{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.032948929159802305, 'fraction_numerical': 0.022652388797364087, 'mean_word_length': 5.21227621483376, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Problem‐Based Learning is a More Effective Method at Developing Critical Reasoning Skills When Compared to Traditional Instructional Methods

The effective development of critical reasoning skills (CRS) is one of the most important factors to ensure student success in the professional environment. Problem‐based Instruction (PBI) pedagogy has been theorized to be a more effective method of developing CRS compared to traditional lecture‐style instruction (LI). Previously, it has been shown that students taught by PBI perform better on exams compared to LI students and that this effect is magnified in traditionally low achieving students (Franklin et. al, AJP: Advances in Education, 2015). This study compared the effectiveness of PBI with LI at developing writing and critical reasoning skills in an upper level, undergraduate animal physiology (AP) course. Students enrolled in AP were randomly assigned to one of two experimental groups: LI (n=41) or PBI (n=73). Student grade point averages were not different between groups at the onset of instruction (p>0.05). To assess the effectiveness of each of these methods at developing CRS, student writing assignments at the beginning and end of the semester were evaluated. Within these writing assignments students were asked to explain the rationale behind a laboratory experiment, report experimental results in a logical manner and discuss the scientific implications of these results. All writing assignments were scored blindly, by 3 graders based on a specific rubric scaled 1–10. Scores were not different between the two groups at the onset of the course (writing assignment #1, first lab of the semester) with LI students scoring 5.45±1.29 points and PBI students scoring 5.18±1.18 points out of a possible 10 points. Writing assignment #2 covered the last lab of the semester. While students in both instructional groups showed improvement in their writing over the course of the semester, students in the PBI group exhibited markedly greater improvement (85.05±33.71%) between writing assignments 1 & 2 compared to LI students (36.79±25.24%, p<0.05, d=1.62). These results indicate that PBI students, who have been challenged to think about conceptual problems and work with their peers to find a solution, develop better critical reasoning skills compared to LI students who are simply provided with direct informational instruction in a lecture style format.