Chapter 1

Problem-Based Learning (PBL)

“Collaborative Problem-Solving”

 

Major Concepts and Ideas in the Field of PBL

Traditional learning occurs when teachers decide what and how information is disseminated to students, making students passive participants in learning. As people saw the need for students to be active participants of learning and be able to do more than just regurgitate facts they began to look for other ways to present content. Problem-Based Learning, or PBL, became a formalized instructional model during medical school instruction in the 1960’s. Howard Barrows headed “The Project for Learning Resources Design” team at McMaster University’s medical education program in the early 1970’s. He and his team developed a PBL approach with the intention of addressing the idea of students as passive learners who were disconnected from learning and lacked the ability to apply what they’ve learned to real-world problems outside the classroom. Barrows & Kelson (1993, pp. 1-2) identified six practices/dimensions to the PBL process: “(1) through posing ill-structured real-world problems, students are engaged with a process of generating, inquiring, and refining hypotheses methodically; (2) through problem design that avoids explicit objectives, students recognize that they require more knowledge/skills to ‘dig out’ the problems themselves, and with experience in the PBL curriculum, students develop a richly elaborated base of ‘integrated knowledge and skills’ and cognitive flexibility; (3) through teacher facilitation rather than lecture or providing answers, students develop self-directed learning skills; (4) through group structured inquiry, students develop collaboration skills and and appreciate the value of multiple perspectives to address problems; (5) ‘overarching’ across the experiences in PBL is that all processes are student centered and geared to being interdisciplinary  – having students take personal and group responsibility for their learning; and (6) through posing the question as a continual instigation, students generate self-appraisal and self-reflection habits” (Filipenko & Naslund, 2015, p. 13). The team realized that medical students didn’t need to learn from textbooks, they needed to learn about dealing with actual patients. Instructors were there to guide students through the learning process and encourage them to think critically and self-reflect. The created medical scenarios, or ill-structured problems, based on real patient cases that could be used in class for students to think through like doctors, examining and creating hypotheses then trying to “diagnose” the patient’s problem. These types of problems have multiple paths to a solution and require the learner to ask questions, make decisions, adapt their thinking, and don’t necessarily have one clear answer. Gallagher (1997) states that “PBL problems are constructed around predetermined learning goals, conceptual focus, and disciplinary relevance”. Therefor ill-structured doesn’t mean lacking structure, but the structure is set up to address the learning goals and be relevant to the learning. An example is how a person reacts when they lose their car keys, do they run around aimlessly looking for them or do they think through the best process for searching and monitor as they go along (Gallagher, 1997).

Due to its use of a student-centered approach to ill-structured problem solving the PBL process developed by Barrow’s team eventually become used by other medical school programs, university and training programs, and K-12 education. Wirkala and Kuhn (2011) found that students performed significantly better on a multitude of outcome measures when they engaged in PBL instruction versus lecture-based instruction. PBL builds many different skills in students because it is student-centered and self-directed. They build research, communication, problem-solving, self-reflection, and cognitive skills. Another benefit of using PBL in classrooms is that it fosters student collaboration and engagement since students typically work in small groups. Using PBL also increases student motivation because the topic is relevant and students feel pride at being able to solve it on their own. As with any other learning model, PBL also has its challenges. A major challenge is that teachers may have become accustomed to being the “sage on the stage” and may not know how to become more of a facilitator or guide during the learning process. Instead of telling teachers must learn to ask questions that guide students and/or model the problem-solving process. The teacher must be a model problem solver and demonstrate what the students should do without telling them. The role of the teacher is to just guide the students and monitor their progress. Another challenge is that the problems must be presented in a way that encourages reflection without giving so much information that the students don’t need to do anything else to solve it. Inversely, problems can’t lack so much information that they become too simple.

The process of PBL begins with the introduction of an authentic, open-ended, ill-structured problem to small groups of students. Students then individually identify and gather facts through research and questioning. The group comes back together to share what they have learned, edit their hypothesis or make a new hypothesis. Throughout the process students self-reflect and groups share reflections as well. Then the group comes to apply what they’ve learned towards a shared solution to the problem. Barrows & Myers (1993) developed an outline for the PBL process.

 

 

Since PBL revolves around authentic problem solving, assessing learning using multiple choice or short answer questions won’t work. The assessment needs to be authentic as well. Some assessment types that work well for use with problem-based learning are individual and group presentations, tripartite assessment, case-based essays, portfolios, reports, and self- or peer-assessment just to name a few (Roopashree, 2014).

