Critical Thinking – Real World Problem Solving Lesson Plan

Return to ePortfolio Main Page


Critical Thinking – Real World Problem Solving Lesson Plan

Lesson – Lower versus Upper Motor Neuron Disorders

Intended Audience: Physical Therapy Students.

Main Learning Outcome: Evaluate subjects in clinical case studies to differentiate between upper and lower motor neuron disorders.

Supporting Learning Outcomes:

  • Analyze your understanding of the causes of symptoms of upper and lower motor neuron disorders.
  • Apply the upper and lower motor neuron pathways to the anatomical structure of the central nervous system.
  • Understand the relationship between upper and lower motor neurons.
  • Understand and identify the symptoms of upper and lower motor neuron disorders.

Plan for active learning:

In order to have the students work through these complex objectives, there will be a combination of case study/problem-based learning and peer teaching. Students will receive a brief training in how to approach a clinical case study based on the case history of an actual patient. After that, students will be broken down into groups of 4 students. Each group will receive series of case studies, one at a time. The initial two case studies will be simple and easy to identify anatomically; one will clearly demonstrate a lower motor injury and one will demonstrate an upper motor injury. The subsequent cases will contain more difficult to identify anatomical injuries.

Each group will be assigned to present their case to the rest of the class after having time to analyze the case. The group will be responsible for answering questions about their case that both the other students have and that the instructor has. It will be important for the instructor to use probative questions if the case study answers are incomplete or incorrect rather than answering the questions for the presenting group. For students who are less confident, working in a group may help them work out answers in a less formal, less threatening way than working alone. For all of the students, working in a group will allow them to see other methods of problem solving that they could apply to future attempts at case studies.

Learning Outcome Alignment:

The main learning outcome for this lesson is evaluation, which requires taking many of the other levels of Bloom’s taxonomy and using the information and processes learned and applying them in a problem-solving heuristic. The use of actual case study to work on learning how to solve problems is well aligned because the case studies allow for real to life problem solving but in a safe space where the outcomes of being wrong are low risk. Additionally, the use of peer teaching and group work allows students in the class to be exposed to how other students apply their background knowledge to the cases to problem-solving. If the instructor is constantly helping the class solve the problems, there is a greater possibility that people will view the instructor’s method of solving the cases is the only correct method. By working in small groups and reporting out as peers to the rest of the class, there are more potential problem-solving methods exposed. Also, if there are common wrong answers or misconceptions, they are more likely to come up naturally so that students who have those misconceptions can confront those misconceptions.

Disciplinary context:

This case study methodology is an excellent fit for pre-clinical students. The case studies that these physical therapy students would be solving would generally be targeted at medical students, so the focus would be on diagnosis. While that would not be an actual task required of PT students in the future, the authenticity of the task and the need to understand diagnoses is important.


Return to ePortfolio Main Page