Figure 1 The Foresight Diamond
(Source: (CQU 1999))
Scot Aldred, Teaching & Learning Advisor & Problem-Based Learning Coordinator,
Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Queensland, 4702. s.aldred@cqu.edu.au
The last decade of the twentieth century and the first three years of the next
have provided enormous challenges for educators around the world. These challenges
have, and are still, impacting on higher education in ways that are shaking
the sector to its very foundations. Reduced government funding, older student
profile, pressure from industry, as well as the explosion in educational technology
have all contributed to the recent volatility in Australian higher education.
This paper presents a case study that details Central Queensland University’s
approach to addressing some of these challenges by supporting the implementation
of problem-based learning in its teaching and learning practices.
Universities are multi-dimensional organisations with a number of starkly different sub-cultures. They have been described as adhocracies or organised anarchies that require leadership skills akin to that of herding cats (Butler 1997; Katz 2002). This poses significant challenges to those who would propose substantial change to the existing ways of doing business.
This paper examines the key issues of technology, flexible/online learning, emerging educational paradigm and change management and looks at how these will interact with the implementation of problem-based learning (PBL) at Central Queensland University (CQU).
The higher education sector around the world is arguably facing one of its greatest challenges in modern times. The impact of information and educational technology is posing some profound challenges for educators and their institutions. Trow (1997) discusses the observable effects on established organisations when information technology becomes part of the way of doing business. He suggests that:
|
…IT will cut its own channels, leading to the creation of institutions that differ from those of today; institutions where the weight of history does not condition and constrain IT’s use. (Trow 1997) |
Trow suggests organisations that begin to make substantial use of information technology will not be able to control its use and will undergo fundamental change in ways that are different from the past. If we were to apply this type of analysis to Central Queensland University (CQU), we can see that the organisation is likely to undergo major fundamental and perhaps unpredictable changes in the near future, just as a result of the technology it adopts and uses. McConachie (2001), in a study (completed in 2001) of the effects of introducing an enterprise-wide IT system on the various sub-cultures within CQU, noted that while the effects on the sub-cultures varied, the organisation as a whole, experienced substantial change.
Educational technology has also become more widespread with the University’s
foray into online education. While the initial courseware developed was predominantly
a repackaging of existing classroom and distance education print resources,
some educators are now beginning to see the online environment as a different
learning space. Alexander (1995) observed this same repackaging in online courses
back in 1995. Spender and Stewart (2002), in a report commissioned by the Commonwealth
Bank, discussed the changes being brought about by the emergence of an online
or e-learning environment. They discuss the changing roles for teachers—becoming
facilitators of learning rather than deliverers of content. Spender and Stewart
also suggest that students are using resources/information to construct new
knowledge rather than just regurgitating old information. McVay Lynch (2002)
suggests a similar role for teachers as facilitators of learning when moving
to an online learning environment.
The factors outlined above suggest that CQU is going to experience a prolonged
period of substantial change.
Central Queensland University is a multi-campus university with Queensland regional campuses located at Bundaberg, Gladstone, Rockhampton, Emerald and Mackay—the Rockhampton campus contains the highest concentration of on-campus students and staff. It also has a small campus located on the Queensland Sunshine Coast hinterland (Pomona) where the Faculty of Education and Creative Arts offers an undergraduate education program.
CQU also caters for large numbers of international students on campuses located in Melbourne, Sydney, the Gold Coast and Brisbane. These campuses are run as a joint venture with a commercial partner, Campus Management Services (CMS). CQU provides the courseware, but the teaching staff and the venues are managed by CMS.
CQU also has offshore campuses in Fiji, Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Japan and soon in the Peoples Republic of China. These are run jointly with a number of different industry partners.
In 1974 CQU offered its first course by distance education and now offers most of its 1310 courses and 227 programs in this mode (Christensen 2002).
In 1997 CQU offered its first online course and now offers in excess of 200 courses via the Internet. Recognising the trend towards the flexible delivery of educational products, in 1997 CQU conducted a review of distance education and flexible learning. The recommendations from this review were contained in a document known as the Green Paper (CQU 1999).
Later, in 1999 the University conducted a review of its online information technology infrastructure and released a report known as the Yellow Paper (CQU 1999).
