Scenario Based Learning’s Potential for Online, Asynchronous Learning and Beyond

Active Learning

A shift from the traditional lecture model towards a more active, student-centered approach to learning has been promoted at colleges and universities since the early 1980s. As Charles C. Bonwell and James A. Eison state in their book Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom, those strategies that support active learning have demonstrated the ability to promote students’ mastery of content, much like the traditional lecture format, but with the additional benefit of developing higher-order skills, such as critical thinking and problem-solving.[1]

But what do we mean when we refer to active learning? In an article on Active Learning from the Center for Teaching at Vanderbilt University, Cynthia J. Brame provides a helpful definition of the concept, synthesizing the characteristics of active learning that have pervaded the past few decades:

“active learning is commonly defined as activities that students do to construct knowledge and understanding. The activities vary but require students to do higher order thinking. Although not always explicitly noted, metacognition—students’ thinking about their own learning—is an important element, providing the link between activity and learning.”[2]

Thus, active learning generally requires that students go beyond the simple recall or explanation of facts and concepts, and instead actively apply that knowledge in new situations, analyze and draw connections between ideas, make decisions that they can then justify and support based on what they have learned, and reflect on the learning process as a whole.

Some active learning strategies can be relatively straightforward and implemented with limited prior planning. For example, a traditional lecture might be modified to incorporate strategic, timed pauses to allow for note taking or a consolidation of notes on the part of the students. Alternatively, the lecture might be chunked into smaller segments that are then connected by a group discussion that provides students the space to think critically about the concepts and ideas that were previously covered and prep for those that will immediately follow. Other common approaches such as think-pair-share activities, student-generated questions or study guides, and concept maps also fall within the realm of active learning.

In addition to these relatively modest, yet effective strategies, active learning also encompasses more elaborate practices that focus on building higher-order skills within the complexities of real-life, or what we might refer to as authentic contexts, those situations that arise and unfold in workplace environments and/or everyday life. Two of the most well-known and implemented methods categorized within this active learning group are Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Case-Based Learning (CBL).

A third approach can be added to the aforementioned active learning strategies. This additional authentic, decision-making strategy is known as Scenario-Based Learning (SBL). The core differences of SBL lie in the relative scale of the activity itself and the immediacy of feedback it affords. SBL incorporates narratives to guide learners through simulated events within authentic contexts that adapt and change depending upon the decisions and choices that the learner makes.[7] Its method is based in situated learning theory, an approach first developed in the 1990s by Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger, suggesting that learning occurs within the same authentic contexts in which that knowledge is then applied.[8] Following this method, SBL provides a safe space in which students can participate in real-world situations and practices, those that would otherwise be difficult for students to experience in the classroom in the absence of these simulated scenarios.[9]

Up to this point, SBL has not received the same level of attention in the space of Higher Education as PBL and CBL; however, SBL continues to be used widely across a variety of other professional environments, especially as an experiential learning tactic for professional development trainings. The remainder of this article, thus, explores SBL in more detail and makes a case for the consideration and efficacy of such a strategy in Higher Education, particularly within online learning environments.

The Need for Authentic, Active Learning Strategies in Higher Education

In 2001, Barbara J. Duch, et. al wrote:

“The last several decades have seen monumental change in all aspects of our lives… Today our students must be prepared to function in a very different working world than existed even ten years ago. The problems that these future professionals will be expected to solve will cross disciplinary boundaries, and will demand innovative approaches and complex problem-solving skills… What worked in the classroom a decade (or two or three) ago [will] no longer suffice, for the simple reason that past approaches fail to develop the full battery of skills and abilities desired in a contemporary college graduate.”[10]

More than two decades later, the criticisms and insights of this statement still apply, as Higher Education and the workplace continue to evolve and change with the arrival and growth of technologies like AI, the speed and frequency with which we interact with people from different cultural backgrounds, and a new reality where working virtually from home, at least part-time, is more the rule than the exception following the COVID-19 pandemic.

