaa, M. Lairio, V. Korhonen & S. Eerola (eds.) Ohjaus yliopiston
oppimisympäristöissä. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 221–230.
Nummenmaa, A.R & Karila, K. 2006. Moniammatillinen päiväkoti oppijoiden
yhteisönä. Ongelmaperustainen oppiminen työyhteisössä. Työsuojelura-
haston loppuraportti.
Nummenmaa, A.R., Karila, K., Virtanen, J. & Kaksonen, H. 2005. Negotiating
PBL Curriculum. A reflective process of renewing the culture of teaching
and learning. In E. Poikela & S. Poikela (eds.) PBL in Context. Bridging
Work and Education. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 45–65.
Nummenmaa, A.R., Karila, K., Virtanen, J. & Kaksonen, H. 2006. Opetussuun­
nitelma työyhteisön neuvottelun ja työssä oppimisen kohteena. In A.R.
Nummenmaa & J. Välijärvi (eds.) Opettajan työ ja oppiminen. Jyväskylä:
Jyväskylän yliopistopaino, 123–137.
Nummenmaa, A.R. & Lautamatti, L. 2004. Ohjaajana opinnäytetöiden työpro­
ses­seissa. Ryhmäohjauksen käytäntöä ja teoriaa. Tampere: Tampere Uni-
versity Press.
Nummenmaa, A.R. & Lautamatti, L. 2005.Ryhmässä ja yhdessä. Opiskelun
työprosessien ohjaus. In A.R. Nummenmaa, M. Lairio, V. Korhonen & S.
Eerola (eds.) Ohjaus yliopiston oppimisympäristöissä. Tampere: Tampere
University Press, 103–122.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 319

Nummenmaa, A.R. & Perä-Rouhu, H. 2002. Opetuksen ja oppimisen arvioin­
ti. In A.R. Nummenmaa & J. Virtanen (eds.) Ongelmasta oivallukseen.
Ongelmaperustainen opetussuunnitelma. Tampere: Tampere University
Press, 111–128.
Nummenmaa, A.R. & Virtanen, J. (eds.) 2002. Ongelmasta oivallukseen. Ongel-
maperustainen opetussuunnitelma. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Nuotio, P., Backman, H., Pernu, M-L. & Sisättö, M. 2001. Matkailu-, ravitsemis‑
ja talousalan koulutuksen arviointi. Arviointi 5/2001. Opetushallitus.
Nurmi, J-E. 1991. The development of future orientation in a life span context.
Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of Psychological Research
reports 13.
Ojanen, S. 2002. Ovatko teoria ja käytäntö jo yhdistyneet opetusharjoittelus-
sa? In P. Nuutinen & E. Savolainen (eds.) 50 vuotta opettajankoulutusta
Savonlinnassa. Joensuun yliopisto. Savonlinnan opettajankoulutuslaitos,
122–131. http://sokl.joensuu.fi/juhlakirja/16Sinikk.htm Read 9 November
2004.
Palmer, B. & Major, C.H. 2004. Learning leadership through collaboration: The
intersection of leadership and group dynamics in problem-based learning.
In M. Savin-Baden & K. Wilkie (eds.) Challenging research in problem-
based learning. Glasgow: Society for Research into Higher Education &
Open University Press, 120–132.
Parjanen, M. 2001. Onnistuuko amerikkalainen takaisinsyöttö suomalaisessa
yliopistossa? In R. Honkonen (ed.) Koulutuksen lumo – retoriikka, poli­
tiikka ja arviointi. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 209–227.
Parjanen, M. 2003. Amerikkalaisen opiskelija-arvioinnin soveltaminen suoma-
laiseen yliopistoon. Korkeakoulujen arviointineuvoston julkaisuja 8:2003.
Helsinki: Edita.
Perlmutter, D. 1997. Manufacturing visions of society and history in textbooks.
Journal of Communication 47 (3), 68–81.
Pettigrew, A.M. 1985. Contextual research: A natural way to link theory and
practice. In A. Lawler, S. Morhmam, S. Ledjord & A. Cummins (eds.) Do-
ing research that is useful for theory and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, 222–274.
Pinar, W.F. 2004. What is curriculum theory? Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum As-
sociates.
Pinar, W., Reynolds, W., Slattery, P. & Taubman, P. 1995. Understanding cur-
riculum. An introduction to the study of historical and contemporary cur-
riculum discourses. New York: Peter Lang.