 

Problem-based learning (PBL) is often confused with project-based learning. These models of learning are not the same. PBL focuses on a central problem that students must investigate while project-based learning centers around the creation of a project or activity. Initiatives like the Maker Movement are an example of instances where the two have been confused and it should be clarified that trends such as this are not PBL, but are project-based as students are making or producing a product. However, as these models become more widely used and researched and authentic problem solving is used in combination with project-based learning model as demonstrated by the Buck Institute for Education, we can see the similarities between them. More about project-based learning is discussed in Chapter 2.

 

 

Theories Associated with PBL

PBL has a basis in metacognitive, constructivist, cognitive load and motivation theories. Metacognition is often described as “thinking about thinking”. This relates to PBL in that metacognition, like PBL, is a process during which the learner is reflective and aware of their thinking and self-evaluates. The self-direction that students must demonstrate during the problem-based learning process requires metacognitive skills. On their own students must think about each step of the process, analyze what they have done and what needs to be done next and be self-aware.

Metacognitive knowledge is that in which the learner knows how to manage their learning. As students are being self-directed learners during the PBL process they are using metacognitive skills to have awareness of their understanding and what else they need to know. In addition, they use metacognitive strategies to set goals, make a plan for achieving them, and assess whether they have been achieved. Problem-solving during the PBL process also requires metacognitive skills. Hmelo & Eberbach (2012) refer to the following definition “Metacognitive skills refer to the executive control processes of planning one’s problem solving, monitoring one’s progress, and evaluating whether one’s goals have been met (Schoenfeld, 1985)”.

Constructivism is a group of theories and ideas which hold that the learner constructs meaning internally from the environment and process of learning. As students have to research and problem solve during PBL, they are “constructing” knowledge themselves versus being given information by the teacher. They construct meaning through coming up with their own solution, along with their other group members, to the problem given. Constructivist learning environments also mirror those of PBL because they engage learners, provide opportunities for collaboration, support learners in setting goals and regulating their own learning and encourage learners to reflect on their learning (Reiser & Dempsey, 2018).

Since students work in groups during the problem-based learning process, they have the support of each other throughout the learning process, Sweller’s (1988) Cognitive Load Theory is based on structures called schemas in which “knowledge is represented in long-term memory as packets of information” (Reiser & Dempsey, 2018). Schemas categorize information which learners use to solve problems. The more that is learned the more schemas develop and increase in complexity. When a problem is presented that students don’t have the appropriate schemas for, as might occur during problem-based learning, a higher cognitive load (which puts more strain working memory) is created. Working collaboratively during PBL helps to reduce this cognitive load and free up working memory for learners.

The process of PBL both requires and creates motivation in students. Students connection to the problem and issue(s) presented increases intrinsic motivation because it is relevant and interesting to the student. They are also motivated because they find value in solving problems themselves and having control over their own learning. Keller (2010) outline five principles of motivation that are applicable to PBL. Perceived gaps in knowledge created by unanswered questions (think of open-ended problems) promote curiosity and motivation. Learners are motivated when the content is meaningful to them in some way. Part of the PBL process involves learners coming up with solutions on their own (or with their group) and they can take pride in and be motivated by the fact that they achieved this on their own. In a similar way, students feel a sense of accomplishment as they see they will be able to come up with a solution at the end PBL process which provides motivation. Volition, or overcoming obstacles during learning, also provides motivation for students who must self-regulate their own learning.

 

PBL Resources

 

Problem-Based Learning Case/Example

Does STEM and problem-based learning hinder effective and engaging learning in the classroom?

Introduction

Students at an elementary school have been introduced to problem-based learning with hopes of becoming a STEM certified school. Students will participate in four problem-based learning projects (two per semester). These projects will incorporate hands-on learning that meets all the components of STEM as well as Georgia Standards of Excellence. Problem-based learning should be led with a real-world problem that the students are able to solve or come up with a solution to. The purpose of this study is to examine PBL units to make sure they align with STEM and GSOE. However, teachers often get away from teaching specific skills that students will be tested on causing lower scores on the District Benchmarks and Georgia Milestones Test.

Problem Situation

The elementary school used in this case study focuses on a large school issue which is Urban Gardening. There are several grade levels who are able to create PBL units that align closely to this larger school issue and there are others that don’t. The researchers wanted to know if the grade level’s PBL units were meeting the components of problem-based learning, STEM, and GSOE without having the students engage in meaningful learning.