This kind of shift means that transferable skills like intercultural competency, adaptability, and the ability to communicate across a variety of mediums and cultures are in high demand among employers. In fact, Falkner and Stålbrandt claim that “When employers talk about employability beyond issues of sector-specific skills, they are usually talking about the ‘soft,’ ‘transferable,’ or ‘generic’ skills that they expect students will gain in [Higher Education].”[11] Yet some studies demonstrate an employer perception that this sort of practical knowledge and ability to transfer learning to a variety of situations is lacking among university graduates whose academic pursuits instead focus on specialized knowledge.[12]

As outlined above, active learning strategies such as PBL, CBL, and SBL can play a significant role in closing this perceived gap between Higher Education and the workforce by exposing learners to workplace realities and situations. A number of studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of PBL, for example, in terms of furthering students’ learning and improving critical thinking and problem-solving skills when compared to more traditional teaching methods.[13] Likewise, recent SBL studies have exhibited similar results. In a study from 2021, an SBL activity was delivered to a group of student teachers in advance of their teaching practicum as a means of increasing self-efficacy and classroom readiness. The study found that in the groups that were either given pre-written feedback generated by expert teachers or that received both feedback and a follow up reflection activity, there was a significant positive effect on cognitive classroom readiness and self-efficacy.[14] In another study from 2016-2017, SBL was employed in an online format to 248 first-year chemical engineering students to help bridge the gap between Higher Education and industry needs with the overarching goal of developing transferable skills. A large majority of students in this study ultimately reported that they not only felt that the scenario task improved their skills in areas such as problem-solving, reflection, and analysis, but that the activity also helped them to see the connections between the learning and its real-world application.[15]

While the potential for such active learning strategies to aid in the development of highly sought-after transferable skills is evident, the overall effectiveness of those strategies depends heavily on the effort put forth by the instructor and/or content designer in advance of actual implementation. In an online classroom, especially, where these types of activities must be conducted virtually and with limited guidance and interaction with the instructor and/or peers, that initial planning effort is even more crucial. The incorporation of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles and strategies – such as providing multiple means of representation, optimizing choice and autonomy to recruit interest, and varying methods for response and navigation in terms of physical action – is necessary to ensure that these learning activities are not only active and engaging, but also inclusive, accessible, and meaningful to all learners. In addition, because of the digital format in which these activities are delivered in an online classroom, UX design elements – including providing clear visual hierarchy, making items that are clickable obvious, strategically incorporating and varying elements such as buttons and grid layouts to vary visual interest – must also be integrated to ensure that the learning experience is enjoyable, useful, and easy to navigate (see UXDL: How to Use Design Thinking to Improve Your Online Course).

Such considerations are even more indispensable for learners in a course delivered partially or fully asynchronously, where learners have much more limited interaction and access to the instructor and/or their peers. In these asynchronous environments, the need to incorporate principles that maximize student engagement and motivation are even more apparent. And it is in these asynchronous settings, in particular, that SBL has the potential to play a vital role for the online learning experience.

Benefits of SBL

As referenced earlier, SBL shares many of the same attributes as both PBL and CBL. For example, SBL relies on a similar use of authentic narratives and situations to frame key questions or problems. An additional similarity is that students are then asked to analyze the various situations that arise and utilize skills such as critical-thinking and problem-solving to make decisions along the way. Finally, the students’ application of concepts and knowledge within each of these types of activities occurs in an isolated, low-risk environment.

Where SBL begins to diverge from both PBL and CBL is in its relative scale and immediacy. While PBL and CBL are conducted over an entire class session or multiple sessions throughout a given term, SBL activities can vary in terms of student workload estimation, depending on the specific content and learning objectives involved. Some tasks may only require five to ten minutes to complete, while others might take thirty minutes to an hour or more to fully participate and appreciate the experience.