Distance education students make up the highest proportion of CQU's Government funded (DEST) students, so it was inevitable that CQU would see its future in the production and use of technology supported flexible delivery of learning materials. The organisation is highly dependent on external students for its government income and is expanding rapidly in the international student market. The perceived scalability of flexible delivery materials (NBEET 1994; Hall 1996; Katz 2002) meant that CQU would look for opportunities to exploit flexible delivery methodologies.
Globalisation and competition, together with a new type of student who places a higher value on learning than credentialism, is causing a paradigm shift in higher education (Hall 1996; NBEET 1996). In Australia, students are now paying significantly more for their education than was the case 20 years ago, and these costs continue to rise with a more restrictive framework for funding student support and changes to the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS). When we combine this escalation of cost with the increased numbers of distance and mature aged students, we have a growing percentage of students who believe that they deserve higher levels of customer service and a greater flexibility in their choice of learning options. No longer will the majority of students except service that is second rate from academics or general staff (Johnson 1992). Flexible delivery options mean that it is easy to enrol in another university where the service is superior. Every student that takes this option most likely warns at least two or three other potential students, and the university with poor service, loses potential income and suffers a decline in its reputation. This reputation is also linked to industry perceptions.
Networking with industry is not usually undertaken in a co-ordinated and systematic manner by Australian universities. Often the only time industry bodies have an opportunity to influence the curriculum in Australian universities is when the university is undergoing industry body accreditation. Many university courses, unfortunately, have no such accreditation requirement and can continue for years without reference to such industry bodies.
Recently, the Bachelors of Social Work and Engineering programs offered by CQU have gained accreditation with their respective association and institute. This in itself may not appear significant, except that both these degree programs are predominantly problem-based and this aspect attracted favourable comment from both bodies at the completion of the certification process.
Attempts to promote the use of new learning paradigms that involve fundamental change are often meet with resistance. Often the institution poses substantial barriers to such change.
A mind once stretched by a new idea never regains its original dimensions. Anonymous |
The institutional barriers to the implementation and acceptance of PBL relate
to a number of areas; not all of which are peculiar to universities. Overall,
the barriers can be grouped into two main areas: cultural and training/staff
development (teaching and learning).
Figure 2 provides a graphical representation of what the author believes to be the fundamental barriers CQU faces in transitioning from a traditional didactic educational model of higher education to one that values a more learner-centred model. Figure 2 also depicts some of the changes and strategies that could be used to overcome these institutional barriers in ways that should be acceptable to the majority of the institution's management and staff.
Higher education is possibly one of the last bastions of conservatism. The main forums and methodologies of education have changed little the last 200 years (Bates 1994). The industrial revolution precipitated probably the last major change to teaching and learning to fulfil a rapidly increasing requirement for an expanded and more educated workforce. The industrial revolution model of education still predominates today and influences every area of our universities management and staff culture. Society's movement from the industrial to the information age is every bit as significant for educators as the previous paradigm shift from agrarian to industrial. Unfortunately, many university staff have yet to realise that this shift has occurred.
Market forces now require graduates to have highly developed generic skills and attributes and value these at least as highly as content knowledge (Bates 1994; Lawnham 2002). Australian universities now acknowledge that there is a need for these graduate attributes, but rarely understand how they can be achieved.
An acknowledgement of the need for a shift from a didactic to a student-centred approach is critical to the long-term success of educational institutions (Spender 2002). Achieving this acknowledgement will need to come from the top down and will require skill and leadership. Senior management need to believe that the University's future depends on making this shift, and making it quickly.
All too often political models of leadership bring short-term personal success in higher education. This results in others adopting a political approach as soon as they reach the early levels of management. Badaracco and Elsworth (1989) in Paul (1990) suggest that a 'political' leader is one that is motivated primarily by self-interest and a search for power, whereas a 'directive' leader has a style that is hands-on and clearly focussed on where they believe the organisation should be going. The last leadership style, 'value-driven', is one where people find meaning and satisfaction through their work (Paul 1990). The latter leadership style energises others and asks that staff place the interests of the organisation above their own self-interest. A value-driven leader's integrity, Paul argues, is rarely compromised. He then goes on to suggest that the ideal leadership model for higher education would be a mixture of value-driven and directive.
So university managers should firstly believe that a paradigm shift in education is required and then possess a leadership style that enables them to enthuse the rest of the staff so that all can understand the reasons and share the same vision. Only when the decision-makers have these attributes, will the majority of staff come onboard and the organisation move forward.
