Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School: What Strategies Help Elementary Students Develop? (SpringerBriefs in Education) 3030705978, 9783030705978

Citation preview

SPRINGER BRIEFS IN EDUC ATION

Samantha S. Reed Carol A. Mullen Emily T. Boyles

Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School What Strategies Help Elementary Students Develop? 123

SpringerBriefs in Education

We are delighted to announce SpringerBriefs in Education, an innovative product type that combines elements of both journals and books. Briefs present concise summaries of cutting-edge research and practical applications in education. Featuring compact volumes of 50 to 125 pages, the SpringerBriefs in Education allow authors to present their ideas and readers to absorb them with a minimal time investment. Briefs are published as part of Springer’s eBook Collection. In addition, Briefs are available for individual print and electronic purchase. SpringerBriefs in Education cover a broad range of educational fields such as: Science Education, Higher Education, Educational Psychology, Assessment & Evaluation, Language Education, Mathematics Education, Educational Technology, Medical Education and Educational Policy. SpringerBriefs typically offer an outlet for: • An introduction to a (sub)field in education summarizing and giving an overview of theories, issues, core concepts and/or key literature in a particular field • A timely report of state-of-the art analytical techniques and instruments in the field of educational research • A presentation of core educational concepts • An overview of a testing and evaluation method • A snapshot of a hot or emerging topic or policy change • An in-depth case study • A literature review • A report/review study of a survey • An elaborated thesis Both solicited and unsolicited manuscripts are considered for publication in the SpringerBriefs in Education series. Potential authors are warmly invited to complete and submit the Briefs Author Proposal form. All projects will be submitted to editorial review by editorial advisors. SpringerBriefs are characterized by expedited production schedules with the aim for publication 8 to 12 weeks after acceptance and fast, global electronic dissemination through our online platform SpringerLink. The standard concise author contracts guarantee that: • an individual ISBN is assigned to each manuscript • each manuscript is copyrighted in the name of the author • the author retains the right to post the pre-publication version on his/her website or that of his/her institution

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8914

Samantha S. Reed · Carol A. Mullen · Emily T. Boyles

Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School What Strategies Help Elementary Students Develop?

Samantha S. Reed Carroll County Public Schools Virginia, VA, USA

Carol A. Mullen Virginia Tech Virginia, VA, USA

Emily T. Boyles Grayson County Public Schools Virginia, VA, USA

ISSN 2211-1921 ISSN 2211-193X (electronic) SpringerBriefs in Education ISBN 978-3-030-70597-8 ISBN 978-3-030-70598-5 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5 © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021, corrected publication 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

I dedicate our book to my children, Blake and Grant; my dad; and my work family. —Samantha S. Reed Dedicating this to the amazing 2017–2020 Roanoke doctoral cohort I had the pleasure to grow alongside at Virginia Tech. —Carol A. Mullen This book is for my parents and my sister. Thank you for showing me how to truly love and support one another. —Emily T. Boyles

The original version of the book was revised: Corrections made in References have been updated. The correction to the book backmatter is available https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5_6

Acknowledgments

A very special thanks to Natalie Rieborn, Publishing Editor of Springer International Publishing in the Netherlands who oversees Springer’s SpringerBriefs in Education series. This innovative format combines the elements of journals and books and explores timely educational subjects in a concise and impactful way. We’re pleased to be adding our volume to it! Natalie was enthusiastic, responsive, and knowledgeable at every turn. Encouraging our book proposal and completion of Springer’s Book Information form, she oversaw the peer review and other publishing steps from beginning to end. Supportive in all circumstances, Natalie is an exceptional guide, coach, and friend in the publishing world. Rajan Muthu, Project Coordinator with Springer, oversaw the production of this book. We also appreciate the helpful commentary provided by anonymous, expert reviewers. Carol Mullen’s partner Bill (Dr. William Kealy), always generous, improved the book’s graphical displays. “Exhausting” the coffee machine, he fired up a new one, making 100 cups in the first week of this project endeavor! We are also grateful to the School of Education and the College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences at Virginia Tech for the support of research projects like ours on the frontlines of education. Samantha S. Reed, Ed.D. Carol A. Mullen, Ph.D. Emily T. Boyles, Ed.D.

