This article was downloaded by: [University of Sydney]

On: 07 December 2013, At: 00:43

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Studies in Higher Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cshe20
Student perceptions about self-directed
learning in a professional course
implementing problem-based learning
Greg Ryan
a
a
University of New South Wales
Published online: 05 Aug 2006.
To cite this article: Greg Ryan (1993) Student perceptions about self-directed learning in a
professional course implementing problem-based learning, Studies in Higher Education, 18:1, 53-63,
DOI: 10.1080/03075079312331382458
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079312331382458
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Studies in Higher Education Volume 18, No. 1, 1993 53
Student Perceptions about Self-
directed Learning in a Professional
Course Implementing Problem-based
Learning
GREG RYAN
University of Ne w South Wales
ABSTRACT I n a climate of rapid change and proliferating knowledge, there is an onus on
teachers in higher education to assume more responsibility f or helping students to develop as
self-directed learners in their courses. I n particular, problem-based learning is a potential
educational f r amewor k wi t hi n whi ch to provi de this assistance. From its theoretical basis, the
paper reports on a st udy whi ch explored the perceptions held by a group of students about their
self-directed learning during a university semester. The professional course wi t hi n whi ch the
students were enrolled implemented problem-based learning, and overtly encouraged the
devel opment o f self-directed learning ability as one o f the published objectives of the course.
Results showed significant changes in their perception of the importance o f self-directed
learning; and highly significant changes in their perceptions of their ability as self-directed
learners. I t is suggested t hat the results are most l i kel y due to the influence o f the educational
environment.
Int roduct i on
Rapid change is an inescapable facet of society today, however t i me-worn this observation
has become. As new and i mport ant knowledge proliferates in every profession, so does the
pressure on teachers in higher education to ' cover' this cont ent in their courses without any
corresponding increase in curri cul um time. As a result, course cont ent is ineffectively
crammed into lectures and tutorials; and in order to release pressure from overburdened
curricula, self-directed learning is expected of students who are oft en ill-prepared and ill-
equipped for this responsibility.
Wi t h knowledge oft en redundant by the time a st udent graduates and enters profes-
sional practice, it is imperative that as educators we ensure that at graduation our students
are well-equipped with the self-directed learning skills which t hey will need in order to keep
abreast of burgeoning knowledge. An aphorism attributed to t he Chinese has expressed this
idea very succinctly: ' Gi ve me a fish and I eat today. Teach me to fish and I will eat for a
lifetime' . Howard Barrows, a leader in the field of problem-based, self-directed learning
extends this metaphor in a criticism of higher education which, in his view, "i s devot ed t o
giving the student an indigestible amount of fish, but no skills in fishing" (Barrows, private
manuscript).
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

54 G. Ryan
As teachers in higher education, we expect our students to be self-directed learners. But
when asking students to prepare for a tutorial or lecture, or to follow up with reading of
their own, what assumptions are made about their ability to do this; and how much assistance
is given to students as they move from dependence to independence as learners?
While no doubt being very knowledgeable about our course content we are often very
unskilled in our ability to help students to become self-directed learners. It is so much easier,
and often more satisfying and comforting, to simply feed students information. It is not
surprising, therefore, to discover that students may not only demonstrate poorly developed
self-directed learning ability on graduation, but that they may also attach very little
importance to having such an ability.
A number of teaching methodologies do, however, place considerable and overt
emphasis on the development of this ability by students. One such approach which is now
well-established within professional education throughout the world is problem-based
learning. Li t t l e research attention, though, has been given to the relationship between
learning environments such as this, and students' perceptions of their self-directed learning
processes. In theory, the use of such an approach to learning should ensure that students
develop their abilities as self-directed learners, and also value its importance. Empirically,
however, this has not been demonstrated.
Self-directed Learning
According to Malcolm Knowles (1975) "self-directed learning describes a process in which
individuals take the initiative, with or without the help of others, in diagnosing their learning
needs, formulating learning goals, identifying human and material resources for learning,
choosing and implementing appropriate learning strategies, and evaluating learning out-
comes" (p. 18).
