The case for plural PBL: an analysis of dominant and marginalized perspectives in the globalization of problem-based learning.

The globalization of problem-based learning (PBL) in health professions education has been both celebrated and criticized. Using a critical narrative review approach, underpinned by our archive of global PBL literature and a targeted literature search, we analyze these dominant global discourses of PBL in health professions education. More precisely, we explore what is missed when the globalization of PBL is theorized either as a positive consequence of standardization, or a problematic spread of Western educational ideals and values around the world. We make visible how two dominant global discourses, a universalist and culturalist discourse, have emerged in the global proliferation of PBL. We also discuss the limitations of the two discourses by demonstrating how they either ignore contextual and cultural diversity or see it as problematic. We then turn to a perspective that has been marginalized in the PBL literature that emphasizes the global origins of PBL, transcending the dichotomy between West and non-West. We make a case for relating to PBL as a plural construct in order to learn from the cultural and situational nuances of educational activities labeled PBL around the world. We argue that PBL as a singular and universal concept has no global future, yet versions of PBL may continue to thrive locally. Finally, we propose avenues for future research that may help elucidate the global and local values that underpin our curricula, as well as the socio-political factors that perpetuate neo-colonialist views and practices in the uptake and implementation of PBL approaches across the globe.

Changes and Adaptations: How University Students Self-Regulate Their Online Learning During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

During the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, universities had to shift from face-to-face to emergency remote education. Students were forced to study online, with limited access to facilities and less contact with peers and teachers, while at the same time being exposed to more autonomy. This study examined how students adapted to emergency remote learning, specifically focusing on students' resource-management strategies using an individual differences approach. One thousand eight hundred university students completed a questionnaire on their resource-management strategies and indicators of (un)successful adaptation to emergency remote learning. On average, students reported being less able to regulate their attention, effort, and time and less motivated compared to the situation before the crisis started; they also reported investing more time and effort in their self-study. Using a k-means cluster analysis, we identified four adaptation profiles and labeled them according to the reported changes in their resource-management strategies: the overwhelmed, the surrenderers, the maintainers, and the adapters. Both the overwhelmed and surrenderers appeared to be less able to regulate their effort, attention, and time and reported to be less motivated to study than before the crisis. In contrast, the adapters appreciated the increased level of autonomy and were better able to self-regulate their learning. The resource-management strategies of the maintainers remained relatively stable. Students' responses to open-answer questions on their educational experience, coded using a thematic analysis, were consistent with the quantitative profiles. Implications about how to support students in adapting to online learning are discussed.