320 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Poikela, E. 1983. Avoin korkeakoulu toiminnallisena ideaalina. Turun yliopisto.

Hallintoviraston julkaisusarja 4/1983. Opintoasiaintoimisto. Turun yli-
opiston offsetpaino.
Poikela, E. 1998. Oppiminen, arviointi ja osaaminen. In A. Räisänen (ed.) Hal-
litaanko ammatti? Pätevyyden määrittelyä arvioinnin perustaksi. Arviointi
2/1998. Opetushallitus, 35–46.
Poikela, E. 1999. Kontekstuaalinen oppiminen. Oppimisen organisoituminen ja
vaikuttava koulutus. Acta Universitatis Tamperensis 675. Tampere: Tam-
pere University Press.
Poikela, E. 2001. Ongelmaperustainen oppiminen yliopistossa. In E. Poikela
& S. Öystilä (eds.) Tutkiminen on oppimista – ja oppiminen tutkimista.
Tampere: Tampereen yliopistopaino, 101–117.
Poikela, E. (ed.) 2002a. Ongelmaperustainen pedagogiikka. Teoriaa ja käytäntöä.
Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Poikela, E. 2002b. Osaamisen arviointi. In R. Honkonen (ed.) Koulutuksen
lumo – retoriikka, politiikka ja arviointi. Tampere: Tampere University
Press, 229–246.
Poikela, E. 2003. Context-based assessment. Refereed proceedings of 3rd inter-
national conference of researching work and learning. Work and learning
in different contexts. Proceedings book IV: Theme 6 Learning processes
and work processes. University of Tampere, Finland. Tampere: Tampere
University Press, 147–155.
Poikela, E. 2004. Developing criteria for knowing and learning at work: To-
wards context-based assessment. Journal of Workplace Learning 16 (5),
267–274.
Poikela, E. 2005a. (ed.) Osaaminen ja kokemus – työ, oppiminen ja kasvatus.
Tampere: Tampereen yliopistopaino.
Poikela, E. 2005b. Työssä oppimisen prosessimalli. In E. Poikela Osaaminen ja
kokemus. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Poikela, E., Järvinen, A., Heikkilä, K. & Tikkamäki, K. 2006. Contextual knowl-
edge and learning processes at work. In G. Castleton, R. Gerber & H. Pillay
(eds.) Improving workplace learning. New York: Nova Science Publishers,
91–105.
Poikela, E. & Nummenmaa, A.R. 2002. Ongelmaperustainen oppiminen tiedon
ja osaamisen tuottamisen strategiana. In E. Poikela (ed.) Ongelmaperustai­
nen pedagogiikka, teoriaa ja käytäntöä. Tampere: Tampere University
Press, 33–52.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 321

Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 1997. Conceptions of learning and knowledge – impacts
of the implementation of problem-based learning. Zeitschrift für Hochs-
chuldidaktik – Austrian Journal for Higher Education 21 (1), 8–22.
Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 1999. Kriittisyys ja ongelmaperustainen oppiminen. In
J. Järvinen-Taubert & P. Valtonen (eds.) Kriittisyyteen kasvu korkeakoulu­
opetuksessa. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 167–185.
Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 2001. Knowledge and knowing in problem-based learn-
ing. Published proceedings of 3rd Asia Pacific conference on PBL. Expe-
rience, empowerment and evidence. Australia: University of Newcastle,
342–353.
Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 2004. Developing evaluation – Context-based assess-
ment and problem-based learning. Conference proceedings book. ESREA:
Between ’old’ and ’new’ worlds of adult education. European research con-
ference, University of Wroclaw, Poland 16-19th September 2004.
Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 2005a. Ongelmaperustainen opetussuunnitelma. Teo­ria,
kehittäminen ja suunnittelu. In E. Poikela & S. Poikela (eds.) Ongelmista
oppimisen iloa. Ongelmaperustaisen pedagogiikan kokeiluja ja kehit-
tämistä. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. (eds.) 2005b. PBL in context. Bridging work and educa-
tion. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 2005c. The strategic points of problem-based learning
– organising curricula and assessment. In E. Poikela & S. Poikela (eds.) PBL
in context. Bridging work and education. Tampere: Tampere University
Press, 7–22.
Poikela, E. & Poikela, S. 2005d. ProBell: A Finnish problem-based learning
(PBL) research network. In T. Barrett, I. MacLabhraim & H. Fallon (eds.)
Handbook of enquiry and problem-based learning. Irish case studies and
international perspectives. Galway: AISHE, All Ireland Society for Higher
Education & National University of Ireland, 217–225.
Poikela, S. 1998. Ongelmaperustainen oppiminen. Uusi tapa oppia ja opettaa?
Ammattikasvatussarja 19. Hämeenlinna: Tampereen yliopiston opetta-
jankoulutuslaitos.
Poikela, S. 2003. Ongelmaperustainen pedagogiikka ja tutorin osaaminen. Tam-
pere: Tampere University Press.
Poikela, S. 2005. Learning at work as a tutor – the processes of producing, creat-
ing and sharing knowledge in a work community. Selected papers book.
Problem-based learning in context – Bridging work and education. Inter-
national conference on PBL. 9-11.6.2005. Lahti, Finland. Tampere: Tam-
pere University Press, 177–194.