Tough (1971), Knowles (1975) and, more recently, Zimmerman (1989, 1990) associate
self-directed learning with a person' s ability to:
--deci de what knowledge and skills to learn;
--di agnose hi s/ her learning needs realistically, with help from teachers and/ or peers;
--t ransl at e her/ hi s learning needs into learning objectives in a form that makes it possible
for the accomplishments to be assessed;
--rel at e to hi s/ her teachers as facilitator% helpers, or consultants and to take the initiative in
making use of their resources;
- - r el at e to her/ hi s peers collaboratively, to see them as resources for learning;
- - i dent i f y human and material resources appropriate to different kinds of learning objec-
tives;
--sel ect effective strategies skilfully and with initiative;
--gai n knowledge or skill from the resources utilised;
--eval uat e hi s/ her work and get feedback from others about progress;
- - det ect and cope with personal blocks to learning;
- - r enew motivation for learning when motivation lags.
Attempts are often made to ' teach' these skills in sessions (for example, ' study skills' ) which
typically are offered by st aff within student support units; are conducted independently of
the undergraduate or postgraduate course being undertaking by the student at the time; and
do not attract academic credit. There are usually no published objectives which overtly
emphasise the development of these skills by students. It is simply expected t hat students
will acquire them more or less independently of a course and its faculty. Thus, on the one
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Sel f - di rect ed Le a r n i n g 55
hand faculty will expect students to be self-directed and to produce work of a satisfactory
standard which has resulted from this process while, on the ot her hand, largely deferring to
support services the direct responsibility for helping t hem t o meet these expectations.
Wri t ers on self-directed learning and problem-based learning ( f or example, Barrows &
Tambl yn, 1980; Barrows, 1986, 1988, private manuscript; Candy, 1991), argue that these
skills should not be developed independently of course content. Barrows, for example,
suggests that skills such as these not only have to be perfect ed through active, repeated and
guided practice, but must also be associated in the learning process with the acquisition of
course-related information. Thi s deliberate process, he argues, can lead to the establishment
of richer associations in memory between existing and newly acquired information and skills.
The conceptual frameworks which can be developed through this active, guided thinking
t end to remain in memory and to be more easily recalled. The related cognitive skills of
probing, analysing, searching for appropriate i nformat i on and information sources, mental
review and deliberation, and synthesis of information in larger concepts are needed
t hroughout life and work, and it should be an overt function of the role of faculty to help
students to develop these skills.
Similarly, course objectives should be overt in their expectations that students become
successful self-directed learners. In addition to indicating specific discipline related knowl-
edge to be developed during a course of study, objectives can also require students to
demonstrate successful self-direction in their learning. Tabl e I provides an example of how
such objectives could appear as part of a course outline. The four specific objectives in this
table are based on items contained within Mal com Knowles' ' Self-rating Inst rument for
Competencies of Self-directed Learning' (1975: Learni ng Resources B).
TABLE I. Example of a broad and a specific course objective associated with self-directed learning ability
Broad objective:
"Demonstrate skills which underlie successful self-direction in learning."
Specific course unit objective which arises out of this broad objective:
"In relation to demonstrating skills which underpin successful self-direction in learning, this course unit (as
part of its expectation that you develop discipline-related knowledge) will assist you to:
--identify your own learning needs;
--identify, select and use appropriate learning resources;
--recognise your learning patterns;
--evaluate your learning outcomes."
The process of transition from dependence to independence as learners, however, can
be difficult for bot h the teacher and the students. The teacher may be unwilling and/ or
unable to shift the responsibilities for learning to the students; and t he students, too, may
have difficulty in changing dependent learning practices.
Candy (1987) challenges a number of the assumptions which are oft en made by
teachers about adult l ear ner s- - i n particular that they are, by nature, self-directed. Is it
reasonable, he asks, to expect adult students to automatically assume control of learning
when oft en their experiences at school have actively discouraged this independence? I f it is
accepted that students develop preferences for a wide variety of learning styles, and t hat
individual differences increase with age (Brundage & Mackeracher, 1980; Knowles, 1984),
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

56 G. Ryan
t hen there will be, in some adult students, a preference for ' ot her-di rect i on' (Candy, 1987)
over self-direction.
