Facilitating Problem Framing in Project-Based Learning
Main Article Content
Abstract
While problem solving is a relatively well understood process, problem framing is less well understood, particularly with regard to supporting students to learn as they frame problems. Project-based learning classrooms are an ideal setting to investigate how teachers facilitate this process. Using participant observation, this study investigated how teachers supported students in taking ownership over the framing of problems in a charter school that serves students who have been underserved by traditional schooling. Data include audio/video records, field notes, interviews, and student work from a nineweek project. Interaction analysis was used to examine ownership and learning over time. Analysis suggests that providing a relevant yet revisable design problem, giving instruction about design process as iterative, and problematizing a model of design process supported students in taking ownership over the framing of the problem; students were motivated to pose questions and gathered information purposefully, thereby learning in the process.
Article Details
1. Publication and Promotion: In consideration of the Publisher’s agreement to publish the Work, Author hereby grants and assigns to Publisher the non-exclusive right to print, publish, reproduce, or distribute the Work throughout the world in all means of expression by any method now known or hereafter developed, including electronic format, and to market or sell the Work orany part of it as Publisher sees fit. Author further grants Publisher the right to use Author’s name in association with the Work inpublished form and in advertising and promotional materials
2. Copyright: Copyright of the Work remains in Author’s name.
3. Prior Publication and Attribution: Author agrees not to publish the Work in print form prior to publication of the Work by the Publisher. Author agrees to cite, by author, title, and publisher, the original Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning publication when publishing the Work elsewhere
4. Author Representations: The Author represents and warrants that the Work:
(a) is the Author’s original Work and that Author has full power to enter into this Agreement;
(b) does not infringe the copyright or property of another;
(c) contains no material which is obscene, libelous, defamatory or previously published, in whole or in part.
Author shall indemnify and hold Publisher harmless against loss of expenses arising from breach of any such warranties.
5. Licensing and Reuse: Reuse of the published Work will be governed by a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0; http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc/4.0/). This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon the Work non-commercially; although new works must acknowledge the original Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning publication and be non-commercial, they do not have to be licensed on the same terms.
References
Atkinson, P., & Hammersley, M. (1994). Ethnography and participant observation. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (Vol. 1, pp. 248– 261). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Atman, C. J., Chimka, J., Bursic, K. M., & Nachtmann, H. L. (1999). A comparison of freshman and senior engineering design processes. Design Studies, 20(2), 131–152.
Atman, C. J., Yasuhara, K., Adams, R. S., Barker, T., Turns, J., & Rhone, E. (2008). Breadth in problem scoping: A comparison of freshman and senior engineering students. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24(2), 234–245.
Barron, B., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A. J., Zech, L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem-and project-based learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3–4), 271–311.
Basadur, M., Graen, G. B., & Green, S. G. (1982). Training in creative problem solving: Effects on ideation and problem finding and solving in an industrial research organization. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30(1), 41–70.
Boling, E., & Smith, K. M. (2014). Critical issues in studio pedagogy: Beyond the mystique and down to business. In Design in Educational Technology (pp. 37–56). London: Springer.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (expanded ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Bursic, K. M., & Atman, C. J. (1997). Information gathering: A critical step for quality in the design process. Quality Management Journal, 4(4): 60–75.
Christiaans, H. H. C. M., & Dorst, K. (1992). An empirical study into design thinking. In N. Cross, K. Dorst, & N. F. M. Roozenburg (Eds.), Research in design thinking. Delft, Netherlands: Delft University Press.
Collin, K. (2006). Connecting work and learning: Design engineers’ learning at work. Journal of Workplace Learning, 18(7–8), 403–413.
Coyne, R. (2005). Wicked problems revisited. Design Studies, 26(1), 5–17.
Crismond, D. P., & Adams, R. S. (2012). The informed design teaching and learning matrix. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 738–797.
Cross, N. (2001). Design cognition: Results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity. In C. M. Eastman, W. M. McCracken, & W. C. Newstetter (Eds.), Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education (Vol. 5, pp. 79–103). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
Dadich, S. (2014, September 23). Why getting it wrong is the future of design. Wired, 126–133.
DeWalt, K. M., & DeWalt, B. R. (2010). Participant observation: A guide for fieldworkers. New York: Rowman AltaMira.
Dole, S., Bloom, L., & Kowalske, K. (2016). Transforming pedagogy: Changing perspectives from teacher-centered to learner-centered. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10(1), 1.
Dominick, P. G. (2001). Tools and tactics of design. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Dorst, K. (2015). Frame innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem-solution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425–437.
Dorta, T., Perez, E., & Lesage, A. (2008). The ideation gap: Hybrid tools, design flow and practice. Design Studies, 29(2), 121–141.
Franske, B. J. (2009). Engineering problem finding in high school students. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Grant, M. M., & Hill, J. R. (2006). Weighing the risks with the rewards: Implementing student centered pedagogy within high-stakes testing. In R. G. Lambert & C. J. McCarthy (Eds.), Understanding teacher stress in an age of accountability. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Griffin, A., & Hauser, J. R. (1993). The voice of the customer. Marketing Science, 12(1), 1–27.
Hanauer, D., Frederick, J., Fotinakes, B., & Strobel, S. (2012). Linguistic analysis of project ownership for undergraduate research experiences. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 378–385.