Performance Analysis

Students were scoring particularly lower than the district in this given year compared to any other year. Students begin participating heavily in problem-based learning this year and there was a decline in test scores. According to a survey, teacher interviews, and observations the projects that were being given did not fully align with GSOE causing students to perform low. The principal had a concern because the data across the cluster was becoming worse than it had ever been. Her expectation was that teachers would align the GSOE with the projects that were being given which would create a more effective and engaging classroom.

Cause Analysis

After reviewing the findings and data of the school compared to the cluster these were the causes:

  1. High rigor and problem solving, but no solutions/conclusion
  2. The teacher was more concerned with teaching STEM rather than incorporating STEM into the standards
  3. Projects were taking up time to build, losing time from true instruction

Intervention

There were various solutions that would help teachers have more effective and engaging classes. The principal did not want her students to be “taught to the test” which is why she chose the STEM route. This given year students performed low and interventions needed to be put in place the following year. The interventions that have been set in place include:

  1. Teachers will be given more planning days to plan PBL units that are aligned to STEM and GSOE.
  2. The STEM teacher would provide resources that tie all three of the components that need to be met.
  3. PBL units will include more real-world situations that are in the elementary school’s area.
  4. The principal would review all units at the beginning of the year to ensure all requirements have been met.

Evaluation

The teachers were able to plan effective PBL units that aligned with the STEM components and GSOE. With another set of interviews, the teachers were pleased with receiving extra planning time for their units. They felt like it helped to achieve more effective and engaging units. This in return helped increase the scores on the benchmark. Students were scoring at least 38% higher than the previous year. The Georgia Milestones test will not conclude until May 16,  2019 so there will be no data to be given until those results are received.

 

Glossary

Problem-based learning – teaching method in which students are presented with real-world problems that are to be solved across various content areas

Engineering Design Process – series of steps engineers use to come up with a solution to the problem; the steps are: ask, imagine, plan, create, and improve

Collaboration– working together to produce or create something

Solution – solving a problem or a question

Connection – the relationship of relating learning to real-world situations

Scientific Method – the process of experimentation that is used to explore observations and answer questions; the steps of the process are: ask a question, hypothesis, test, analyze data, and results

Problem Solving – the process of finding solutions to complex issues

STEAM – an acronym that stands for science, technology, engineering, art, and math

Student-Centered – learning experiences and instructional approaches that are intended to address learning needs, interest, and aspirations of the students.

Authenticity – work that is real

 

References

Filipenko, M., & Naslund, J. (Eds). (2015) Problem Based Learning in Teacher Education. Springer: Cham, Switzerland. ISBN: 9783319020037.

Gallagher, S. A. (1997). Problem-based learning: Where did it come from, what does it do, and where is it going? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20(4), 332-362. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016235329702000402

Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235. https://doi-org.ezproxy.gsu.edu/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3

Hmelo-Silver, C. E. & Eberbach, C. (2012). Learning theories and problem-based learning. In S. Bridges, C. McGrath, & T. Whitehill (Eds.). Researching problem-based learning in clinical education: The next generation (pp. 3- 17). New York: Springer

Khalil, M. K., & Elkhider, I. A. (2016). Applying Learning Theories and Instructional Design Models for Effective Instruction. Advances in Physiology Education, 40(2), 147–156. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.gsu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=eric&AN=EJ1097074&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Kim, D. G., & Lee, J. (2014). A Study on Improving Information Processing Abilities Based on PBL. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 41–52. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.gsu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=eric&AN=EJ1043118&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Reiser, R., & Dempsey, J. (Eds). (2018) Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (4th Ed). Pearson: New York, NY.

Roopashree, B. J. (2014). PBL: Future Challenges for Educational Practice and Research. Journal on School Educational Technology, 10(2), 9–16. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.gsu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=eric&AN=EJ1097623&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Smith, C., Powell, S., & Wood, E.J. (1995). Problem-based Learning and Problem-solving Skills. Biochemical Education, 23(3), 149-152.

Wirkala, C., & Kuhn, D. (2011). Problem-based learning in K–12 education: Is it effective and how does it achieve its effects? American Educational Research Journal, 48 (5), 1157–1186.

Authored by: Brooke Jones & Tanisha Butler-Sewell