A teacher of adults, like any other, has a responsibility to recognise these differing
needs and to cater for t hem in some way. A t ut or can, for example, negotiate with students
the means by which the group will gradually assume more and more responsibility for
learning as students settle in to the course and its content. During the early stages, the t ut or
can take a more dominant role in tutorial activity in order to guide students toward self-
direction, gradually reducing this dominance as students become more and more familiar
with the academic expectations being made of them. As this process unfolds, students test
their self-directed learning abilities, with regular feedback from the tutor.
By providing this support, the t ut or is acknowledging that whilst a student may have
been an i ndependent learner in one situation, it doesn' t necessarily follow that the st udent
will be just as comfortable with independence in a new and unfamiliar situation. Nor is it
assumed that having a preference for independence in learning automatically leads to success
as an i ndependent learner.
The implication of our discussion to this point is that educational environments require
the following characteristics for effective self-directed learning to occur:
- - emphasi s on the process of learning, as well as on the learning of course content;
- - cont r ol of learning progressively t urned over to students;
- - a focus on the exploration of key concepts and principles, rather than on a detailed
knowledge of every topic; and
- - i nt egr at ed, ' active' learning, utilising the students' own experiences as part of this process.
Ther e are many di fferent ways in which these characteristics can be achieved in higher
education settings. Problem-based learning, in particular, has demonstrated this capacity.
Problem-based Learning
Thi s is not an entirely ' new' phenomenon. Its features, which incorporate the devel opment
of analytical and problem-solving skills; the devel opment of self-directed learning ability;
the integrated structuring of learning within the cont ext in which the student will practice as
a graduate; and the encouragement of motivation for learning, have all been evident in
various forms for decades.
Although sharing these features with many other forms of learning, it is the way in
which they are applied within problem-based learning which provides a certain uniqueness.
Within closed loop (or ' rei t erat i ve' ), self-directed, problem-based learning, the following
stages typically occur:
- - Th e problem is encount ered first in the learning process, before any preparation or formal
study has necessarily occurred.
- - Th e probl em is present ed to students in the same way that it would present itself in a
professional situation.
- - St udent s work with the problem in a manner which permits their ability to reason and
apply knowledge to be challenged and evaluated, appropriate to the current level of
learning.
- - As the problem is explored, and with guidance and challenge from the t ut or, strengths and
weaknesses in learning are identified by students and used as a guide to individualised
study.
- - Th e skills and knowledge acquired by this study are applied back to the problem, to
evaluate the effectiveness of learning and to reinforce learning.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Self-directed Learning 57
--The learning that has occurred in work with the problem and in individualised study is
summarised and integrated into the students' existing knowledge and skills (Barrows &
Tamblyn, 1980; Barrows, 1986).
To be successful in this learning requires of students well-developed ability as self-directed
learners, and considerable and continued attention is given to this development as an active
component of tutorial process (Barrows, 1988). Throughout this activity, the tutor also
facilitates development of the students' reasoning processes, guiding when necessary, and
challenging the depth and accuracy of understanding and application of concepts.
The Current Study
The relationship between learning environments such as this, and students' self-directed
learning processes requires closer scrutiny by researchers. In particular, exploration is
needed of the perceived importance that students place on developing these abilities which
are so essential in problem-based learning; and of students' perceptions of their abilities as
they progress within such a course. The current study therefore sought to:
1. Identify whether students within a course which is implementing problem-based learning
perceive as important the ability to be self-directed learners, and whether this perceived
importance changed over time as they moved through the course.
2. Identify whether students' perceptions of their abilities to be self-directed learners
changed over time as they moved through the course.
Me t h o d
Subjects and the Learning Environment
Subjects were 35 first-year students enrolled within the Faculty of Health at the University
of Western Sydney, Macarthur, a facuky which is developing its experience in the
implementation of problem-based learning. The subjects ranged in age from 21 years to 55
years, with 90% of subjects being in the 25-40 age range. All were registered nurses who
were upgrading their certificate-level awards to either diploma or Bachelors degree status
requiring either 2 or 4 years of part-time study respectively. All subjects had been in
professional practice for a minimum of 2 years. None of the students had undertaken
previous study at university level, their certificate-level studies having been undertaken in
hospital-based schools. Typically, these studies involved a 'block' system of release from
full-time work for concentrated study of subject matter. Emphasis was placed on coverage of
content using traditional lecture-based methodologies, together with the development of
specific skills essential in day-to-day nursing practice.