Bates (1994) argues that radical rather than incremental change is required when moving to a online learning model. Radical change requires courage, vision and strong policy to provide the framework for the changes that must occur. Within the change management literature, change is classified as transactional (small incremental changes) or transformational (large or radical changes) (Mirvis 1988). In the literature, transformational change is often referred to as second order change while transactional is commonly called first order. While transactional change can be described as planned and orderly, transformational change requires a fundamental shift in organisational behaviour and radical change to the associated processes. Table 2 provides an overview of the characteristics associated with first and second order change.
| First-order change | Second-order change |
| Adjustments within the existing structure | New way of seeing things |
| Doing more or less of something | Shifting gears |
| Reversible | Irreversible |
| Restoration of balance | Often but not always driven by IT |
| Non-transformational | Often begins through the informal system |
| New learning is not required | Requires new learning - Transformation to something quite different |
| Old story can still be told | New story is told |
Table 2 Characteristics of first and second-order change
(Source: Adapted from Levy (1986) in McConachie (2001))
Dunphy and Stace (1988) suggest that first order or incremental change works
best where there is relative stability in the organisation’s industry,
while second order change is more appropriate where there are high levels of
volatility.
Organisational change carries with it inherent risks which are proportional
to the degree and timeframe of the changes. Figure 3 provides a representation
of orders of change and their accompanying level of risk.
Bates (1994) claims that radical change is required to move to an acceptable online learning model. It therefore, carries a great deal of risk. It could be argued that since 1994 there has been a large amount of first order change and that this in some way might mitigate against the risks, however, Spender and Stewart’s 2002 report would seem to suggest that radical change is still required.
One of the most substantial barriers to innovation and success in most organisations is staffs' fear of change (McNamara 1999). The adoption of a student-centred model of education brings with it substantial levels of change.
Over that past five years CQU has undergone a substantial amount of change with the re-organisation of its faculties and divisions, as well as the introduction of the four-term year. Many staff now show signs of change weariness (McConachie 2001) and the importance of online learning and rapid advances in learning technologies means that the rate of change is unlikely to decrease. Effective leadership can assist staff to see opportunities in change rather than perceive it as a threat (Paul 1990).
The effective implementation of PBL imposes significant and radical change . The organisation's ability to adapt to that change and grow depends on the following factors:
(McNamara 1999)
Imershein (1976) suggested that organisational change will result when stakeholders
have concrete models, provided by sufficient exemplars, that show new and more
effective ways of operating. Imershein’s suggestions are quite similar
to Kuhn’s (1970) explanations of how practices develop in scientific communities.
Imershein’s model provides a key to change management in higher education
in that the systematic development of online course exemplars that are based
on a learner-centred model, provide viable working alternatives for academic
staff to review and examine; and perhaps move towards with a reasonable level
of confidence and security.
The changing educational paradigm means that the roles of academic staff will change, with a greater emphasis on designing and preparing high quality learning resources, as well as providing high quality and timely support and guidance for students. The days of regular lecturing to large classes with a couple of haphazardly organised tutorial classes every week will soon be over, and the model will become a technological artefact (Bates 1994).
The implications for academic employment patterns are enormous. There is no longer a requirement to locate academic staff at the institution. They need not move to be employed. There is no longer a need to link the development of learning materials to teaching—the Open University (OU) in the United Kingdom has been successfully contracting academic staff to write learning packages, that they may never teach, for over ten years.
The changing requirements for universities and a more competitive educational market place means that universities are more likely to employ sessional rather than full-time staff. The advances in ICTs also means that these staff can be contracted and remain in their current location. Sessional employment is likely to lead academic staff to seek contracts with a number of organisations rather than just one, and issues of intellectual property will force a number of changes in university policy.
The above suggestions may horrify some staff and unions, but to some extent this is already occurring. As stated earlier, the OU has been using an adaptation of the above model for some years. As funding becomes tighter and the need for technology greater, university management will look for ways to cut costs and maximise income, and there are clear indications that different employment structures will be implemented.
This has strong implications for PBL as effective training for coaches is essential (Barrows 1980; Barrows 1986; Woods 1995) and employment patterns that favour the employment of sessional staff could discourage these staff from undertaking the required training in the methodology.