322 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Poikela, S. & Lähteenmäki, M.-L. 2002. The PBL tutor’s development of profes-
sional expertise. Experiences from one mentoring project. Paper presen-
tation. 4th Asia Pacific conference on problem based learning. Dec 2002,
University of Songkhla, Hatyai, Thailand.
Poikela, S. & Portimojärvi, T. 2004. Opettajana verkossa. Ongelmaperustainen
pedagogiikka verkko-oppimisympäristöjen toimijoiden haasteena. In V.
Korhonen (ed.) Verkko-oppiminen ja yliopistopedagogiikka. Tampere:
Tampere University Press, 93–112.
Polanyi, M. 1966. The tacit dimension. Garden City (N.Y.): Doubleday and
company, inc.
Portimojärvi, T. 2002. Verkko-opiskelun haasteet ja mahdollisuudet. In E.
Poikela (ed.) Ongelmaperustainen pedagogiikka. Tampere: Tampere Uni-
versity Press, 75–87.
Portimojärvi, T. 2006. Hyppy tuntemattomaan. Opiskelijana ongelmaperus-
taisessa oppimisympäristössä. In A.R. Nummenmaa & J. Välijärvi (eds.)
Opettajan työ ja oppiminen. Jyväskylä: Koulutuksen tutkimuslaitos, 233–
247.
Portimojärvi, T. & Donnelly, R. 2006. Ongelmaperustaista oppimista verkossa.
Muuntuvia näkemyksiä ja monimuotoisia toteutuksia. Teoksessa T. Porti-
mojärvi (ed.) Ongelmaperustaisen oppimisen verkko. Tampere: Tampere
University Press. Tulossa.
Potter, J. & Wetherell, M. 1989. Discourse and social psychology. Beoynd at-
titudes and behaviour. London: Sage.
Preece, J. 2000. Online communities. Designing usability, supporting sociabil-
ity. New York: Wiley Publishers, Oxford.
Puolimatka, T. 2002. Kvalitatiivisen tutkimuksen luotettavuus ja totuusteoriat.
Kasvatus 33 (5), 466–474.
Raivola, R. 2000. Tehoa vai laatua koulutukseen? Juva: WSOY.
Raucent, B., Galand, B., Frenay, M., Laloux, A., Milgrom, E., Vander Borght, C.
& Wouters, P. 2005. Is active learning more efficient than traditional learn-
ing. Paper presented in fifth international workshop on active learning in
engineering education. Delft-Amsterdam, the Netherlands, June 8-9-11
2005 “Active Learning & Educational Technology”.
Reid, W.A. 1978. Thinking about the curriculum. London: Routledge.
Roberts, J. 2005. The ritzerization of knowledge. Critical Perspectives on Inter-
national Business 1 (1), 56–63.
Robson, C. 2002. Real world research: A resource for social scientists and prac-
titioner-researchers. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 323

