Successfully Implementing Problem-Based Learning in Classrooms

Description

Problem-based learning (PBL) represents a widely recommended best practice that facilitates both student engagement with challenging content and students' ability to utilize that content in a more flexible manner to support problem-solving. This edited volume includes research that focuses on examples of successful models and strategies for facilitating preservice and practicing teachers in implementing PBL practices in their current and future classrooms in a variety of K-12 settings and in content areas ranging from the humanities to the STEM disciplines. This collection grew out of a special issue of the Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. It includes additional research and models of successful PBL implementation in K-12 teacher education and classroom settings.
Problem-Based Learning in K–12 and Teacher Education: Introduction and Current Trends, by Thomas Brush and John Saye

Part I: Problem-Based Learning in Teacher Education

1. Transforming Preservice Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ Practices: Promoting Problem Solving and Sense Making, by Marilyn E. Strutchens and W. Gary Martin

2. Conexiones: Fostering Socioscientific Inquiry in Graduate Teacher Preparation, by Krista D. Glazewski, Michèle I. Shuster, Thomas Brush, and Andrea Ellis

3. An Instructional Model to Support Problem-Based Historical Inquiry: The Persistent Issues in History Network, by Thomas Brush and John Saye

4. Preservice Elementary Teachers Learning to Teach PBL Through Science-Integrated Engineering Design, by Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue

Part II: Problem-Based Learning in K–12 Contexts

5. Teacher as Designer: A Framework for Analysis of Mathematical Model-Eliciting Activities, by Margret A. Hjalmarson and Heidi Diefes-Dux

6. The Grand Challenge: Using a PBL Approach to Teach Cutting-Edge Science, by Peggy A. Ertmer, Sarah Schlosser, Kari Clase, and Omolola Adedokun

7. Using Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments to Support Problem-Based Historical Inquiry in Secondary School Classrooms, by John Saye and Thomas Brush

8. Engaging Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Adopting a Nine-Step PBL Model, by Karen C. Goodnough and Woei Hung

Conclusion: What Is Missing; What Is Needed? Future Research Directions With PBL in K–12 and Teacher Education, by Michael M. Grant and Krista D. Glazewski

Index

Sujets

• Education

Informations

• Publié par: Purdue University Press
• Date de parution: 15 mars 2017
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781612494951
• Langue: English

