The concern for content coverage is also a concern of teachers thinking about adopting REAL teaching strategies. Teachers fear that their students will sacrifice breadth of content if they focus on the opportunity for depth that REALs afford. There is also the concern that the new teaching strategies will not prepare students for standardized achievement tests. However, the data in this area are generally positive. Dolmans (1993) found that PBL learning activities covered an average of 64% of intended course content. However, the coverage actually increased when students generated learning issues in response to their own needs, because half of those issues were judged relevant to course content. In terms of covering prescribed objectives, Rangachari (1991) found that students brainstorming about PBL problems identified and exceeded all of the faculty objectives. Blumberg and colleagues (1990) found adequate consistency between student issues and objectives generated by faculty. Coulson and Osborne (cf. Coltrane, 1994) discovered that PBL student groups identified an average of 61 % of faculty objectives deemed essential.