The smaller scale and time commitment associated with SBL activities makes them well suited for lower-stakes, ungraded types of tasks that can serve as scaffolded activities for higher-stakes assignments. Such opportunities for low-stakes practice that can be repeated or attempted multiple times are particularly important for bolstering student motivation and overall performance by supporting self-efficacy and reducing fear of failure (see Encourage and Embrace Failure). The low-stakes nature and inherent branching structure of scenario activities are more likely to encourage students to return to the learning activity more than once, to experiment with different decisions, and to explore new strategies or approaches to solving a problem than would likely be the case with higher-stakes PBL activities, for example.

In addition to supporting student motivation, SBL activities also provide some potential benefits over both PBL and CBL, such as increased access and inclusion, since they are not constrained by either time or space. The low-stakes format means that students who may require additional time to complete tasks, those who may work better individually rather than in larger groups, or those with other challenges that prevent them from working synchronously still have an opportunity to partake in active learning tasks situated in authentic environments. Unlike PBL and CBL activities that rely heavily on frequent interaction with the instructor and/or peers, SBL activities are more versatile in that they can be delivered partially or entirely asynchronously or synchronously. They can also be completed individually, as a group, or a combination of both meaning that they can function in both small and large classes alike.

Perhaps the most important difference and most persuasive argument for the implementation of SBL in online, asynchronous environments is the immediacy of feedback which SBL affords the learner. Feedback for each possible choice that appears within a scenario is generated in advance by the instructor. This means that as soon as a learner makes a choice to a given challenge or question, that learner instantly receives comments and results pertaining to the decision that was just made. Such immediate feedback, thus, provides a means for the learner to monitor their own progress and to reflect on whether or not each individual decision was the right one, why or why not, and what they might do differently in the future.

The ability to self-monitor and self-regulate is a crucial component of metacognition, a skill that has been highly associated with student success (see Supporting Student Learning and Metacognition). In online, asynchronous courses where interactions are more limited and direct feedback between the instructor and student is likely more infrequent, SBL activities can provide much needed support for building these metacognitive skills that may otherwise be lacking. Furthermore, the experience itself of working through an SBL activity can also serve as a preparatory exercise for a larger reflective activity that emphasizes the process of learning.

Situations Best Suited to Scenario-Based Learning and Additional Resources

As has been explained throughout this article, Scenario-Based Learning is as an active learning strategy that promotes heightened engagement and motivation, critical thinking and problem-solving skills that are invaluable to employers, and metacognitive skills that support continued learning. SBL activities tend to require less time to complete than both PBL and CBL activities, they are more apt to be used for low-stakes assignments that can be repeated and returned to for additional practice and exploration, they can function in a variety of environments (small or large classes, asynchronous or synchronous environments, and online or in-person classrooms), and they offer the type of immediate and useful feedback that can often be a challenge to provide, in asynchronous spaces especially.

The most challenging aspect of SBL lies in the actual development of these types of activities, as they do require strategic, advanced planning in order to prove effective. That initial increased effort, however, can pay dividends in the long run, ensuring that activities are functional and meaningful for all learners and resulting in activities that can be recycled and reused with minimal revisions over a long period of time. While the details and strategies related to the “how” of developing an effective scenario is beyond the scope of this particular article, we want to leave you with a few considerations and resources that will help to get you started as you consider implementing SBL in your own courses.

Below is a list of just a few examples of the types of situations in which you might consider incorporating an SBL activity:

Resources

We encourage you to explore the resources listed below as a starting point for how to go about building an effective scenario:

• Building Scenarios in ThingLink
• R. J. Nadolski, H. G. K. Hummel, and H. J. vanden Brink et al., EMERGO: A methodology and toolkit for developing serious games in higher education, Simul. Gaming. 39 (2008), no. 3, 338–352.

For additional questions and/or support in designing and implementing SBL activities in your course, you are also invited to schedule a consultation with an ASC ODE instructional designer who can assist you in the SBL design and implementation process.