The course, which was in its third year of successful operation, implemented the
'closed-loop/reiterative' method of problem-based learning outlined earlier. The brochure
advertising the course carried a description of problem-based learning which emphasised that
learning within the course would be based on the systematic exploration of situations
typically encountered in nursing practice.
Whilst it was acknowledged at the outset that as successful, practising registered nurses
the students undoubtedly already possessed self-directed learning abilities, it was not
assumed by the course tutors that these abilities would automatically transfer to the
unfamiliarity of university-level study.
Students attended two evenings per week (Monday and Wednesday, 4.30-8.30 pm,
incorporating a short meal break), and were organised into two tutorial groups (18 and 17
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

58 G. Ryan
students respectively), each with its own tutor. Apart from a small number of students who
worked together and who requested to be in the same group, allocation to groups was
arbitrary. The course uni t outline, which contained the self-directed learning objectives
listed in Table 1 (in addition to other objectives associated with specific knowledge and skill
development), was distributed to students at the beginning of the first week of semester.
During tutorials, student learning was triggered by the exploration of ' situation
improvement packages', which were written simulated encounters with ' patients' organised
within a time-frame. For example, an early package which was explored over a 3 week
period provided several encounters with the members of a family who visited a community
baby heakh clinic at which the student ' worked' . One of several significant learning issues
triggered by these encounters and identified by students was that of ' growth and develop-
ment' : specifically, that of a 9 month-old female and a 4 year-old male.
Existing knowledge about human growth and development was verbalised by the group,
and with guidance and challenge from the t ut or, deficits in learning were identified. In this
instance, for example, there was a clearly identified need by the students to evaluate and
expand existing knowledge in terms of theory and research about human cognitive and social
development. With further guidance from the tutor, students identified more clearly their
learning needs in terms of the current problem; how a range of relevant resources would be
identified and located; and ways in which the scope and accuracy of the information found
could be critically evaluated. Students used the self-directed learning time between one
tutorial and the next to explore the issues, both independently and in self-selected working
subgroups. These subgroups ( of between four and six students) assumed great significance
for the students throughout the semester, providing a very stable, supportive and co-
operative extension of the tutorials.
During a follow-up tutorial, new knowledge was discussed and applied back to the
original problem~ providing an opportunity to evaluate the quality of the knowledge gained
and the students' understanding of the issues. Critical reflection was also encouraged on the
students' problem-solving and self-directed learning processes, involving self-questioning
such as: How did we go about our (problem-solving/self-directed learning)? Were we
successful? Against what standards/expectations did we measure this success?
Gradually, with help from their tutor, students would identify those aspects of a
1earning issue which were difficult to grasp through self-directed research and discussion
during tutorials. A resource session (the need for which can often be accurately predicted by
faculty), which often took the form of a lecture/discussion was then offered, either by one of
the two tutors, or by a guest lecturer. The sessions were not compulsory, and students were
expected to bring to these sessions their specific questions, providing an opportunity for the
teacher to extend student understanding of the topics being studied. In addition to the
guidance and support offered by tutors during tutorials, the resource sessions provided
students with further opportunity for ' other-direction' as they gradually assumed more and
more control of their own learning.
Thi s pattern of learning recurred throughout the course, and dealt with issues which
ranged across traditional discipline areas such as anatomy and physiology, psychology,
philosophy, sociology and nursing theory and practice. Core concepts (such as ' growth and
development' or ' fluid and electrolyte balance' ) were revisited during the semester through
different problem situations, gradually building a conceptual understanding of issues which
was grounded in professional practice.
This is a highly supportive learning environment, and one which is designed to assist
students to make a gradual transition from dependence toward self-direction in learning.
