Problem‐based learning and action research in postgraduate teaching: the interdisciplinary core

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to describe innovatory online teaching carried out in the inter‐university master’s ‘Educational Innovation Policies and Practices for the Knowledge Society’, with the participation of Malaga, Almería and Internacional de Andalucía Universities. The master’s focuses on the exploration of a problem‐based learning model, which was specifically developed and directed to reflect the basic assumptions of action research. The online teaching model, developed particularly by Internacional de Andalucía University, is the background for the development of an interdisciplinary core investigated in this study. The principles that sustain the problem‐based learning model, particularly the full involvement of students in situated problems, have led to the application of action research’s assumptions and premises by placing problems within the professional practice of the students, their reflections and their possible modifications. The results suggest that the interdisciplinary core is a collaborative innovative opportunity that can turn real innovation processes into study content, from the educational practice of students.

Keywords:

• action research
• problem‐based learning
• higher education
• teacher training

Notes

1. Documentation can be accessed online (http://www.acceleratedschools.net/).

2. The core was designed to help to overcome the gap between theory and practice and to promote collaborative work, which was missing in one of the courses studied by Ax, Ponte, and Brouwer (2008).

3. We must note the relation of stage I and stage II with the use of personal narrative writing in self‐study as it is described in Pithouse, Mitchell, and Weber (2009).

4. M. Cotrina, M. García and R. Porras’ second external evaluation report ‘En mitad del viaje’ (2007).

5. The external evaluation team are Manuel Cotrina, Mayka García and Ramon Porras, researchers at the University of Cadiz.

6. M. Cotrina, M. García and R. Porras’ first external evaluation report ‘Valorando el diseño y los primeros momentos del Master’ (p. 8).

7. It must be noted that we did not constrain by the managerial arrangements as Burnett (2007). There were some misunderstandings between the teaching team and the administrative team but they did not interfere so much with the principles and development of the master’s programme.

8. The second external evaluation report, drawn up in interviews and documental revision, concludes that ‘there is a clear coincidence between objectives and facts (evidences)’ (see note 4).