Making Learning Real with Problem-Based Case Learning

Often, when we use the phrase framing, we are referring to the classroom environment that we, as educators are creating within which our students are, or will be working.  At times though, we also use the term to define a process that will allow the student to identify learning objectives for themselves, and then determine a path to follow that will allow them to meet those objectives.  Clearly, it falls to the teacher to create a framework within which effective learning takes place.  However, there is limited value to the student if he or she is not introduced to methods that will allow them to create this kind of framework for themselves.  Empowering our students to take control of their learning is perhaps the most powerful and useful lesson we can impart, if our goal is to promote and foster a process of critical thinking.

There are six common components for framing problems.  They are:

• Investigation,
• Finances,
• Time,
• Resources,
• Consequences, and
• Checklists (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000; Clayton C., 2007).

Not all of the listed components will be applicable to every learning task, nor does this list contain every possible criterion to consider.   As an exercise in thinking, however, this list goes a long way to establishing a process that allows consideration of a set of criteria in order to determine when viable and appropriate solutions have been found.  Each of the components listed relate to, and have an effect on, each other, and it is these relationships that we are trying to make apparent to our students as we train them to think critically about the tasks confronting them in school and as they engage the world outside of school.  So, when we talk about framing, we are really talking about finding ways to structure the learning process, both institutionally as well as individually.

All of the learning tasks we are confronted with need to be structured in some way.  This can be a challenge for the novice learner who has not had much experience approaching learning with this in mind.  However, engaging in some form of structuring will save time and energy in the long run, and when you are involved in some kind of team or group learning environment, an effective structure may reduce the amount of frustration experienced by the other people who are involved in the process with you (Clayton C., 2007).  While it may seem counter intuitive, the clearer the structure is, the more flexibility team members will have when engaging in the pursuit of the learning objective, and a metacognitive and critical thinking process.  If the structure that includes clearly stated goals and ways to assess these goals, then the team members may feel more freedom to engage in a decision making process that is more fluid, and less linear.  There will hopefully be more freedom to engage in a free flow of ideas and discussion while the problems are being solved.

The stronger the framework, the more the learning will be supported.  And the framework can be overt or covert in nature.  That is to say that the student doe not need understand every aspect and nuance of the framework to be affected by or work within it, but I will get back to this point a bit later.  A classroom structure that utilizes the PBCL teaching strategy can be an effective way to establish the desired framework.  When the business partner with a real business problem to solve is introduced to the class, many of the parameters listed earlier are already defined for the student.  With the framework defined, the students can move within the established boundaries (while being encouraged to push those boundaries when necessary), as they work toward finding the most appropriate and viable solution to the given problem.

Of the framing components listed earlier, I would suggest, that the most important of the components listed is the first one, investigation.  As the students progress through the learning objective, every student, whether working individually or as part of a team, needs to be engaged in the process of investigating the problem being presented.  The process of investigation is present in the way each student confronts the other five components listed.   The goal of a framework that is attempting to teach or encourage critical thinking is to move the students to a point where they more interested in asking questions that start with the phrase “what if …,” and less on questions that start with the phrase “how do I …”  because it is the “what if” questions that will create the opportunities and highlight the need to combine the pieces of the possible solutions into a solution that best satisfies the originally articulated goals.  Possible solutions are tested, assessed, adapted, and then tested again until the best solution FOR THE GIVEN SITUATION is found.  Many solutions will undoubtedly be found, and from that field of choices, the solution that best satisfies the stated objectives is chosen.  Once chosen and implemented, the chosen solution should be assessed to see how well it met the defined criteria, but that is a topic for another article.

Earlier I said that the framework could be overt or covert, and that the students do not necessarily need to understand every nuance of the framework in order to be affected by or work within that framework.  That is not to suggest that students should be left in the dark or not be encouraged to understand (investigate) the framework.  The point is that there are times when students can work within the framework without understanding why the framework is in place.  For instance, in a PBCL environment, the problem that the business partner presents may establish parameters for cost, size, and scope of the solution.  The student doesn’t have to be privy to, or part of that decision making process in order to work within the parameters.  Of course, there are things to be gained by exploring how those parameters were established, but it is not essential for every student.  Part of establishing a useful framework, is establishing one that is flexible enough to meet each student where they are, while still pushing them past his or her comfort zone.  If it sounds like a tightrope, that’s because it is.