While not eliminating entirely the discomfort which students experience (see, for example,
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Self-directed Learning 59
Tayl or' s (1986) detailed account of the experiences of a group of st udent s), much is done to
smooth the process and prevent the antagonistic reactions which students oft en exhibit when
t hrown in t o self-directed learning, to either sink or swim. Mot i vat i on can also be enhanced
by the relevance of the learning to the students' professional practice, the constant
opport uni t y for feedback regarding self-directed learning and problem-solving endeavours,
and by the gradual control of learning which can be assumed by students.
Self-rating Instrument
At the start of the first tutorial, the purpose of the st udy was discussed with the
st udent s- - namel y, t hat it was an at t empt to look at their own perceptions of t hei r learning
across the semester; and that as a consequence, they would be asked to complete a self-rating
scale on three occasions during the semester.
Four items were taken from the Knowles (1975: Learni ng Resources B) ' Self-rating
Inst rument for Competencies of Self-directed Learning' which related to the self-directed
learning objectives detailed in Tabl e I. For each of the four items, students were asked to
rate how i mpor t ant / r el evant to their current learning they percei ved each item to be; and
what t hey perceived t o be t hei r present level of performance on a scale of 0- 6 (where
0=abs ent ; 1=l ow; 3=moder at e; 6=hi gh) on three occasions t hroughout the semest er - -
during the first week, at mid-semester, and during the last week. The i nst rument appeared in
the following form:
In relation to self-directed learning, I am able to:
It em
1. Ident i fy my specific learning needs. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
2. Ident i fy and locate a range of relevant
resources 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
3. Critically evaluate the scope and accuracy of the
i nformat i on 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
4. Evaluate the effectiveness of the application of
this knowledge. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Discussions were held with each student group to ensure that t here was a common
understanding of each of these items. Aft er the data were recorded, the completed scales
were ret urned to the students to keep as their record and to use as the basis for ot her
reflective activities which might occur during their subsequent tutorials. Care was taken,
however, to separate clearly the st udy from any tutorial activities. The students were asked
to mark the sheet in a way which could be recognised by themselves and by the experi ment er
on each of the three occasions. Two suggestions were their bi rt h date, mont h and year; or a
password. Response rate was 100% on each occasion.
Data Analysis and Results
Tabl e II shows means and standard deviations calculated for the perceived importance of
self-directed learning; and the perceived ability as a self-directed learner on each of the four
items on three occasions during the semester. Results show that on three separate occasions
t hroughout t he semester, students consistently rated highly the importance of self-directed
learning. Ther e is also a consistent t rend for this high rating of importance to increase across
the semester, for each of the items. Correlation coefficients for items 1-4 were 0.58, 0.72,
0.63 and 0.81 respectively. Calculations using the one-tailed t-test for correlated means
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

60 G. Ryan
( Fer gus on, 1981) r eveal ed t hat t he i ncrease in t he rat i ng o f i mpor t ance across t he semest er
was si gni fi cant at t he 0.01 level.
TABLE II. Means and standard deviations--perceptions (on three occasions in a university semester) by students of
the importance which they placed on self-directed learning; and their ability as a self-directed learner
Occasions
1. Beginning of
semester 2, Mid-semester 3. End of semester
M SD M SD M SD
Perceived importance
Item 1. Identifying learning needs 5,43 0.70 5.51 0.56 5.71 0.46
Item 2. Identifying and locating resources 5.46 0.82 5.60 0.60 5.74 0.51
Item 3. Critically evaluating information 5,34 0.87 5,34 0,73 5.69 0,63
Item 4. Evaluating application of knowledge 5.60 0,65 5.54 0.66 5.77 0.55
Perceived ability
Item 1. Identifying learning needs 2,54 0.82 3.49 0.74 4.34 0,68
Item 2. Identifying and locating resources 2,71 1.15 3.66 0.85 4.40 0,81
Item 3, Critically evaluating information 2,54 1.01 3,37 0,97 4.03 0,89
Item 4. Evaluating application of knowledge 3,11 1,08 3.69 0,87 4.31 0,83
(N=35 students; maximum score possible on each item on each occasion is 6).