CQU (as indeed with the vast majority of Australian universities) does not require their teaching staff to have or obtain teaching qualifications. In Australia, industry workplace trainers, K—12 teachers and TAFE instructors all require teaching qualifications. This could suggest the level of importance some Australian universities place on teaching and learning. Asking university teaching academics to understand and support the importance of moving to a more open and student-centred model of learning, without an understanding of learning theory, is a difficult thing to achieve.
This requirement is, however, acknowledged in goal four of CQU's new Strategic Plan 2002—2004:
CQU will continue to develop its courses and teaching strategies to encourage and support flexible learning. We will respect the diversity of our student population (e.g., age, experience, location) by applying communication and information technologies and pedagogical approaches consistent with students' needs and staff capabilities (Hancock 2002). |
The third objective listed to achieve this goal is as follows:
To provide staff, through a range of professional development strategies, with opportunities to acquire new skills and share knowledge about flexible approaches to teaching and learning (Hancock 2002). |
Poor attendance at teaching and learning staff development activities can be
one of the biggest barriers to implementing effective problem-based learning
in the Institution's courses and programs. If you don't know what you don't
know, it is difficult to appreciate the need for teaching and learning staff
development activities. Many of the teaching and learning staff development
activities the University has organised in the past have been poorly attended.
It is difficult to encourage academic staff to undertake teaching and learning
staff development activities when there are few extrinsic rewards for excellence
in this area of their responsibilities. Research outcomes tend to be better
rewarded and are certainly easier to measure and quantify.
Reduced government funding also seems to work against developing high quality learning opportunities. The focus on obtaining non-government funding through CQU’s international campuses to make up for shortfalls in government funding means that the institution takes a 'bums on seats' approach, rather than provide institution-wide support for innovative approaches to quality teaching and learning that might be more labour intensive than the traditional didactic methodology. The increased student load also means that academic workloads have exploded, leaving little time for reflecting on teaching practises and innovation. Butler (1997) discusses the need to provide opportunities in terms of time and space, for academic staff to experiment with different educational approaches and the use of educational technology.
Workloads for CQU general and academic staff have risen dramatically over
the last five years, with the massive growth in the Australian International
Campuses (AICs). While the faculties most affected have employed additional
staff to cope with the increased volume, staff still appear to be overworked.
Increased workloads also work against staff's willingness to be involved in
staff development activities, with academic staff seeking to devote their time
to class management issues and the preparation of conference papers, journal
articles and book chapters.
Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance. Will Durant |
Problem-based learning (PBL) encompasses a family of educational approaches that all have messy ill structured problems at their core (Barrows 1986). Some examples of PBL include:
(Woods 1995) |
The Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy define PBL as:
|
Problem-based learning (PBL) is an educational approach that organizes curriculum and instruction around carefully crafted problematic situations adapted from real-world issues. Learners gather and apply knowledge from multiple disciplines in their quest for solutions. Guided by cognitive coaches, they develop critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaborative skills in addition to content knowledge as they identify problems, formulate hypotheses, conduct data searches, perform experiments, formulate solutions, and determine the "best fit" of solutions to the conditions of the problem. (IMSA 2001) |
The power of PBL comes from the fact that the learning environment embodies
most of the principles that improve learning as well as providing a context
for learning which leads to greater levels of learner engagement (Woods 1995).
Most, if not all Australian universities have policy that relates to the generic graduate skills and attributes they strive to achieve. The type of activities undertaken in problem-based learning contribute demonstrably towards these generic skills and attributes. Stepien (1993) suggests that PBL develops the following generic skills and attributes:
(Stepien 1993)
Each one of these relates to an equivalent or identical generic skill/attribute
identified in CQU’s Teaching and Learning Management Plan (CQU 2003).
It is clear from the literature that an understanding of the underpinning pedagogical basics of PBL is required by all participants. Coaches, students and academic administrators all need to understand the approach as this methodology presents significant challenges.
The design and development of the course materials is critical. PBL requires a highly planned and structured approach to be successful. Coachs’ guides are required to ensure that all staff understand the subject areas that the students are to cover and the way the course should run. PBL is based on inquiry and there are special facilitation skills required to ensure that they cover the required subject areas without direct intervention.
Earlier in this paper the author explored the issues that surround the emergence of a new learning paradigm. PBL is based around this paradigm—it forces students to become active learners and requires that coaches guide student groups rather than direct them as would be the case in a traditional didactic learning environment.