Extrait

Successfully Implementing Problem-Based Learning in Classrooms
Successfully Implementing Problem-Based Learning in Classrooms
Research in K–12 and Teacher Education
Edited by Thomas Brush & John W. Saye
Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, Indiana
Copyright 2017 by Purdue University. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Cataloging-in-Publication data is on file with the Library of Congress.
Cloth ISBN: 9781557537805
ePDF ISBN: 9781612494944
ePUB ISBN: 9781612494951
Cover image Hand Drawing by Kalawin/iStock/Thinkstock
C ONTENTS
Problem-Based Learning in K–12 and Teacher Education: Introduction and Current Trends
Thomas Brush and John Saye
P ART I: P ROBLEM -B ASED L EARNING IN T EACHER E DUCATION
1 Transforming Preservice Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ Practices: Promoting Problem Solving and Sense Making,
Marilyn E. Strutchens and W. Gary Martin
2 Conexiones: Fostering Socioscientific Inquiry in Graduate Teacher Preparation,
Krista D. Glazewski, Michèle I. Shuster, Thomas Brush, and Andrea Ellis
3 An Instructional Model to Support Problem-Based Historical Inquiry: The Persistent Issues in History Network,
Thomas Brush and John Saye
4 Preservice Elementary Teachers Learning to Teach PBL Through Science-Integrated Engineering Design,
Pamela S. Lottero-Perdue
P ART II: P ROBLEM -B ASED L EARNING IN K–12 C ONTEXTS
5 Teacher as Designer: A Framework for Analysis of Mathematical Model-Eliciting Activities,
Margret A. Hjalmarson and Heidi Diefes-Dux
6 The Grand Challenge: Using a PBL Approach to Teach Cutting-Edge Science,
Peggy A. Ertmer, Sarah Schlosser, Kari Clase, and Omolola Adedokun
7 Using Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments to Support Problem-Based Historical Inquiry in Secondary School Classrooms
John Saye and Thomas Brush
8 Engaging Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Adopting a Nine-Step PBL Model
Karen C. Goodnough and Woei Hung
C ONCLUSION
What Is Missing; What Is Needed? Future Research Directions With PBL in K–12 and Teacher Education
Michael M. Grant and Krista D. Glazewski
Index
P ROBLEM -B ASED L EARNING IN K–12 AND T EACHER E DUCATION : I NTRODUCTION AND C URRENT T RENDS
Thomas Brush and John Saye
Welcome to this edited volume focusing on research exploring the use of problem-based learning (PBL) in preservice and inservice teacher education. Currently, there is a major debate regarding the most effective methods for providing the best educational experiences for K–12 students that will afford them with the experiences they need to succeed in the 21st century. Recent definitions of the requirements for high-quality teaching emphasize not only content and pedagogical knowledge but also the use of innovative instructional strategies to support students’ acquisition of a more flexible knowledge base as they engage in complex problem solving (Bell, 2010; Lombardi, 2007; Saye et al., 2013; U.S. Department of Education, 2010). PBL represents a widely recommended best practice that facilitates both student engagement with challenging content and students’ ability to utilize that content in a more flexible manner to support problem solving. In PBL, curriculum is anchored within authentic, ill-structured problems. Teachers guide and support students as they apply content knowledge toward problem solutions (Barrows & Kelson, 1993; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Savery, 2015).
Current Trends of PBL in K–12 Education
Extensive research conducted over the past decade demonstrates that PBL can be an effective strategy for enhancing both student engagement with challenging content and students’ academic achievement with that content in K–12 settings (Brush et al., 2013). A number of meta-analyses focusing on the implementation of PBL in K–12 environments conclude that PBL instruction is more effective than traditional, teacher-centered instruction with regard to student achievement (Ravitz, 2009; Strobel & Barneveld, 2009; Walker & Leary, 2009). Wirkala and Kuhn (2011) explored the effectiveness of PBL with middle school social studies students and determined that students engaged in PBL instruction versus lecture-based instruction performed better on a number of outcome variables including content knowledge and argumentation. Linn and colleagues’ extensive research focusing on both the web-based science environment and “knowledge integration” framework continues to demonstrate the effectiveness of problem-based instruction when compared to typical instructional activities (Chiu & Linn, 2014; Linn & Eylon, 2011). Liu and colleagues (2014) and Pedersen and Liu’s (2002) research with Alien Rescue suggests that PBL can be an effective method for both student academic achievement in science and (perhaps more importantly) for students to transfer knowledge to both similar problems and different situations. Saye and colleagues (2013) analyzed the teaching practices of numerous middle- and high school teachers and found a strong positive correlation between teachers who engage in problem- and inquiry-based teaching practices and their students’ performance on achievement tests.
PBL has also been found to have a positive impact on a wide range of student abilities. For example, Glazewski and colleagues (2016) collaborated with a high school biology teacher on a problem-based unit focused on genetics. Results of the implementation of this unit with ninth grade students not only indicated that students had significant content knowledge gains in science (specifically genetics) but that students who were struggling with science content had significantly greater gains from pretest to posttest than their peers. Similar research demonstrating the positive impact of PBL with struggling students has been found in the areas of economics (Mergendoller, Maxwell, & Bellisimo, 2006) and scientific thinking in social science (Jewett & Kuhn, 2016).
PBL Versus Project-Based Learning
While extensive PBL research has been conducted in the areas of secondary science, social studies/history, and mathematics (e.g., Trinter, Moon, & Brighton, 2015), the research in the area of English language arts (ELA) is more limited. In addition, research focusing on PBL implementation at the elementary level is also limited. This may be due to the distinction between problem -based learning and project -based learning. Much of the literature examining inquiry-based curricular models implemented in the ELA curriculum and/or with elementary-age students tends to focus on project-based learning. This is even the case with new educational trends such as the maker movement, which tends to have students be more product/maker focused as opposed to problem focused (Halverson & Sheridan, 2014; Peppler & Bender, 2013; Smith, 2013). For example, Smith (2013) discussed an inquiry project with seventh and eighth grade ELA students in which they digitally fabricated pop-up books. The researcher specifically discussed how these types of “maker” initiatives should be considered project-based as opposed to problem-based.
From our perspective, PBL curricular models are distinct from many models proposed for project-based learning (Saunders & Rennie, 2013; Savery, 2015; Saye & Brush, 2004). In PBL, an authentic problem or central question is the overall focus of a unit; with project-based learning, the project or activity is the central focus of the unit of instruction (Savery, 2015). This sometimes can lead down a path in which the project takes over the curricular focus with little regard for the need for students to demonstrate any understanding of substantive, authentic problems. Barron and colleagues (1998) dismissed project-based learning that focuses on “doing for the sake of doing” (p. 273), or “action without appropriate reflection.” They define worthy projects as ones that integrate “doing with understanding” (p. 274). However, for Barron and colleagues, PBL is most meaningfully used when embedded in complex projects.
The Buck Institute for Education, a leading organization for development and promotion of project-based learning, has published what they refer to as “essential design elements” for any project-based curricular initiatives. They specifically state that “[t]he heart of a project … is a problem to investigate and solve, or a question to explore and answer” (Buck Institute for Education, 2015, p. 2). Similarly, Parker and colleagues (2011) used project-based learning to characterize a substantial problem-based curriculum project. Noting that project-based learning often refers to “a broad and often unspecified umbrella term for a wide range of pedagogies” (p. 538), they make clear that their use of the term project-based emphasizes activities in which students engage in deep, disciplined inquiry structured around authentic problems .
Thus, the distinction between PBL and project-based learning may become less of an issue as inquiry-based instructional models become more accepted in K–12 settings. However, the conceptualization of “problem-based learning,” “problem-based projects,” and “project-based learning” may warrant further discussion and clarification as we continue to explore the most effective methods for promoting inquiry in K–12 settings. In particular, the lack of PBL models in ELA and elementary settings may benefit from continued exploration of the commonalities between PBL and project-based learning.