Th e scores f or per cei ved abi l i t y r epor t ed i n Tabl e I I , however , showed, on all f our
i t ems, a muc h gr eat er r ange f r om l ow/ mode r a t e at t he begi nni ng o f semest er , t hr ough t o
mode r a t e / hi gh by t he end o f semest er. Thi s i ncrease in per cei ved abi l i t y across t he semest er
is bot h subst ant i al and hi ghl y si gni fi cant at t he 0.001 l evel ( one- t ai l ed t - t est f or cor r el at ed
means) .
D i s c u s s i o n
Students" Perceptions of the Importance of Self-directed Learning
St udent s not onl y per cei ved sel f - di r ect ed l ear ni ng t o be i mpor t ant , but t he i mpor t ance
i ncr eased si gni fi cant l y f or t hese st udent s t hr oughout t he semest er. The r e are at least t wo
possi bl e expl anat i ons f or t he hi gh per cei ved i mpor t ance o f sel f - di r ect ed l earni ng evi dent at
t he begi nni ng o f t he semest er. Th e resul t may have been a r esponse t o t he over t i mpor t ance
whi ch was pl aced on t hese skills by t he cour se obj ect i ves. Thi s assumes, however , t hat t he
st udent s ( a) dur i ng t he fi rst week o f t he cour se read t he obj ect i ves cont ai ned i n t he cour se
uni t out l i ne; and ( b) under s t ood t hem and t hei r si gni fi cance t o t he course. Di scussi ons
bet ween t he cour se t ut or s i ndi cat ed t hat this was not t he case. Whi l e st udent s may have read
t hem, under s t andi ng o f t he obj ect i ves gradual l y appear ed f r om t he second and t hi r d weeks
onwar d as a r esponse t o t ut or i al di scussi ons.
Al t er nat i vel y, per cept i ons o f what uni ver si t y st udi es ent ai l ed may have i nf l uenced t he
rat i ngs. St udent s ma y si mpl y have been maki ng t hei r r esponses accor di ng t o what t hey
per cei ved shoul d be i mpor t ant , gi ven t hat t hey were enroUed at a uni ver si t y. Thi s is not
appar ent , however , in comment s made by t he st udent s. Dur i ng a f ol l ow- up t o t he st udy at
t he end o f t he semest er ( and bef or e any dat a were anal ysed) , st udent s were asked,
anonymous l y, t o wri t e a br i e f over vi ew o f t hei r pr ogr ess t hr oughout t he semest er. Th e
exercise asked t hem t o eval uat e t he t r ends whi ch had appear ed in t hei r sel f-rat i ngs over t he
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Self-directed Learning 61
semester, providing bri ef explanations, in point form, of why t hey had rated themselves in
the way that t hey had, and to come to some conclusion about both the importance which
they had placed on self-directed learning, and their ability to be self-directed. All 35
students submitted this written overview. Responses were judged only in terms of the clarity
of their expression not their content. That is, statements were discarded i f their meaning was
at all difficult to decipher, or i f the meaning was at all ambiguous, In all, statements were
collected from sixteen of the submissions.
The following points were typical.
DFeel i ng responsible and independent at the same time motivated me to increase my
knowledge.
- - One acquires merit and self-esteem when one looks and learns by oneself. It can be very
confusing sometimes but it gives good results.
--Sel f-di rect ed learning is a skill that needs to be learned and you have to train yoursel f to
master it. It requires quite some time and effort to get the hang of it.
- - Once this self-directed learning has taken place the confidence to put this knowledge to
use has become a natural flow on.
- - The democratic style of our sessions encourages discussion and reflection.
- - I still believe I have a long way to go, but I am heading in the right direction.
wi t took me longer than I thought and I had to re-think my strategies towards my studies.
mHavi ng previously been spoon-fed during hospital training I needed to come to terms with
self-directed learning.
A number of students made references, such as that contained in the last statement, to their
previous educational experiences, making comparisons with the current emphasis on self-
directed learning. One student in particular made the following observation:
in many ways this process (during earlier t rai ni ng--ant hor' s note) was much easier
than self-directed learning in t hat the research and summarising of the information
was received and processed by the teacher. In (sic) reflection, I can see that this
cycle of education can be inferior to that of self-directed learning because the
information may (not ) be directed at the individual' s particular learning needs.
