Development and validation of a questionnaire on problem-based learning to evaluate facilitation by the tutor and the student group

References

• Aditomo A, Köhler C. 2020. Do student ratings provide reliable and valid information about teaching quality at the school level? Evaluating measures of science teaching in PISA 2015. Educ Asse Eval Acc. 32(3):275–310. doi: 10.1007/s11092-020-09328-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson RC. 1977. The notion of schemata and the educational enterprise: general discussion of the conference. In: Anderson RC, Spiro RJ, Montague WE, editors. Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; p. 415–431.
   Google Scholar
• Bach A, Thiel F. under review. Erfassung gruppenbezogener Lernprozesse - Entwicklung und Validierung eines standardisierten Fragebogens für kooperative Lernsettings [Group-Related Learning Processes - Development and Validation of a Standardized Questionnaire for Cooperative Learning Settings].
   Google Scholar
• Barrows H, Kelson AC. 1995. Problem-Based Learning in Secondary Education and the Problem-Based Learning Institute (Monograph 1). Springfield, IL: Problem-Based Learning Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Bliese PD. 2000. Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: implications for data aggregation and analysis. In: Klein KJ, editor. Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: foundations, extensions, and new directions. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; p. 349–381.
   Google Scholar
• Chen J, Wang M, Kirschner PA, Tsai C-C. 2018. The role of collaboration, computer use, learning environments, and supporting strategies in CSCL: a meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res. 88(6):799–843. doi: 10.3102/0034654318791584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Grave WS, Dolmans DHJM, van der Vleuten CP. 1998. Tutor intervention profile: reliability and validity. Med Educ. 32(3):262–268. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.1998.00226.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Jong N, Verstegen DML, Könings KD. 2018. The role of the e-tutor in synchronous online problem-based learning: a study in a Master Public Health Programme: role of e-tutor in problem-based learning. Brit J Educational Tech. 49(3):385–397. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12554.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolmans DHJM. 2019. How theory and design-based research can mature PBL practice and research. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 24(5):879–891. doi: 10.1007/s10459-019-09940-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolmans DHJM, Wolfhagen HAP, Scherpbier AJJA, van der Vleuten CPM. 2003. Development of an instrument to evaluate the effectiveness of teachers in guiding small groups. High Educ. 46(4):431–446. doi: 10.1023/A:1027388806218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolmans DHJM, Wolfhagen IHAP, Snellen-Balendong HAM. 1994. Improving the effectiveness of tutors in problem-based learning. Med Teach. 16(4):369–377. doi: 10.3109/01421599409008275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gärtner H, Thiel F, Kellermann C, Nachbauer M. 2022. Ein theoriebasierter Schülerfragebogen für Unterrichtsevaluation [A theory-based student questionnaire for teaching evaluation.]. JERO. 2022(1):147–173. doi: 10.31244/jero.2022.01.07.
   Google Scholar
• Gerhardt-Szep S, Kunkel F, Moeltner A, Hansen M, Böckers A, Rüttermann S, Ochsendorf F. 2016. Evaluating differently tutored groups in problem-based learning in a German dental curriculum: a mixed methods study. BMC Med Educ. 16(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s12909-015-0505-0.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gillies RM. 2016. Cooperative learning: review of research and practice. AJTE. 41(3):39–54. doi: 10.14221/ajte.2016v41n3.3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver CE. 2004. Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev. 16(3):235–266. doi: 10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu LT, Bentler PM. 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equat. Model. 6(1):1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hung W, Dolmans DHJM, van Merriënboer JJG. 2019. A review to identify key perspectives in PBL meta-analyses and reviews: trends, gaps and future research directions. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 24(5):943–957. doi: 10.1007/s10459-019-09945-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IBM Corp. 2020. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows [SOFTWARE]. Version 27.0. Armonk (NY): IBM.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson DW, Johnson RT. 2002. Learning together and alone: overview and meta‐analysis. Asia Pacific J Educ. 22(1):95–105. doi: 10.1080/0218879020220110.
   Google Scholar
• Kamp RJA, Dolmans DHJM, Van Berkel HJM, Schmidt HG. 2011. Can students adequately evaluate the activities of their peers in PBL? Med Teach. 33(2):145–150. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2010.509766.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klieme E, Rakoczy K. 2003. Unterrichtsqualität aus Schülerperspektive: Kulturspezifische Profile, regionale Unterschiede und Zusammenhänge mit Effekten von Unterricht [Teaching quality from students’ perspective: culture-specific profiles, regional differences, and relations with effects of teaching]. In: baumert J, Artelt C, Klieme E, Neubrand M, Prenzel M, Schiefele U, Schneider W, Tillmann K-J, Weiß M, editors. PISA 2000—Ein differenzierter Blick auf die Länder der Bundesrepublik Deutschland [PISA 2000. A differentiated view on the Länder of Germany]. Opladen: leske & Budrich; p. 333–359.