The PBL methodology values and relies on student’s prior learning and experience and its outcomes are always negotiated. This is the hallmark of a student-centred curriculum (Johnson 1992).
In a world that is experiencing an information explosion the choice of appropriate content becomes a significant issue. There is a limit to how much content you can reasonably expect students to assimilate during a fixed term, although many University practitioners have been attempting to add more information each year. This becomes more of an issue when a teaching academic finds out that adopting a PBL approach is likely to result in 20% less coverage of content (Albanese 1993). The explanation lies in the approach to learning—PBL encourages assimilation of information and higher order learning and not regurgitation of facts. This is particularly significant if PBL is implemented using a “half-hearted” approach. If the process is adopted, but the old assessment that seeks to measure how much low level information the student can regurgitate is retained, the end result is predictable—poorer performance when compared with students who have had experienced a more didactic approach (Woods 1995).
It is also not uncommon to experience some initial resistance from students who have not experienced this type of learning before. This is often a product of the students’ prior success in learning environments that encourages memorisation and rewards passive learning. It is not possible to be successful in a problem-based learning environment without becoming an active learner and many students initially resent this requirement. Of course once the students have experienced a number of PBL subjects, or indeed an entire program that is problem-based, the feedback is just the opposite (Vernon 1993). The Vernon analysis matches with data gathered by the author from a focus group he conducted with final year social work (PBL) students at Central Queensland University.
Problem-based learning is a highly structured activity and as such requires substantial levels of planning, development and tutor/coach training (Woods 1995). The course developer must have mapped the problem terrain and have developed strategies that ensure the critical aspects of this terrain are covered by the students as they progress through their activities.
PBL courses require higher levels of supervision and group guidance in the early stages. This is predominantly due to how different the methodology is to what most students have previously experienced. The level of required supervision declines significantly after the students have experienced their first PBL learning cycle.
The research involved with the self directed study phase of the PBL learning cycle imposes a substantial additional load on library and IT facilities. Many more students will seek assistance from librarians to help them with searches and document delivery. On-campus computer facilities are likely to be more heavily used as students seek to locate the information they require. This in not an undesirable consequence, but one the organisation needs to take in to account when planning PBL programs.
PBL challenges the way we have always done things, and as can be seen from the change management literature, second order or transformational change presents substantial risks from resistance to change.
University funding rewards increased student numbers rather than graduate quality. The production of high quality graduates has a direct effect on the reputation of an institution, but is difficult to measure in the short term.
Given CQU’s history it is hardly surprising that the organisation is
interested in exploring new approaches to learning and educational technologies
to support them.
In 2001 the author was asked to take on the responsibility of being CQU’s
Problem-Based Learning coordinator. One of the responsibilities of this position
was to formulate a coordinated plan for staff development in this particular
pedagogical area.
By early 2002 the author had developed a blueprint for staff development that involved:
To date the author has completed the design, development and implementation of the Problem-Based Learning Portal (HREF1) and the Introduction to Problem-Based Learning Course (HREF2).
The PBL portal contains sound information for PBL developers, coaches and students as well as annotated links to a substantial number of Web resources. The Introduction to Problem-Based Learning Course is based on the model of PBL developed by Barrows for the Southern Illinois University School of Medicine. The course provides an exemplar of the type Imershein and Kuhn have suggested in their publications.
The author has also developed and delivered university-wide and faculty-based seminars and workshops. The final part of the blueprint relates to the design, development and implementation of the online courses listed above.
Problem-based learning employs most of the attributes that are known to improve learning (Woods 1995) and as such shares most of the attributes of the emerging approaches to education. In particular, the move to a student-centred approach with authentic tasks and assessment mirrors much of the emerging paradigm shift in education.
This paper has compared the characteristics of problem-based learning and the emerging learning paradigms and shown that they are similar and compatible. The introduction of problem-based learning requires radical change and this presents risks for the organisation. CQU’s increased use of technology particularly in the area of flexible online learning is producing its own organisational change. Any pedagogical strategies need to be consistent with the changes occurring as a result of the CQU’s technology usage.
To address the academic staff development needs required for problem-based learning the strategy laid out earlier will need to be carefully monitored and the suggestions offered by McNamara (1999) will need to be closely followed to ensure success.
By supporting the further development of learner centred exemplars, Central
Queensland will ensure that academic staff have concrete and secure models that
they can adopt when developing new and modifying existing programs and courses.