The tutors in the present study made it an overt and consistent element of tutorial process
each week to monitor and guide their students' development of self-directed learning ability,
in conjunction with their learning of course content. Thi s regular forum provided opportu-
nity for students to discuss experiences and problems with each other, and with their tutor,
and to explore a range of strategies for dealing with issues related to self-directed learning.
The emphasis placed on guiding the students' development of self-directed learning ability
during the course will have contributed significantly to the consistently high ratings of
importance placed on this ability by the students.
Students" Perceptions of their Ability as Self-directed Learners
The substantial and highly significant increase across the semester in the students' percep-
tions of their abilities as self-directed learners reported in Table II could be attributed to
several factors. During tutorials, the development and use by students of their self-directed
learning skills was actively promoted by the tutors, both by helping them to identify how
they would achieve their identified learning objectives, and by encouraging them to reflect
on the outcomes of this self-directed learning. Regular feedback for each student as to the
success or otherwise of self-directed activities was being provided during these tutorials,
from both the facilitator and fellow students.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

62 G. Ryan
Regularly being caused to reflect on the processes of their self-directed learning
provi ded opportunities for discussion of alternative strategies which could be used in order
to achieve learning objectives; as well as providing opport uni t y for discussion of difficulties
being faced by students regarding issues such as the pressure of full-time work, and family
and social pressures. For example, one student made the following comment during the
follow-up reflection exercise:
. . . to be able to st ruct ure my time at home depends on a few variables, like your
share of the household chores and your social cal endar . . . Self-directed learning is a
skill that needs to be learned, and you have to train your sel f to master it. It
requires quite some time and effort to get the hang of it.
The connections between on-campus activity and the students' professional practice also
formed the basis for several ot her comments by students such as:
. . . b y . . . gathering information, asking questions, working in groups and getting
feedback from the facilitator and peers, I have certainly improved and extended
my knowledge in many domains. I feel di fferent at work; I think differently when I
admit a pat i ent . . .
. . . in the clinical setting, learning i s . . . a dynamic process of self-directed learning
via the constant use of reference material to update practices.
During tutorial discussions, regular opport uni t y was also provided to address broader
academic issues such as the meaning of ' critical evaluation' in academic expression, and its
relationship t o effective st udy skills. Whilst sessions which addressed these issues were
available through the institution' s st udent support services, students oft en required assis-
tance in identifying how these more generalised skills related to the task at hand. An
educational envi ronment which has built into it considerable opport uni t y for these issues to
be discussed as a legitimate component of tutorial activity provides students (particularly in
the early stages of a course, and particularly when unaccustomed to university-level studies)
with a great deal of help in ' demystifying' academic expectations.
Another likely factor which contributed to the significance of the results in this study is
the effect on motivation which can occur when achievable, realistic learning goals are set
(and subsequently met ) by students (Zi mmerman, 1989). The t ut ors in this st udy helped
students t o identify t hei r learning needs in terms of proximal and distal goals. For example,
on one occasion, students had identified a need to expand their knowledge of the concept of
fluid and electrolyte balance (a distal goal). But rather than tackling this larger issue in its
ent i ret y, the students, with the help of the t ut or, broke down the task into manageable units.
Thi s approach led the students from an immediate problem such as a patient' s vomiting and
diarrhoea (and its resultant sodium and potassium imbalance) outward to t he gradual
building of an understanding of the broader concept of fluid and electrolyte balance. The
concept was revisited a number of times during the semester, but always in the context of a
problem or situation with which the student was working at the time.