Hey, J., Yu, J., & Agogino, A. M. (2008). Design team framing: Paths and principles. Paper presented at the ASME 2008 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2006). Goals and strategies of a problem-based learning facilitator. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 4.
Homer-Dixon, T. (2000). The ingenuity gap: How we can solve the problems of the future. Toronto: Knopf.
Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well- structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65–94.
Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85.
Jonassen, D. H., Strobel, J., & Lee, C. B. (2006). Everyday problem solving in engineering: Lessons for engineering educators. Journal Of Engineering Education-Washington, 95(2), 139.
Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103.
Jorgensen, D. L. (1989). Participant observation. Wiley Online Library.
Kapur, M. (2015). The preparatory effects of problem solving versus problem posing on learning from instruction. Learning and Instruction, 39, 23–31.
Kuhl, P. K. (2004). Early language acquisition: Cracking the speech code. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5(11), 831–843.
Kvan, T., & Gao, S. (2006). A comparative study of problem framing in multiple settings. In Design Computing and Cognition ’06 (pp. 245–263). London: Springer.
LaBanca, F., & Ritchie, K. C. (2011). The art of scientific ideas: Teaching and learning strategies that promote creative problem finding. Science Teacher, 78(8), 48.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lowrie, T. (2002). Designing a framework for problem posing: Young children generating open-ended tasks. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 3(3), 354–364.
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1997). Enacting project-based science. Elementary School Journal, 341–358.
Mergendoller, J. R., Maxwell, N. L., & Bellisimo, Y. (2006). The effectiveness of problem-based instruction: A comparative study of instructional methods and student characteristics. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(2), 5.
Morozov, A., Kilgore, D., & Atman, C. (2007). Breadth in design problem scoping: Using insights from experts to investigate student processes. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: Authors.
Neeley, W. L., Jr., Lim, K., Zhu, A., & Yang, M. C. (2013). Building fast to think faster: Exploiting rapid prototyping to accelerate ideation during early stage design. Paper presented at the ASME 2013 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference.
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving (Vol. 104). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. Constructionism, 36, 1–11.
Petrosino, A. (1998). The use of reflection and revision in hands-on experimental activities by at-risk children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville.
Reiter-Palmon, R. (2009). A dialectic perspective on problem identification and construction. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2(3), 349–352.
Reiter-Palmon, R., Mumford, M. D., O’Connor Boes, J., & Runco, M. A. (1997). Problem construction and creativity: The role of ability, cue consistency, and active processing. Creativity Research Journal, 10(1), 9–23.
Reitman, W. R. (1964). Heuristic decision procedures, open contraints, and the structure of ill-defined problems. In G. Bryan (Ed.), Human judgements and optimality. New York: John Wiley.
Restrepo, J., & Christiaans, H. (2003). Problem structuring and information access in design. Expertise in design.
Ritchie, K. C. (2009). The process of problem finding in inquiry education: A focus on students’ experiences. Available at McGill University Library, http://digitool.library.mcgill.ca/webclient/StreamGate?folder_id=0&dvs=1472583495123~297&usePid1=true&usePid2=true
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. Roth, W. M., & Bowen, G. M. (1993). An investigation of problem framing and solving in a grade 8 open-inquiry science program. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 165. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0302_2
Rowland, G. (1992). What do instructional designers actually do? An initial investigation of expert practice. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 5(2), 65–86.
Runco, M. A., & Chand, I. (1994). Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. In M. Runco (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 3.
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In Barry Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society, 67–98. n.p.: Open Court.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schrader, S., Riggs, W. M., & Smith, R. P. (1993). Choice over uncertainty and ambiguity in technical problem solving. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 10(1), 73–99.
Scott, C. A. (1994). Project-based science: Reflections of a middle school teacher. Elementary School Journal, 75–94.
Strobel, J., & Van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of meta-analyses comparing pbl to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(1), 4.
Svihla, V. (2009). How differences in interaction affect learning and development of design expertise in the context of biomedical engineering design. PhD dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
Svihla, V., Reeve, R., Field, J., Lane, W., Collins, J., & Stiles, A. (2016). Framing, reframing and teaching: Design decisions before, during and within a project-based unit. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 7(1), 19–36.
Tracy, P. (2005). Design and problem finding in high schools: A study of students and their teacher in one queensland school. Master’s thesis, Griffith University.
Verhaegen, P.-A., Peeters, J., Vandevenne, D., Dewulf, S., & Duflou, J. R. (2011). Effectiveness of the panda ideation tool. Procedia Engineering, 9(0), 63–76. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.03.101
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walker, A., & Leary, H. (2009). A problem based learning meta analysis: Differences across problem types, implementation types, disciplines, and assessment levels. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(1), 6.
Woodhall, T. F. (2011). Designing a rubric to assess the problem definition phase of student design projects in upper year engineering courses. Master’s thesis, Queen’s University at Kingston Ontario Canada.
Wynn, D., & Clarkson, P. J. (2005). Models of designing. In P. J. Clarkson & C. Eckert (Eds.), Design process improvement–A review of current practice (pp. 34–59). London: Springer.
Zydney, J. M. (2008). Cognitive tools for scaffolding students defining an ill-structured problem. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(4), 353–385.