Ropo, E. 1994. Opetussuunnitelmat ja elinikäinen oppiminen. In A. Kajanto & J.
Tuomisto (eds.) Elinikäinen oppiminen. Jyväskylä: Gummerus, 87–114.
Ropo, E. (ed.) 2001. Opettajuus ja opetussuunnitelma koulun muutoksessa.
Tampere: Tampereen yliopiston opettajankoulutuslaitoksen julkaisuja A
24.
Ross, B. 1991. Towards a framework for problem-based curricula. In D. Boud &
G. Feletti (eds.) The challenge of problem-based learning. London: Kogan
Page, 34–41.
Ross, B. 1999. Kohti ongelmalähtöisten opetussuunnitelmien kehystä. In D.
Boud & G. Feletti (eds.) Ongelmalähtöinen oppiminen. Uusi tapa oppia.
Translator into Finnish. J. Birstedt et al. Helsinki: Terra Cognita, 44–52.
Roth, W-M. 2000. Learning environments research, life-world analysis and soli-
darity in practice. Learning Environments Research 2, 225–247.
Ruokolainen, S. 2005. Tiedonhallinta ongelmaperustaisessa oppimisessa – in-
formaatiolukutaito, tietoteknologia ja kirjasto. In E. Poikela & S. Poikela
(eds.) PBL Ongelmista oppimisen iloa. Ongelmaperustaisen pedagogiikan
kokeiluja ja kehittämistä. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 135–146.
Rust, C., Price, M. & O’Donovan, B. 2003. Improving students’ learning by de-
veloping their understanding of assesment criteria and processes. Asses-
ment & Evaluation. Higher Education 28 (2), 147–164.
Ryle, G. 1949. The concept of mind. London, U.K: Hutchinson.
Sarja, A. 2000. Dialogioppiminen pienryhmässä. Opettajaksi opiskelevien har-
joitteluprosessi terveydenhuollon opettajankoulutuksessa. Jyväskylä Stud-
ies in Education, Psychology and Social Research 160. Jyväskylä: Jyväsky-
län yliopisto.
Sarja, A. 2003. Dialogioppiminen opetuksen ohjaustilanteissa. In R. Silkelä (ed.)
Tutkimuksia opetusharjoittelun ohjauksesta. Suomen harjoittelukoulujen
vuosiraportti N:o 1. Joensuu: Joensuun yliopistopaino, 73–78.
Savery, J. & Duffy, T. 1996. Problem based learning: An instructional model
and its constructivist framework. In B. Wilson (ed.) Constructivist learn-
ing environments: Case studies in instructional design. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Educational Technology Publications, 134–148.
Savin-Baden, M. 2000. Problem based learning in higher education: Untold sto-
ries. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education.
Savin-Baden, M. 2003. Facilitating problem-based learning. Illuminting per-
spectives. Glasgow: SRHE & Open University Press.
Savin-Baden, M. 2004. Understanding the impact of assesment on students in
problem-based learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching Interna-
tional 41 (2), 223–233.

324 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Savin-Baden, M. 2006. Developing independent inquires through problem-

based learning. Promising expectations or fitting despair. A key note in St
Martin’s College teaching fest 26 June 2006. http://www.cdlt.ucsm.ac.uk/
Conference/festdocs/Maggi%20Savin-Baden.pdf. Read 5 September 2006.
Savin-Baden, M. & Howell Major, C. 2004. Foundations of problem-based
learning. London: Open University Press.
Savin-Baden, M. & Wilkie, K. (eds.) 2004. Challenging research in problem-
based learning. Society for research into higher education. London: Open
University Press.
Schaffer, D.W. 2004. Pedagogical praxis: The professions as models for post-in-
dustrial education. Teachers College Record 106 (7), 1401–1421.
Schank, R.C. & Abelson, R. 1977. Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding. Hills-
dale, NJ: Earlbaum Associates.
Schmidt, H.G. 1983. Problem-based learning: Rationale and description. Medi-
cal Education 17 (1), 11–16.
Schmidt, H.G. & Moust, H.C. 1995. What makes a tutor effective? A structur-
al-equations modelling approach to learning in problem-based curricula.
Academic Medicine 70 (8), 708–714.
Schmidt, H.G. & Moust, H.C. 2000a. Factors affecting small-group tutori-
al learning: A review of research. In D.H. Evensen & C.E. Hmelo (eds.)
Problem-based learning: a research perspective on learning interactions.
Mahwah, NJ:.Lawrence Erlbaum, 19–52.
Schmidt, H.G. & Moust, J.H.C. 2000b. Processes that shape small group tuto-
rial learning: A review of research. In D.H. Evensen & C.E. Hmelo (eds.)
Problem-based learning: A research perspective on learning interactions.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum.
Schmidt, H.G., Norman, G.R. & Boshuizen H.P.A. 1990. A cognitive perspec-
tive on medical expertise: theory and implications. Academic Medicine 65
(10), 611–621.
Schrage, M. 1990. Shared minds. The new technologies of collaboration. New
York: Random House.
Schutz, A. & Luckman, T. 1973. The structures of the life-world. Evanston, IL:
Northwestern University Press.
Schön, D.A. 1983. The reflective practioner. How professionals think in action.
New York: Basic Books.
Schön, D.A. 1986. Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Seikkula, J. & Arnkil, T.E. 2005. Dialoginen verkostotyö. Helsinki: Tammi.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 325