ix

Praise for Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School

“This easy-to-read book makes an important contribution to the problem-based learning (PBL) literature. The research is limited on this topic and specific instructional strategies that help students grow, learn, and develop. The study is important for practitioners interested in effective PBL implementation in the elementary grades. They will learn of vital strategies that elementary teachers use to effectively implement PBL, making the book very informative. The importance of utilizing PBL to connect classroom experiences with real-world applications is illustrated. A vivid picture is painted of practitioners’ experiences with PBL. Educators can readily implement the strategies described to increase interest in learning tasks as well as achievement for all students. As a guide, it will appeal to practitioners looking to improve students’ achievement and twenty first century skills. It’s also an excellent choice for higher education faculty seeking to develop school leaders and teachers who can benefit from this alternative model of pedagogy for educating students. Courses addressing effective instruction would gain from adopting this text.” —Barbara M. Wickham, Montgomery County Public Schools, Virginia “Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School makes an original contribution to the field in that PBL is not that common in primary and elementary schools. Because the research on PBL in elementary schools is not substantial, this book is instrumental in adding to the research. The work contains key instructional strategies that promote skills and knowledge that can be applied when using the PBL approach. I believe that the ideas and practices described by the authors apply globally because PBL has become a global instructional program that supports the development of critical skills. The authors offer a well written book that does a great job delving into PBL approaches that could benefit elementary schools all over the world. Without a doubt, I recommend it as an outstanding choice for elementary curriculum and instruction courses.” —Lee B. Shields, Campbell County Public Schools, Virginia

xi

Contents

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . About This Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Significance of the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Purpose and Justification of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 1 3 5 6 7 7 7

2 A Review of Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Search Processes and Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Synthesis of the Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PBL Defined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Compared with PjBL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . History of PBL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PBL in Medicine: Howard Barrows’s Influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PBL in Education: John Dewey’s Influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PBL and Constructivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PBL in K–12 Public Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PBL and STEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Closely Related Instructional Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impact of PBL on Student Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Profile of a Virginia Graduate—The 5Cs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engaging Qualities Present in PBL Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9 9 10 11 11 12 13 13 15 15 17 20 25 27 29 31 32 33

3 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Questions and Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Collection Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Instrument Design and Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37 37 38 41 43 xiii

xiv

Contents

Data Organization, Coding, and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of Interview Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Findings for the Research Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

47 47 48 64 69 69

5 Overarching Outcomes, Implications, and Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discussion of Overarching Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relevance and Implications for Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relevance and Implications for Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Navigating Uncharted Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

71 71 72 75 77 78 79 80 81

Correction to: Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School . . . . . . . . . . C1 Appendix: PBL Teacher Interview Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

About the Authors

Samantha S. Reed, Ed.D. is Principal at Hillsville Elementary, a PK–05 school in Virginia, USA. She has been serving for seven years as an education leader. Previously, she was an elementary Teacher and division math specialist. Her dissertation focused on problembased learning and student development of twenty-firstcentury skills. She is a graduate of the Educational Leadership program at Virginia Tech.

Carol A. Mullen, Ph.D. is Professor of Educational Leadership at Virginia Tech, USA, and a J. William Fulbright Senior Scholar alumnus. She is an internationally acclaimed, award-winning scholar whose research in education encompasses leadership, mentoring, creativity, and globalism using social justice lenses. Her books published with Springer are Revealing Creativity (2020); Veteran Teacher Resilience (with Shields, 2020); and Creativity Under Duress in Education? (2019, edited). Forthcoming is Handbook of Social Justice Interventions in Education (edited). Her alma mater, the University of Toronto/Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (Canada), awarded her the Excellence Award in 2020.

xv

xvi

About the Authors

Emily T. Boyles, Ed.D. is Coordinator of English Learner Professional Development for Grayson County Public Schools in Virginia and Adjunct Professor at Fortune University in California, USA. She was formerly an elementary school Principal, Assistant Principal, and high school Spanish Teacher. Her dissertation examined principals’ support of student achievement in Title I schools within rural Appalachia. She coauthored a book chapter and journal article. She is a graduate of the Educational Leadership program at Virginia Tech.

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1 Fig. 4.1

Virginia’s 5Cs: Preparing future-ready graduates Source Adapted from VDOE (2019b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Top 10 PBL instructional strategies that nurtured the 5Cs . . . . . . . .