Concl us i on
In broader terms, the study may have become its own self-fulfilling prophecy. Causing the
students to moni t or their own performance and systematically to rate their abilities may
have been sufficient alone to produce positive self-reflective effects during the semester
(Zi mmerman, 1989). While not denying the possibility of this ' Hawt horne effect ' , the
study' s results are more likely to be due to the effects of the highly supportive learning
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Self-directed Learning 63
environment in which the students operated: an environment which overtly assisted students
t o devel op, and successf ul l y use, t hei r sel f - di r ect ed l ear ni ng abilities. ( Thi s success was
evi dent in t he st udent s' passi ng t he semest er ' s c our s e s - - a n accompl i s hment whi ch, gi ven t he
nat ur e o f pr obl em- bas ed l ear ni ng and its assessment , woul d not have been possi bl e wi t hout
wel l - devel oped sel f - di r ect ed l earni ng abi l i t y. )
Th e st udy has r eveal ed a consi st ent moder at e t o hi gh l evel o f i mpor t ance pl aced by a
gr oup o f st udent s on sel f - di r ect ed l earni ng; and a subst ant i al and si gni fi cant change i n t hei r
per cei ved abi l i t y t o be sel f - di r ect ed l earners, across a uni ver si t y semest er. Thes e resul t s, it is
suggest ed, are mos t l i kel y due t o t he i nfl uence o f t he educat i onal envi r onment i n whi ch t he
st udent s wer e wor ki ng, an envi r onment whi ch pl aced a great deal o f over t i mpor t ance on
suppor t i ng st udent s as t hey moved successful l y t owar d i ndependence as l earners.
Whi l st r epor t i ng success wi t hi n a par t i cul ar , pr obl em- bas ed appr oach t o l earni ng, it is
not t he onl y ci r cumst ance in whi ch sel f - di r ect ed l earni ng can be act i vel y and successful l y
devel oped. Speci fi c obj ect i ves f or t he devel opment o f sel f - di r ect ed l ear ni ng can be wr i t t en
i nt o any cur r i cul um; and devel opment o f this abi l i t y can be made an over t ai m wi t hi n any
uni ver si t y- l evel course o f st udy. Th e chal l enge t o t eachers is t o br i ng out i nt o t he open t hei r
cover t expect at i ons o f st udent s, and t o conduct t hei r sessions i n ways, si mi l ar t o t hose
out l i ned i n this paper , whi ch are desi gned t o act i vel y assist st udent s as t hey move f r om
dependence t o i ndependence as l earners.
Correspondence: Greg Ryan, Professional Devel opment Centre, University o f New South
Wales, PO Box 1, Kensington, NSW, Australia 2033.
REFERENCES
BARROWS, H.S. (1986) A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods, Medical Education, 20(6), pp. 481-486.
BARROWS, H.S. (1988) The Tutorial Process (Springfield, IL, School of Medicine, Southern Illinois University).
BARROWS, H.S. (Private Manuscript) Reiterative, problem-based self-directed learning: a powerful, well-designed
species of problem-based learning (Springfield, IL, School of Medicine. Southern Illinois University).
BARROWS, H.S. & TAMBLYN, R. (1980) Problem-based Learning: an approach to medical education (New York,
Springer).
BRUNDAGE,D. & MACKERACHER, D. 1980) Adult Learning Principles and their Application to Program Planning
(Ontario, Ministry of Education).
CANNY, P. (1987) Evolution, revolution or devolution: increasing learner-control in the instructional setting, in:
D. BOOD & V. GRIFFIN, (Eds) Appreciating Adults Learning: from the learners' perspective (London, Kogan
Page).
CANDY, P. (1991) Self-direction of Lifelong Learning: a comprehemive guide to theory and practice (San Francisco,
CA, Jossey-Bass).
FERGUSON, G.A. (1981) Statistical Analysis in Psychology and Education (Singapore, McGraw-Hill).
KNOWLES, M. (1975) Self-directed Learning: a guide for learners and teachers (New York, Cambridge, The Adult
Education Company).
KI,~OWLES, M. (1984) The Adult Learner: a neglected species (Houston, TX, Gulf Publishing).
TAYLOR, M. (1986) Learning for self-direction in the classroom: the pattern of a transition process, Studies in
Higher Education, 11(1), pp. 55-72.
TorJGn, A. (1971) The Adults Learning Projects (Toronto, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education).
ZIMMERMAN, B.J. (1989) A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning, ffournal of Educational
Psychology, 81(3), pp. 329-339.
ZIMMERMAN, B.J. (1990) Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview, Educational Psychologist,
25(1), pp. 3-17.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

o
f

S
y
d
n
e
y
]

a
t

0
0
:
4
3

0
7

D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
3