Serres, M. 1983. Hermes: Literature, science, philosophy. Baltimore: John Hop-
kins University.
Short, J., Williams, E. & Christie, B. 1976. The social psychology of telecommu-
nications. London: Wiley.
Silén, C. 1996. Ledsaga lärande – om handledarfunctionen i PBI. Filosofiska
fakulteten SiF – av handling 3/96. Lisentiat avhandling. Lingköping:
Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för pedagogik och psykologi.
Silén, C. 2000. Mellan kaos och kosmos – om eget ansvar och självständighet
i lärände. Linköping Studies in Education and Psychology No.73. Ling-
köping: Linköpings Universitet, Department of Behavioural Sciences.
Silén, C. 2001. Lärande i basgrupp. En fältstudie angående “navet i hjulet“ i en
utbildning med Problembaserad inlärning, PBI. In C. Silén & H. Hård af
Segerstad (eds.) Texter om PBL – teori, praktik, reflektioner. Linköping:
Unitryck, 50–66.
Silén, C. 2003. Vikten av utmaning och exemplaritet i PBL. In A. Fyrenius &
C. Silén (eds.) Utgångspunkter för basgruppsarbete i PBL. Linköping:
Linköpings Universitet, 27–46.
Silén, C. 2004. Does problem-based learning make students “go meta”? In M.
Savin-Baden & K. Wilkie (eds.) Challenging research in problem-based
learning. Society for research into higher education. London: Open Uni-
versity Press, 144–155.
Silén, C. 2006. The tutor’s approach in base groups (PBL). Higher Education 51
(3), 373–385.
Silen, C., Domeij, D., Göransson, A., Kjellgren, K., Tornvall, M.L. & Qvicker-
Andersson, M. 1993. Kvalitativ integrerad examination för Högskolans
vårdarutbildning. Lingköping: Hälsouniversitet.
Silkelä, R. 2003. Aito kohtaaminen opetusharjoittelun ohjauksessa. In R. Silkelä
(ed.) Tutkimuksia opetusharjoittelun ohjauksesta. Suomen harjoittelukou-
lujen vuosiraportti N:o 1. Joensuu: Joensuun yliopistopaino, 79–84.
Sipos-Zackrisson, K. 1999. Problembaserad lärande (PBL) I tre professionsut-
bildningar vid Linköpings Universitet. En studie om möten med nya ar-
betssätt. Lingköping: Linköpings Universitet, Department of Behavioural
Sciences.
Squires, G. 1997. Evaluating teaching and improving learning. Lifelong Learn-
ing in Europe 2, 86–91.
Ståhle, P. & Grönroos, M. 1999. Knowledge Management – tietopääoma yri­
tyksen kilpailutekijänä. Ekonomia-sarja. Helsinki: WSOY.

326 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Suoninen, E. 1993. Kielen käytön vaihtelevuuden analysoiminen. In A. Jokinen,