26 68

xvii

List of Tables

Table 2.1 Table 3.1 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 Table 4.4 Table 4.5 Table 4.6 Table 4.7 Table 4.8

Comparing case-based learning, inquiry-based learning, and problem-based learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alignment of research and interview questions, data sources, and analytic procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Basic demographics of teacher/staff interviewees . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interview Q2: PBL strategies used by teachers A–G . . . . . . . . . . . Interview Q3a: Strategies used to develop critical thinking by teachers A–G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interview Q3c: Strategies used to develop communication by teachers A–G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PBL strategies used to develop citizenship by teachers A–G . . . . Concerns/challenges with implementing PBL addressed by teachers A–G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Key instructional strategies of PBL identified through data analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Top 10 PBL strategies that contributed to the 5Cs . . . . . . . . . . . . .

26 42 48 50 51 54 57 61 65 67

xix

Chapter 1

Introduction

Abstract Problem-based learning (PBL) is a popular trend in public education. Generally, PBL is defined as a teaching method that enables students to gain knowledge and skills by working collaboratively to investigate authentic and engaging open-ended questions and/or problems. It also promotes elementary students’ 21stcentury competencies and development for a global world. This chapter introduces an underrepresented area of educational research—PBL in elementary schools and strategies that help students develop. General questions guiding this study are, What is PBL, and what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’ 21st-century learning? By interviewing teachers who used PBL methods for 2 school years, the research team learned key instructional strategies that promote skills and knowledge when students collaboratively investigate authentic open-ended problems. In this book, peer-to-peer relational learning and other strategies used in PBL classrooms are uncovered and examined. PBL, a dynamic instructional tool for enlivening elementary classrooms, is shown in the literature to cultivate student learning and interests, increase engagement, support skills building, and advance capacities expected of college- and career-ready 21st-century graduates. The information we gathered should support the implementation of PBL in elementary schools. Keywords Creativity · Critical thinking · Communication · Collaboration · And citizenship (the 5Cs) · Elementary student development · Problem-based learning (PBL) · 21st-Century skills

Overview Problem-Based Learning in Elementary Schools: What Strategies Help Students Develop? takes readers into places of learning invisible from the outside. In the educational settings described, elementary teachers use key instructional strategies to implement problem-based learning (PBL) effectively. Our review of literature illustrates the importance of PBL to authentic learning and connecting classroom experiences with real-world applications. We also feature quotes from practitioners

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. S. Reed et al., Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5_1

1

2

1 Introduction

about their PBL practices to offer a practical study that is accessible and robust. This book is for interested practitioners, education leaders, researchers, and policymakers. PBL is a popular trend in public education. However, many classrooms have yet to model stimulating projects that foster problem-solving and critical-thinking skills. Students need guidance with 21st-century problem solving to benefit their school and post-school years (Carroll, 2014). Generally, PBL is defined as a teaching method that enables students to gain knowledge and skills by working collaboratively to investigate authentic open-ended questions and/or problems (Bas, 2008; Marra et al., 2014). PBL, a learning catalyst, promotes elementary children’s contemporary skills in preparation for academics, career, and life. The 21st-century education movement in the United States is over 2 decades old (Boss, 2019; also, National Education Association [NEA], n.d.). Since 2002, it has been led by the Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21) (2019), a consortium of at least five million education, business, and government leaders, worldwide, including the NEA. P21 is founded on the premise that “all learners need educational experiences in school and beyond, from cradle to career, to build knowledge and skills for success in a globally and digitally interconnected world” (p. 2). P21’s Framework for 21st Century Learning’s 12 discrete skills were expected to be infused in K–12 education. However, the framework proved cumbersome, so the most important skills “became known as the ‘Four Cs—critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity” (NEA, n.d., p. 3). These have made their way into public schools, including those US school districts that also adopted the Portrait of a Graduate, a related education reform; with a foothold in Virginia, USA, for example, Portrait of a Graduate is invested in “all students hav[ing] benefitted from educational experiences preparing them to be effective lifelong learners and contributors” (BattelleforKids, 2018). Consolidated into the Four Cs, the idea is that key subjects (e.g., language arts, mathematics, and science) should incorporate critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity to prepare graduates for careers and life. Educators are expected to use tools and strategies that “engage students” and promote participation in learning, which NEA (n.d.) deemed “imperative” (p. 3). In response, we offer study of PBL instructional strategies aimed at nurturing elementary students’ competencies for a global world. The term 21st-century skills refers to “a broad set of knowledge, skills, work habits, and character traits” that educators, reformers, employers, and policymakers believe to be “critically important to success in today’s world, particularly in collegiate programs and contemporary careers and workplaces”; a general assumption is that these “skills can be applied in all academic subject areas, and in all educational, career, and civic settings throughout a student’s life” (Glossary of Education Reform, 2016). US states have developed their own version of 21st-century skills, Four Cs framework, and vision of Portrait of a Graduate. Within Virginia (our own state), the applicable competencies are critical thinking, creativity, communication, collaboration, and citizenship (the 5Cs; Virginia Department of Education [VDOE], 2019b), and the graduate portrait is called Profile of a Virginia Graduate (VDOE, 2019a).

Overview

3

Simply put, the 5Cs model absorbed the Four Cs (NEA, n.d.) and added a fifth skill: citizenship. Regarding our study, we now turn to PBL in elementary schools and strategies that help children develop essential skills. General questions guiding this study are, What is PBL and what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’ 21st-century learning? By interviewing teachers who used PLB methods for 2 school years, we (the research term) were able to identify PBL strategies that promote skills and knowledge when students collaboratively explore authentic open-ended problems. In this book, peer-to-peer relational learning and other strategies used in PBL classrooms are uncovered and examined for their relevance. PBL, a dynamic instructional tool for enlivening educative processes in elementary classrooms, is shown to cultivate student learning and interests, support skills building, increase engagement and knowledge gains, and advance capacities expected of college- and career-ready graduates. The research on PBL is limited, particularly as it pertains to specific strategies that help students grow, learn, and develop. Combined with our original study, though, the information conveyed should support the successful implementation of PBL in elementary schooling contexts.

About This Book We wrote this book for practitioners, both teachers and administrators at the elementary level, who are looking to effectively implement PBL to improve student achievement and support the development of the 5Cs. Additionally, this book should appeal to higher education administrators looking to develop school leaders and future teachers by exploring this alternative model of pedagogy as a successful means to educate students. Courses related to implementing effective instruction (for teachers and administrators) and supporting/observing effective instruction (for administrators/leaders) could benefit from utilizing this text. Because PBL is a tool that supports the development of essential skills needed for global citizenship, this study has relevance for educators, worldwide. The pages ahead contain strategies that educators can readily implement to increase interest in learning tasks as well as achievement for all young students. We highlight intensive instructional accounts of educators’ approaches for applying PBL strategies that mobilize children’s learning in a global world. Painting a lively picture of student-centered educational environments, we draw upon frameworks, best practices, experiences, processes, strategies, and research results. Firsthand accounts of best practices in PBL instruction connect this pedagogy to theory, research, practice, and policy. Why aren’t there more studies of PBL at the elementary level and information about how it helps children develop 21st-century skills? As three inquisitive education leaders, we sought to contribute to this area of study by identifying strategies teachers use when implementing PBL in elementary classrooms. We were motivated

4

1 Introduction

to extend the educational research on this topic while supporting aspiring and practicing teachers with insights from PBL teachers, as well as building administrators in making informed decisions about the implementation of PBL. General questions for guiding this basic qualitative study were, What is PBL, and what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’ 21st-century learning for success in work and life? We asked PBL teachers questions about their instruction and the strategies they use in their classrooms. We also probed how they facilitate students’ development of the 5C skills in Virginia, with the common understanding that these competencies are expected of successful graduates. Later in the book we discuss our findings and map them onto existing literature. What lies ahead in this book for the research community is 21st-century learning and PBL frameworks, concepts, and practices in elementary classrooms that develop students’ 21st-century capacities. Researchers will find out about teacher instruction in the early years of schooling that purposefully fosters student-centered learning, real-world relevance, and collaboration in accordance with capacities expected of them to be successful. Practitioners (teachers, teacher mentors and trainers, school leaders and other leaders, and policymakers) seeking information about PBL pedagogies for the elementary grades will find depictions that shed light on how teachers approach PBL within real-world contexts. Anyone interested in pedagogic strategies that advance critical thinking, creativity, communication, collaboration, and citizenship capacities, particularly within demanding accountability and changing world contexts, should find value. This book is unique in that it • Focuses on concepts and practices of PBL for the elementary classroom • Uses interviews with teachers to illuminate PBL strategies for engaging all students • Highlights instructional accounts of teachers involving their implementation of PBL strategies that advance 21st-century skills • Combines frameworks, practices, experiences, processes, strategies, and results to paint a lively picture of student-centered learning • Clarifies outcomes that include increased student engagement and achievement, and college and career readiness • Connects firsthand accounts of PBL instruction to theory, research, practice, and policy A tightknit US-based research team, since 2017 we have been doing the work underlying this book, initiated by Samantha Reed, Principal at Hillsville Elementary, a PK–5 school in Virginia. As of 2020, she has been serving for 7 years as the administrative leader and was previously an elementary teacher and division math specialist. An education leader with a passion for curriculum and instructional leadership, she has a keen interest in PBL not only at the classroom level but also the building level. As the project head, she initiated this exploration of PBL instruction with teachers to better understand how it can enrich young students’ learning.

About This Book

5

Coauthor Carol Mullen, Professor of Educational Leadership at Virginia Tech, served as Principal Investigator of this study. She is a seasoned researcher in educational leadership with expertise extending to curriculum studies and qualitative research. She contributed to this project from its inception by guiding its research components and contributing much of the writing while bridging the worlds of practice and theory. Team member Emily Boyles is Coordinator of English Learner Professional Development for Grayson County Public Schools in Virginia and Adjunct Professor in higher education. She has served as an elementary school principal, assistant principal, and high school Spanish teacher. She conducted the teacher interviews for this study and related tasks.

Statement of the Problem This chapter introduces study of PBL in elementary schools and strategies that help students develop. Even though child development has long been an extremely important topic in education, PBL pedagogies, strategies, and tools are presently investigated more extensively at secondary and postsecondary levels. Unknown is the extent to which habits of learning are being instilled in students, with the pressures of high-stakes standardized testing that can jeopardize the richness of experiential curriculum like PBL. Today, educators, parents, policymakers, politicians, and even corporate executives acknowledge the need for children to form habits of learning. Children have a natural curiosity, are active learners, and develop cognitively. Pedagogic knowledge, curricular expertise, and structured activity settings are needed for cultivating discovery. Besides tapping into youngsters’ topical curiosities, their interest in learning is an important life skill to foster. In the twentieth century, educational philosophers offered insights into the need for classrooms to be places where students can make discoveries and learn to learn (e.g., Bruner 1960/1999). Earlier, Dewey envisioned (1916) schools as communities in which learners partake in learning by doing and have the freedom to make discoveries within life-like environments necessitating their adaptation if they are to grow; a powerful premise was that “it is only in experience that any theory has vital and verifiable significance” and that children “learn in a meaningful way if the experimental ‘face’ of a subject area—including its ambiguities and permutations—[is] encountered during the learning process” (p. 144). A pervasive goal of public education is to ensure all students achieve at high levels through effective instructional delivery. This national goal is reflected in many federal initiatives. The Every Child Succeeds Act of 2015 (a revision of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001) “requires states to test students in grades 3 through 8 … in reading and math”; however, as Klein (2018) pointed out, “states also have to test students at least three times in science.” Virginia serves as an example of state initiatives that have grown out of the 21st-century skills movement. This state emphasizes performance-based assessment;

6

1 Introduction

the 5Cs; and pedagogic models focused on analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation (VDOE, 2019b). High school graduates are expected to be capable 21st-century problem-solvers and lifelong learners who can critically analyze complex problems (Koray et al., 2008). PBL supports this policy directive by fostering student motivation and interest-driven learning. Research indicates that PBL strategies have been shown to enhance students’ competencies, such as industryoriented skills (e.g., Chung et al., 2016). An implication is that PBL can be utilized to generate problem-solving opportunities that motivate peer collaborators and develop their learning capacities. Student collaboration and self-directed learning have facilitated PBL instruction in and out of school, wherein traditional teaching methods are not as effective owing to the centrality of the teacher and passive modes of instruction centered on textbooks (Strobel & van Barneveld, 2009). Against the tide of testing cultures, peer collaboration is a major thrust of PBL that involves learning relationally about authentic, real-world problems (Drake & Long, 2009; Han et al., 2016; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Holm, 2011; Savery, 2006).

