Examining How Middle School Science Teachers Implement a Multimedia-enriched Problem-based Learning Environment
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study examined how a group of ten middle school teachers implemented a technology enriched problem-based learning (PBL) environment. The goal was to understand their motivation, document their implementation techniques, and identify factors that teachers considered important in using technology-based PBL tools in their teaching. The analysis identified four factors that provided the impetus for teachers to consider the adoption of technology-based PBL instruction. These factors are (1) the PBL program addresses the teachers’ curricular needs and implementing it has campus administrative and technical support, (2) the method is aligned with teachers’ pedagogical beliefs, (3) the PBL program offers a new way of teaching and promotes the development of higher-order thinking skills, and (4) the PBL program challenges students in a captivating manner and supports the learning needs of all students. Teachers’ implementation techniques with over 1,000 sixth graders were documented in detail with regard to: 1) the teacher’s roles, 2) the student’s role, and 3) the classroom interactions during the implementation of the PBL program. In addition, a detailed description of contrasting narratives of two pairs of teachers is provided, illustrating the range of implementation techniques that can occur using the same PBL program to allow for individualized instruction to meet different students’ needs. The goal of providing detailed implementation practices is to address the lack of “how to” in PBL implementation in K-12 classrooms as indicated in the literature and offer insights and ideas to those interested in adopting and implementing PBL. Findings are discussed within the theoretical framework and implications are provided.
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
Barab, S. A., & Luehmann, A. L. (2003). Building sustainable science curriculum: Acknowledging and accommodating local adaptation. Science Education, 87(4), 454–467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.10083
Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 68, 3-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219966804
Barrows, H. S. (2002). Is it Truly Possible to Have Such a Thing as dPBL? Distance Education, 23(1), 119-122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01587910220124026
Becker, H. J. (2000). Findings from the teaching, learning, and computing survey: Is Larry Cuban right? Retrieved from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/ccsso.pdf
Becker, H. J., & Riel, M. M. (2000). Teacher professional engagement and constructivist-compatible computer usage (Report no. 7). Retrieved from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/report_7/
Belland, B. R., Glazewski, K. D., & Richardson, J. C. (2008). A scaffolding framework to support the construction of evidence-based arguments among middle school students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(4), 401-422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9074-1
Bottge, B. A., Grant, T. S., Stephens, A. C., & Rueda, E. (2010). Advancing the math skills of middle school students in technology education classrooms. NASSP Bulletin, 94(2), 81-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0192636510379902
Brinkerhoff, J. D., & Glazewski, K. (2000, October). Hypermedia-based problem based learning in the upper elementary grades: a developmental study. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Denver, CO.
Brush, T., & Saye, J. (2000). Implementation and evaluation of a student-centered learning unit: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 79-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02319859
Cope, C., & Ward, P. (2002). Integrating learning technology into classrooms: The importance of teachers’ perceptions. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 5(1), 67-74.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dias, L. B., & Atkinson, S. (2001). Technology integration: Best practices – where do teachers stand? International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 5(11). Retrieved from http://www.ucalgary.ca/iejll/dias_atkinson
Druckman, D., & Ebner, N. (2008). Onstage or behind the scenes? Relative learning benefits of simulation role-play and design. Simulation & Gaming, 39(4), 465-497. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046878107311377
Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development. 53(4), 25–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02504683
Ertmer, P. A. (2010). Editor’s introduction. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learn- ing, 4(1), 4-5.
Ertmer, P. A., & Simons, K. D. (2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K-12 teachers. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1(1), 40-54.
Gallagher, S. A. (1996, November). The effect of problem-based learning on complex thought. Presentation at the annual meeting of the National Association for Gifted Children, Indianapolis, IN.
Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(3), 223-252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5
Hmelo, C. E., & Ferrari, M. (1997). The problem-based learning tutorial: Cultivating higher order thinking skills. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20(4), 401-422.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
Hmelo-Silver, C.E., & Barrows, H. (2006). Goals and strategies of a problem-based learning facilitator. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1(1), 1-19.