K. Juhila & E. Suoninen (eds.) Diskurssianalyysin aakkoset. Tampere: Vas-
tapaino, 48–74.
Taylor, K., Marienau, C. & Fiddler, M. 2000. Developing adult learners. Strate-
gies for teachers and learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Tennant, M. 1997. Psychology & adult learning. (2nd edition) London and New
York: Routledge.
Thompson, S.A. & Mann, W.C. (eds.) 1992. Discourse description: Diverse lin-
guistic analyses of a fund-raising text. Pragmatics & Beyond Series 16, Am-
sterdam: Benjamins, 109–130.
Tipping, J., Freeman, R.F. & Rachlis, A.R. 1995. Using faculty and student per-
ceptions of group dynamics to develop recommendations for PBL training.
Academic Medicine 70 (11), 1050–1052.
Tolska, T. 2002. Kertova mieli. Jerome Brunerin narratiivikäsitys. Academic
dissertation. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto.
Tompkins, C. 2001. Nursing education for the twenty-first century. In E. Ride-
out (ed.) Transforming nursing education though problem-based learning.
Boston: Jones & Barlett, 1–20.
Toseland, R.W., Jones, L.V. & Gellis, Z.D. 2004. Group dynamics. In C.D. Gar-
win, M.L. Gutierrez & M.J. Galinsky (eds.) Handbook of social work with
groups. New York: The Guilford Press, 13–31.
Tuomi, J. & Sarajärvi, A. 2002. Laadullinen tutkimus ja sisällönanalyysi. Hel-
sinki: Tammi.
Turner, V. 1969. The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. London:
Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Tyler, R.W. 1949. Basic principles of learning and instruction. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
Tynjälä, P. 1999. Oppiminen tiedon rakentumisena. Konstruktivistisen oppi-
miskäsityksen perusteita. Tampere: Tammer-Paino Oy.
Tynjälä, P. 2006. Opettajan asiantuntijuus ja työkulttuurit. In A.R. Nummen-
maa & J. Välijärvi (eds.) Opettajan työ ja oppiminen. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän
yliopistopaino, 99–122.
Tynjälä, P. & Collin, K. 2000. Koulutuksen ja työelämän yhteistyö – pedagogisia
näkökulmia. Aikuiskasvatus 20 (4), 293–305.
Uden, L. 2005. Technology and problem-beased learning. Hershey, PA, USA:
Information Science Publishing.
Usher, R. 1996. A critique of the neglected epistemological assumptions of edu-
cational research. In D. Scott & R. Usher (eds.) Understanding educational
research. London: Routledge.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 327

Uusitalo-Arola, L. 2004. Kun työ haastaa koko elämän. Psykologia 39 (4), 272–
283.
Wainfan, L. & Davis, P.K. 2004. Challenges in virtual collaboration. Videocon-
ferencing, audiocon-ferencing and computer-mediated communication.
Santa Monica, CA, USA: Rand Corporation.
Watson, T. 2004. Motivation: That’s Maslow, isn’t it? In C. Grey & E. Antonaco-
poulou (eds.) Essential readings in management learning. London: Sage,
239–254.
Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vernon, D.T. A. & Blake, R.L. 1993. Does problem-based learning work? A
meta-analysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine 68, 550–563.
Vilkka, H. 2005. Tutki ja kehitä. Keuruu: Tammi.
Williamson, D. 2002. Forward from a critique of Hofstede’s model of national
culture. Human Relations 55 (11), 1373–1395.
Willig, C. 2001. Introducing qualitative research in psychology: Adventures in
theory and method. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Virkkunen, T., Toikka, K. & Engeström, Y. 1997. Oppiminen ja yhteistoimin-
nan uudet rakenteet. Euroopan komission Vihreän kirjan Partnership for
a new organization of work virittämiä ajatuksia. In T. Alasoini & M. Kyl-
lönen (eds.) Aallon harjalla. Kansallinen työelämän kehittämisohjelma.
Raportteja 4. Helsinki: Työministeriö.
Virtanen, J. 2001. Ongelmaperustaisen opetussuunnitelman rakentaminen. In
E. Poikela & S. Öystilä (eds.) Tutkiminen on oppimista – ja oppiminen
tutkimista. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 118–131.
Visschers-Pleijers, A.J.S., Dolmans, D.H.J.M., de Grave, W.S., Wolfhagen,
I.H.A.P., Jacobs, J.A. & van der Vleuten, C.P.M. 2006. Student perceptions
about the characteristics of an effective discussion during the reporting
phase in problem-based learning. Medical Education 40, 924–931.
Visschers-Pleijers, A.J.S.F., Dolmans, D.H.J.M., Wolfhagen, I.H.A.P. & van der
Vleuten, C.P.M. 2004. Exploration of a method to analyze group interac-
tions in problem-based learning. Medical Teacher 26 (5), 471–478.
Wolf, T.M., Randall, H.M., von Almen, K. & Tynes, L.L. 1991. Perceived mis-
treatment and attitude change by graduating medical students: a retrospec-
tive study. Medical Education 25 (5), 182–190.
Von Schilling, K. 2001. The significance of the tutorial process. In C. Silén &
H. Hård af Segerstad (eds.) Texter om PBL – teori, praktik, reflektioner.
Linköping: Unitryck, 40–49.