   Google Scholar
• Kunter M, Voss T. 2013. The model of instructional quality in COACTIV: a multicriteria analysis. In: kunter M, Baumert J, Blum W, Klusmann U, Krauss S, Neubrand M, editors. Cognitive activation in the mathematics classroom and professional competence of teachers. Results from the COACTIV project. New York: Springer; p. 97–124.
   Google Scholar
• Maaz A, Hitzblech T, Arends P, Degel A, Ludwig S, Mossakowski A, Mothes R, Breckwoldt J, Peters H. 2018. Moving a mountain: practical insights into mastering a major curriculum reform at a large European medical university. Med Teach. 40(5):453–460. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1440077.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muthén LK, Muthén BO. [1998] 2017. Mplus statistical analysis with latent variables: user’s guide. Los Angeles (CA): Muthén and Muthén.
   Google Scholar
• Nicklen P, Keating JL, Paynter S, Storr M, Maloney S. 2016. Remote-online case-based learning: a comparison of remote-online and face-to-face, case-based learning – a randomized controlled trial. Educ Health. 29(3):195–202.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Perels F, Otto B, Landmann M, Hertel S, Schmitz B. 2007. Self-regulation from a process perspective. Zeitschr Psychol/J Psychol. 215(3):194–204. doi: 10.1027/0044-3409.215.3.194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pianta RC, La Paro K, Hamre BK. 2008. Classroom Assessment Scoring System^TM. Baltimore (MD): Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Praetorius AK, Klieme E, Herbert B, Pinger P. 2018. Generic dimensions of teaching quality: the German framework of Three Basic Dimensions. ZDM Math Educ. 50(3):407–426. doi: 10.1007/s11858-018-0918-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt HG. 1993. Foundations of problem-based learning: some explanatory notes. Med Educ. 27(5):422–432. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1993.tb00296.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitz B, Schmidt M. 2007. Einführung in die Selbstregulation [Introduction to self-regulation]. In: landmann M, Schmitz B, editors. Selbstregulation erfolgreich fördern: Praxisnahe Trainingsprogramme für effektives Lernen [Successfully promoting self-regulation: practical training programs for effective learning]. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer. p. 9–19.
   Google Scholar
• Shoair OA, Smith WJ, Abdel Aziz MH, Veronin MA, Glavy JS, Pirtle SJ. 2023. Pharmacy students’ perceptions and attitudes toward face-to-face vs. virtual team-based learning (TBL) in the didactic curriculum: a mixed-methods study. Med Educ Online. 28(1):2226851. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2023.2226851.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singaram VS, van der Vleuten CPM, van Berkel H, Dolmans DHJM. 2010. Reliability and validity of a Tutorial Group Effectiveness Instrument. Med Teach. 32(3):133–137.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slavin RE. 1996. Research on cooperative learning and achievement: what we know, what we need to know. Contemp Educ Psychol. 21(1):43–69. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1996.0004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slavin RE, Hurley EA, Chamberlain A. 2003. Cooperative learning and achievement: theory and research. In: Reynolds WM, Miller GE, editors. Handbook of psychology: educational psychology. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley; p. 177–198.
   Google Scholar
• Thiel F, Blüthmann I, Watermann R. 2012. Konstruktion eines Fragebogens zur Erfassung der Lehrkompetenz (LeKo) [Construction of a questionnaire to assess teaching competence (LeKo)]. In: Berendt B, Voss H-P, Wildt J, editors. Neues Handbuch Hochschullehre [New handbook university lecture]. Stuttgart: Raabe; p. 1–27.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson BM, Levine RE, Kennedy F, Naik AD, Foldes CA, Coverdale JH, Kelly PA, Parmelee D, Richards BF, Haidet P. 2009. Evaluating the quality of learning-team processes in medical education: development and validation of a new measure. Acad Med. 84(10 Suppl):S124–S127. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181b38b7a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstegen D, de Jong N, van Berlo J, Camp A, Könings K, van Merriënboer J, Donkers J. 2016. How e-learning can support PBL groups: a literature review. In S. Bridges, L. Ki Chan, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, editors, Educational technologies in medical and health sciences education. Volume 5: Advances in medical education. Cham (Switzerland): Springer; p. 9–33.
   Google Scholar
• Visschers-Pleijers AJSF, Dolmans DHJM, Wolfhagen IHAP, van der Vleuten CPM. 2005. Development and validation of a questionnaire to identify learning-oriented group interactions in PBL. Med Teach. 27(4):375–381. doi: 10.1080/01421590500046395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar