TLDR: A study found that pharmacy apprentices learned diagnostic strategies more effectively when they first attempted to solve a problem, then received instruction and personalized feedback (PS-I), compared to receiving instruction before problem-solving (I-PS). The PS-I approach significantly improved their ability to apply these skills to new, complex situations (far-transfer tasks).
Developing strong diagnostic reasoning skills is crucial across many professional fields, from healthcare to engineering. However, students often face challenges like jumping to conclusions too quickly or relying too heavily on simple rules of thumb. Scenario-based learning (SBL), which uses realistic case studies and practice, offers a promising way to teach these skills. Yet, a key question remains: what’s the best way to sequence instruction and problem-solving activities?
A recent study by Fatma Betül Güreş, Tanya Nazaretsky, Bahar Radmehr, Martina Rau, and Tanja Käser explored this very question. Their research, titled “How Instructional Sequence and Personalized Support Impact Diagnostic Strategy Learning,” investigated whether providing explicit diagnostic strategy instruction before problem-solving (known as I-PS) or after problem-solving (PS-I) leads to better learning and the ability to apply that learning in new situations.
The researchers conducted their study using PharmaSim, an online scenario-based learning environment designed for pharmacy technician apprentices. PharmaSim simulates real-world client interactions, allowing students to practice their diagnostic skills. The study involved 80 participants who were randomly divided into two groups: one receiving instruction before problem-solving (I-PS) and the other problem-solving before instruction (PS-I).
In the PS-I group, students first tackled a client scenario without prior instruction on diagnostic strategies. After this initial attempt, they received instruction on these strategies, with examples directly related to their own problem-solving experience. In contrast, the I-PS group received the same instruction before engaging with the client scenario, using hypothetical examples. Both groups, however, received personalized feedback on their performance within PharmaSim, which highlighted areas where they excelled or overlooked critical information.
The study was structured in several phases: a pretest to ensure similar starting knowledge, a learning phase, a near-transfer phase (applying skills to a slightly different but similar scenario), and a far-transfer phase (applying skills to a much more complex and unfamiliar scenario). The researchers measured students’ diagnostic quality scores, including their adherence to structured checklists (like LINDAFF), their ability to consider interpersonal relationships, and their overall data interpretation skills.
The findings revealed some significant insights. While both instructional approaches were beneficial, the PS-I approach—where students engaged in problem-solving before receiving instruction—led to notably higher performance in the far-transfer tasks. This suggests that students who initially grappled with a problem, and then received instruction tailored to their experience, were better able to apply their learning to new and complex situations. The PS-I group also showed better acquisition of strategies related to considering interpersonal relationships in near-transfer scenarios.
Interestingly, the I-PS group’s performance gains only became apparent after the second phase, indicating that the personalized feedback, rather than the initial instruction alone, played a crucial role in their learning. This highlights the cognitive demands of diagnostic tasks and the importance of feedback in solidifying understanding.
Also Read:
- Enhancing LLM Tutors for Long-Term Learning Outcomes
- SCRIPT Chatbot: Understanding How AI Supports Novice Programmers
In conclusion, this research suggests that allowing students to engage in problem-solving first, followed by targeted instruction and personalized feedback, can be a more effective way to teach complex diagnostic strategies, especially when the goal is to enable students to transfer their skills to novel and challenging contexts. This approach helps students build an initial understanding through struggle, which is then refined and deepened by instruction that directly addresses their identified knowledge gaps. For more details, you can read the full research paper here.