Hoffman, B., & Ritchie, D. (1997). Using multimedia to overcome the problems with problem based learning. Instructional Science, 25(2), 97-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1002967414942
Hung, W., Jonassen, D. H., & Liu, R. (2007). Problem-based learning. In M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. V. Merrienboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (3rd Ed.) (pp. 485-506). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Inan, F. A., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: a path model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(2), 137-154. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9132-y
Kramer, B. S., Walker, A. E., & Brill, J. M. (2007). The underutilization of information and communication technology-assisted collaborative project-based learning among international educators: A Delphi study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 527- 543. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9048-3
Lajoie, S. P. (1993). Computer environments as cognitive tools for enhancing learning. In S. P. Lajoie & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp.261-288). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Liu, M., Horton, L. R., Corliss, S. B., Svinicki, M. D., Bogard, T., Kim, J., & Chang, M. (2009). Students’ problem-solving as mediated by their cognitive tool use: A study of tool use pattern. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 40(1), 111-139. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/EC.40.1.e
Liu, M., Horton, L., Olmanson, J., & Toprac, P. (2011). A study of learning and motivation in a new media enriched environment for middle school science. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(2), 249-265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-011-9192-7
Liu, M., Horton, L., Toprac, P., & Yuen. T. (2011). Examining the design of media rich cognitive tools as scaffolds in a multimedia problem-based learning environment. In M. Orey, S. A. Jones, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Educational Media and Technology Yearbook (EMTY), 36. Springer.
Liu, M., Hsieh, P., Cho, Y. J., & Schallert, D. L. (2006). Middle school students’ self-efficacy, attitudes, and achievement in a computer-enhanced problem-based learning environment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research. 17(3). 225-242.
Liu, M., Williams, D., & Pedersen, S. (2002). Alien rescue: A problem-based hypermedia learning environment for middle school science. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 30(3), 255-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/X531-D6KE-NXVY-N6RE
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., Blunk, M., Crawford, B., Kelly, B., & Meyer, K. M. (1994). Enacting project-based science: Experiences of four middle grade teachers. The Elemen- tary School Journal, 94(5), 517-538. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/461781
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), 49-69.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Park, S. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (2008). Examining barriers in technology-enhanced problem-based learning: Using a performance support systems approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(4), 631-643. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00858.x
Park, S. H., Ertmer, P., & Cramer, J. (2004, October). Implementation of a technology-enhanced problem-based learning curriculum: A year-long study of three teachers. Paper presented at the meeting of Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Chicago, Illinois. Paper retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED485022.pdf
Pedersen, S., & Liu, M. (2003). Teachers’ beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(2), 57-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02504526
Polanco, R., Calderón, P., & Delgado, F. (2004). Effects of a problem-based learning program on engineering students’ academic achievements in a Mexican university. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41(2), 145-155. http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/1470329042000208675
Ravitz, J. (2009). Summarizing findings and looking ahead to a new generation of PBL research. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 3(1), 4-11.
Rowland, J. (2008). Laptops as practice: A case study examining communities of practice in a ubiquitous computing environment, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Texas, Austin, Texas.
Sage, S. M. (2000). A natural fit: problem-based learning and technology standards. Learning and Leading with Technology, 28(1), 6-12.
Savery, J. S. (2006). Overview of PBL: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1(1), 9-20.
Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In B.G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: case studies in instructional design (pp. 136-148). Engelwood Cliffs, NY: Educational Technol- ogy Publications.
Saye J. W., & Brush, T. (2002). Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 77-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02505026
Taradi, S. K., Taradi, M., Radic, K., & Pokrajac, N. (2005). Blending problem-based learning with Web technology positively impacts student learning outcomes in acid-base physiology. Advances in Physical Education, 29(1), 35-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.00026.2004
Wallace, R. M. (2004). A framework for understanding teaching with the Internet. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 447-488. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312041002447
Ward, J. D., & Lee, C. L. (2002). A review of problem-based learning. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, 20(1), 16-26.
Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer school: the interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Education Research Journal 39(1), 165-205. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312039001165
Xun, G. E., & Land, S. M. (2004). A conceptual framework for scaffolding ill-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 5-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02504836
Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological prospective. American Educational Research Association Journal 40(4), 807-840. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00028312040004807