328 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

REFERENCES

Woods, D.R. 1994. Problem-based learning. How to gain the most from PBL.
McMaster University. Kanada: Hamilton.
Värri, V-M. & Ropo, E. 2004. Opettajan identiteetti opettajankoulutuksen haas-
teena. In Puheenvuoroja kasvatusalan yliopistokoulutuksen kehittä­misestä.
Tampereen yliopiston kasvatustieteiden tiedekunnan 30-vuotisjuhlakirja,
39–60.
Yamada, S. & Maskarinec, G. 2003. ‘Authentic problem-based learning’, In-
strumental rationality and narrative. Asia Pacific Family Medicine 2 (4),
226–228.
Yanar, A. 2001. ”Who regulates student-regulated learning? Architectural de-
sign studio as learning environment.” Lifelong Learning in Europe 5 (4),
239–246.
Yin, R.K. 1984. Case study research. Applied social research methods series.
New York: Sage Publication.
Ylijoki, H. 1998. Akateemiset heimokulttuurit ja noviisien sosialisaatio. Tam-
pere: Vastapaino.
Zimitat, C., Hamilton, S., DeJersey, J., Reilly, P. & Ward, L. 1994. Problem-
based learning in metabolic biochemistry. http://florey.biosci.uq.edu.au/
Biochem Ed/PBLmetab.htm. Read 16 June 2006.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 329

330 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)
 The authors

PROBELL AND ME

Timo Portimojärvi
My ProBell is not just a group,
it is an idea in my head or it is a pile of papers in my bag.
Sometimes it doesn’t let me sleep in the evening,
asking me to come and play.
My ProBell is always present,
even if it is totally silent and feels forgotten.
Suddenly it creeps onto my table
and tells me to write at least one paragraph.
My ProBell is extraordinary,
I don’t even remember how I met it.
And then it grabbed my hand and my head
and led me into the land of research.

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 331

 The Authors

Anna Raija Nummenmaa

My ProBell has been a continuing adventure
in a colourful autumn forest.
It has been an opportunity to learn
about the manifold characteristics of changing nature.
It has given me a lot of energy.
When I have been tired, a short walk in this wonderland
with the group has given me the power I need to continue.
Right at the beginning, it was impossible to understand
where we actually were and where we were going.
There were many possible routes and there still are.
Now I think that everybody has found their own way.
As I did mine.

Merja Alanko-Turunen
I joined the ProBell research group in winter 2001. During the stimulat-
ing and rewarding time I have spent in this community of practice. I
have learned not only how to carry out a PhD study, but how to organise
national and international conferences, write and present articles and pa-
pers, consult educational institutions, work as a fellow researcher when
assisting others in their research projects and, last but not least, how to
spot a stone bramble in a forest. Furthermore, PBL as an educational ap-
proach has served as a remarkable threshold concept for me – there is no
going back. My current interests include critical pedagogy and critical
business studies.

Jyri Lindén
During the years of being a member of the ProBell group, my interests
have been twofold. Firstly, I have been curious about the discursive posi-
tion of teachers, their roles with regard to the power relations in different
educational institutions. Secondly, I have been trying to examine what
curriculum as a theoretical concept means, and, in particular, what kinds
of narratives support the PBL curriculum as a construction.
When I joined the group, we had just started a curriculum develop-
ment project in the department of teacher education where I worked.

332 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBELL AND ME

PBL was one of the key concepts in this process, only we did not know
what the concept would mean to us in the future. As our own project
proceeded, I was able to follow other institutions’ curriculum develop-
ment work both as a mentor and trainer. From the beginning, the ProBell
group accepted these training-mentoring projects as part of its approach.
Research and development were closely intertwined and we were able to
share practical and theoretical findings arising from our work. Theory-
based development work at different levels of educational institution has
given contextual understanding to our research. One important dis-
covery is that curriculum development and implementation cannot be
copied from one institution to another; they are unique, culture-based
reconstruction processes.

Satu Öystilä
I have been working with PBL since 1995, when in the faculty of Medi-
cine at the University of Tampere they trained their teachers to become
PBL tutors. I joined the ProBell group in winter 2001. I have used the PBL
strategy in many university educational projects. I have also trained PBL
tutors as group leaders, especially in higher education. My special inter-
est has been and still is group dynamics and the significance of group
processes and peer groups in promoting the learning process.