There can be little doubt that for a distributed, regional university like CQU,
its future lies in developing high quality courseware that can be delivered
effectively across a wide range of learning situations. This courseware will
invariably be Web-based and learner-centred. Problem-based learning represents
a strong and proven pedagogical methodology that will prove to be a strong part
of the University’s strategy.
Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). "Problem-based learning: a review of the literature on outcomes and implementation issues." Academic Medicine 68: 52-81.
Alexander, S. (1995). Teaching and learning on the World Wide Web. AusWeb95, Ballina, NSW, Australia, Southern Cross University.
Barrows, H. (1986). "A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods." Medical Education 20: 481-486.
Barrows, H., & Tamblyn, R. (1980). Problem-Based Learning: An Approach to Medical Education. New York, Springer.
Bates, A. W. (1994). Educational aspects of the telecommunications revolution. Distance Education Association of New Zealand, Wellington.
Butler, J. (1997). "Which is more frustrating: achieving institutional change or herding cats?" Active Learning 6(July).
Christensen, C. (2002). The data you requested. S. Aldred. Rockhampton, Analysis and Planning, CQU.
CQU (1999). CQU Online. Rockhampton, Central Queensland University.
CQU (1999). Review of distance education and flexible learning: The foresight Saga. Rockhampton, Central Queensland University.
CQU (2001). Strategic Plan for Flexible Learning 2001 - 2003. Rockhampton, Central Queensland University.
CQU (2003). Teaching and Learning - Management Plan 2003-2004, CQU. 2003.
Dunphy, D. C., & Stace, D. A. (1988). "Transformational and coercive strategies for planned organization change: Beyond the O.D. model." Organisation Studies 9(3).
Hall, J. W. (1996). "The educational paradigm shift: Implications for ICDE and the distance learning community." Open Praxis vol. 2: pp. 27-36.
Hancock, G. (2002). Strategic Plan 2002- 2004. Rockhampton, Central Queensland University.
Imershein, A. W. (1976). Sociological Methodology. San Francisco, Jossey Bass.
IMSA (2001). Introduction to Problem-Based Learning, Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy. 2001.
Johnson, R., ed. S. Goldman (1992). ' Open learning: Unseen issues '. Good Practice for Flexible Delivery. Adelaide, TAFE National Staff Development Committee: pp. 145-9.
Katz, R., N. (2002). "The ICT infrastructute: a driver of change." Educause review 37(4): 50-61.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.
Lawnham, P. (2002). Smells like team spirit. The Australian. Sydney: 29.
Levy, A. (1986). "Second order planned change: Definition and conceptualisation." Organisational Dynamics 15.
McConachie, J. (2001). The effect of sub-cultures on the implementation of an enterprise system. Business. Brisbane, Southern Cross University: 241.
McNamara, C. (1999). Basic context for organisational change, The management assistance program for non-profits. 2002.
McVay Lynch, M. (2002). The online educator: A guide to creating a virtual
classroom. London, Routledge-Farmer.
Mirvis, P. H. (1988). "Organizational development: Part I--An evolutionary
perspective." Research in Organizational Change and Development 2: 1 -
57.
NBEET (1994). Costs and Quality in Resource-Based Learning On- and Off-Campus: commissioned report ,. Canberra, National Board of Employment, Education and Training: pp. 7-13.
NBEET (1996). The emerging new paradigm for the education industry', Education and Technology Convergence, commissioned report. Canberra, National Board of Employment, Education and Training: pp. 67-72.
Paul, R. H. (1990). Towards open management: A value-driven leadership Approach. Open Learning and Open Management. London, Kogan Page. ch. 5: 66-73.
Spender, D., & Stewart, F. (2002). Embracing e-learning in Australian schools. Brisbane, Commonwealth Bank.
Stepien, W., & Gallagher, S. A. (1993). "Problem-based Learning: As Authentic as it Gets." Educational Leadership 50(7): 25-8.
Trow, M. (1997). "Notes on the development of information technology in higher education." Daedelus 126(4): 293.
Vernon, D., T. A., & Blake, Robert, L. (1993). "Does Problem-based learning Work? A meta-analysis of evaluative data." Academic Medicine 68(7).
Woods, D. R. (1995). Problem-based Learning: helping your students gain the most from PBL. Ontario, Canada, Waterdown.