Problem-Based Learning

I love the open-endedness of this learning model.  Unlike a webquest where teachers create a list of websites students must visit, Problem-Based Learning lets the kids do the research; teachers merely provide links to relevant digital libraries and databases.  In the Hung et al. article, PBL is described as a ‘relatively new and innovative form of instruction”.  While this may true about the official PBL model, I disagree.  When I was in high school in the 1980s, all our science courses had labs.  Our labs were problems.  We had to (with our lab partner) make observations, conduct experiments, and problem solve to answer specific questions our teachers prepared for us.  We had to write up our labs (reflections) using a template—to try to justify our solutions.  At the heart of the activity was problem-based learning. I remember the science teacher, facilitating instruction and supervising us (for safety reasons – especially in chemistry).  During Earth science, I remember we had to identify the 30+ rock samples based on our own observations and research we gathered.  The teacher never gave us a set of websites (of course we didn’t have the web back then); he provided us with a set of resources to do research from.

One drawback to using this model is the content being taught is not consistent with other courses (other years).  The students drive the learning, so it is different for each student.  Also, students bring a wide array of prior knowledge to the learning table with them, and that prior knowledge is needed to help spur along the inquiry aspect of solving the problem.  Students need to make real world connections to be fully engaged, and what if they have no prior knowledge to connect to learning to motivate them?  One might suspect students would do worse on standardized tests too.  However...

PBL – promotes more in-depth study and understanding of content b/c students are more interested in what they are studying.  They have a clearly designed purpose – to find a solution to the problem they have chosen to study.  Students become the ‘authority’ on the topic they are researching.  There is a lot of power in that.  When other students ask questions or when they share information, they are reciprical teaching.   It is important to ease students into learning using this model though.  I wouldn’t want my students getting frustrated and giving up – because solving a problem does seem daunting when students are used to being spoon-fed knowledge.  I like how Dr. De Gallow described the goals of this model as being “partly determined by the students themselves” placing some of the “responsibility on the students’ shoulders for their own learning” in order to hopefully increase the student’s motivation to learn (http://www.pbl.uci.edu/whatispbl.html).

PBL is time consuming – and focuses on a range of content.  The argument in the Hung et al. article is whether breadth is more important than depth.  Because there is so much information available about a given topic, public education has to know when to draw a line on depth – or too much time could be spent gathering more research.  When in reality, the goal is to facilitate students’ skill building: critical thinking, problem solving while at the same time learning content (educational objectives).  The benefit of PBL is that students are able to learn the content in the context of skill building while making personal connections to topics the student is interested in – thus supporting the depth of their learning. 

By using a model and having a plan in place with some set time limits, students will be able to use higher-order thinking without overspending time gathering knowledge.  This is where teacher facilitation is imperative so that students stay focused on thinking critically, sharing knowledge, and solving the problem.

I thought the medical education study was interesting.  The non-PBL students scored better on the knowledge acquisition portion of the test yet the PBL students performed better in the clinical portion of the test in the first case but in the second study, non-PBL learners fell way below the national average.  That is where the argument of depth over breadth (knowledge acquisition) takes precedence.  In real life do humans solve problems or take standardized, multiple-choice tests?  Are we preparing kids for real life or for taking more standardized tests?  This answer is clear to me!

The benefits for using PBL to prepare students “to be self-directed, lifelong learners and practical problem solvers” far outweigh the negative aspects for designing PBL instruction.  Although creating, setting up, and then the actually activities take a huge portion of classroom time, the skills students acquired can be utilized and practiced again and again throughout the school year, reducing the need to spend time learning how to do research, how to read expository writing, how to cite sources, how to synthesize knowledge, and how to create a presentation or showcase for learning.  These skills become ‘behind the scene’ skills as students practice their problem-solving skills again and again.  Using a cliché, the actual motions included in learning become second nature to students – like riding a bike – and students build their skills to use them in other classes, in other contexts, in real life.   They master the tools for acquiring knowledge, then they build confidence in their abilities and are better able to tackle more challenging problems.  They may even read news or watch videos (about their chosen topic) in students’ personal or relaxed time, making connections from learning to life.  That is what adults –who are life-long learners --do. 

As for using web tools to enhance Online PBL learning, I am not a big fan of doing this completely online.  Web-enhanced learning modules are more reachable.  Unlike traditional lesson plans, PBL requires teachers to do a lot of planning up-front.  Then the facilitation process is more difficult in a web environment.  Face-to-face facilitation, especially around small groups, makes it easier to detect where a group is in their learning.  I would recommend Google docs, dropbox, and Wiggio for sharing documents and communicating digitally.  Evernote is another great tool and you can share documents and notes you’ve created in ‘notebook’ files.  Using a good old Wiki is another great tool for sharing – and it allows individuals to upload documents as wiki pages, images and video, and more.  And a wiki is simple to use – just click edit to make changes to a page once you are a ‘writer/editor’.  Elluminate, WIMBA, and Skype are good options too.  But I would rather have things written down so I can see them.  I don’t want to rely on a whiteboard or one person sharing their screen at a time.  I want to be able to write on and edit a document while hearing discussions or having written chats/discussions.