Marja-Leena Lähteenmäki
I encountered PBL for the first time when I visited London as an ex-
change teacher in 1995. My interest deepened when I got the chance to
visit Linköping University that very same year. The students’ active and
responsible way of studying impressed me. The PBL-education that my
work place organised initiated a curriculum change in my professional
field – physiotherapy education. At Pirkanmaa Polytechnic we started
the first PBL group in autumn 1996 and by 2007 eight groups of students
had graduated.
I have been a member of ProBell since 2001, and have enjoyed meeting
colleagues from different polytechnics and universities. My own research
interests are focused on planning problem-based learning environments,

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 333

 The Authors

implementing problem-based learning, and comparing the learning out-

comes of problem-based learning and subject-based learning.

Helvi Kaksonen
I became acquainted with PBL in 1999, when Esa Poikela PhD began to
teach the basics of PBL to our work community. In autumn 2000 the
Unit of Early Childhood Education at the University of Tampere began to
implement PBL as an educational strategy in the programme for kinder-
garten teachers. This meant that the curriculum had to be transformed
in accordance with the principles of PBL. I have worked within different
study modules as the students’ tutor, and have also used PBL in providing
in-service education to the mentors of day care centres.
I joined the ProBell group in 2003. Being a member of this research
group has facilitated interaction between teaching, research and in-serv-
ice education. As a member of the ProBell group, I have had the opportu-
nity to pursue my doctoral studies at the Academy of Finland as part of
the ‘Life as Learning’ project. Participating in PBL conferences organised
by the ProBell group has deepened my knowledge of PBL pedagogy. The
exchange and sharing of different thoughts and ideas within the ProBell
group has enhanced not only my personal research, but also the teaching
and in-service education in which I am involved.

Kirsti Karila
I became familiar with PBL in 1999 thanks to Esa and Sari Poikela’s PBL-
related course. Soon afterwards my work place, the Unit of Early Child-
hood Education at University of Tampere, started to implement PBL as a
strategy for educating kindergarten teachers. I joined the ProBell group
in 2001 and, since then, the group has played a significant part in my
development both as a teacher and as a researcher. I have learnt a great
deal, not only about teaching and conducting research, but also about
collaboration. My own research interest is focused on the processes of
learning at work and the development of expertise especially in the con-
text of PBL.

334 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)

PROBELL AND ME

Jorma Virtanen
Some years ago we started to construct a new kind of curriculum in the
Unit of Early Childhood Education at the University of Tampere. The
process comprised many phases of development, and the final implemen-
tation of problem-based learning by the curriculum workgroup was very
exciting. – What do I think nowadays about those years and those peda-
gogical innovations? – It’s just PBL, and I like it.

Terry Barrett
I am a lecturer in education development at the Centre for Teaching and
Learning, School of Education and Lifelong Learning, University Col-
lege Dublin. I am working with lecturers from a variety of disciplines on
problem-based learning initiatives. I am joint co-ordinator of the HEA
funded inter-university project on Enquiry and Problem-based Learn-
ing lead by University College Dublin. My research interests are in PBL
students’ talk in PBL tutorials, PBL staff development and the potential
of PBL to develop students’ critical and creative thinking. I have given
keynote papers at PBL conferences in Ireland, England and Finland. I
met members of Probell in 2001 and really appreciate the opportunities
Probell has afforded in encouraging and developing one another as PBL
practitioners and researchers.

Esa & Sari Poikela

Our journey into the world of PBL began with training and research into
the work of PBL tutors in medical and physiotherapy education in Tam-
pere during the 1990s. This exploration continued as we examined the
roots of PBL in Sweden in 1995 and in Australia from 1996 to 1997. At
the beginning we were surprised how little Finnish researchers in the
field of education knew about the PBL that had been successfully imple-
mented for over 20 years in many parts of the world. Hopefully, educa-
tors now know more about PBL thanks to ProBell’s books, dissertations,
articles, conferences and training programmes.
For us, founding ProBell meant creating a community in which ideas
and practices regarding interesting or special areas of pedagogical re-
search into PBL could be shared. We have combined research, develop-

UNDERSTANDING PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 335

 The Authors

ment, teaching and training in many educational institutions during re-

cent years. Our articles in this book eloquently express our joint research
interests so far. Now we have settled at the University of Lapland in the
Arctic Circle, and it is time to concentrate more deeply on issues of PBL.
We need to look more closely, for example, at assessment and evaluation,
information literacy and knowledge acquisition, curriculum develop-
ment, leading learning and workplace learning.

336 POIKELA, Esa & NUMMENMAA, Anna Raija (eds.)