Significance of the Research PBL’s growing popularity calls on teachers, administrators, and students to adapt to a rapidly changing world. Importantly, while PBL promotes problem-solving skills, it is constructivist in orientation. Also, PBL targets “a larger task or problem” to which “all learning activities” are anchored (Savery & Duffy, 1995, p. 32), relies on learners’ interests and perspectives, involves interrelated tasks (e.g., “purposing, planning, executing, and judging”), and depends on real-world complexities (Bas, p. 1; Koray et al., 2008). Being an innovator is simply not enough—humanitarian citizenship, a democratic competency, is expected of generations entering workforces. Consideration of these realities should impact PBL and undergird its instructional values (e.g., collaboration and self-directed learning) and principles of community (e.g., diversity and respect). All such dynamics should be built into PBL instruction. How children approach learning and each other informs any in-depth investigation, such as the degree to which the relational learning allows for honesty and proves satisfying. The values children embody will be carried into their futures—as problem-solvers, they will need to be culturally attuned to the needs, interests, demands, and talents of members of underrepresented groups (Klimaitis & Mullen, 2021). Children need the knowledge and skills to succeed in modern-day workplace cultures and global economies. As PBL researcher Bas (2008) put it, “This need is driven not only by workforce demands for high-performance employees who can plan, collaborate, and communicate, but also by the need to help all young people learn civic responsibility and master their new roles as global citizens” (p. 1). PBL, while known for at least 100 years, accounts for the environment in which students live and learn and that they in turn influence.

Purpose and Justification of Study

7

Purpose and Justification of Study Our research purpose was to identify key instructional strategies teachers reported using during their implementation of PBL in fourth and fifth grade classrooms during the 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 school years. A related purpose was to find out what strategies aided in developing the 5C skills for elementary students grades K–8 regarding the expectations of graduates who have been prepared for college, careers, and life. The study context was a school division in Virginia that was encouraged by the superintendent to experiment with a new or different approach to classroom instruction during the school years specified. Through this research, we arrived at pedagogic strategies used by teachers who implemented PBL at their school to determine if these contributed to the 5Cs. Our findings add to the literature surrounding the use of PBL as a means of effective, engaging, and relevant instruction in elementary schools. We endeavored to make our project informative for practitioners interested in implementing PBL.

Summary In this book we take our readers on a journey that reveals pedagogic strategies PBL teachers used for supporting 21st-century skills building. The focus on PBL in elementary school, in addition to the current competency profile of US-based graduates, makes it useful for elementary-level practitioners and other stakeholders interested in child development and learning. Rather than just theorizing the potential value of PBL as a worthwhile instructional tool for developing elementary students’ learning competencies, we took the next step. After thoroughly reviewing the relevant literature on PBL instruction and designing our interview method, we talked directly with PBL teachers of elementaryaged children. In the pages that follow, we reveal what teacher participants—who were all given permission from their school division to try something new—learned from their innovations in classroom pedagogy. Chapter 2 is a review of literature on PBL in elementary schools and other educational contexts; as such, it defines salient terms and covers a host of relevant ideas and practices.

References Bas, G. (2008). Implementation of multiple intelligences supported project-based learning in EFL/ESL classrooms (pp. 1–11) (ERIC Number: ED503870). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED503870. BattelleforKids. (2018). Portrait of a Graduate: A first step in transforming your school system. https://portraitofagraduate.org.

8

1 Introduction

Boss, S. (2019). It’s 2019. So why do 21st-century skills still matter? https://www.edsurge.com/ news/2019-01-22-its-2019-so-why-do-21st-century-skills-still-matter. Bruner, J. (1960/1999). The process of education: A landmark in educational theory. Harvard University Press. Carroll, M. P. (2014). Shoot for the moon! The mentors and the middle schoolers explore the intersection of design thinking and STEM. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 4(1), 14–30. Chung, P., Yeh, R. C., & Chen, Y. C. (2016). Influence of PBL strategy on enhancing student’s industrial oriented competences learned: An action research on learning weblog analysis. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(2), 285–307. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Macmillan. Drake, K. N., & Long, D. (2009). Rebecca’s in the dark: A comparative study of problem-based learning and direct instruction/experiential learning in two 4th grade classrooms. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(1), 1–16. Glossary of Education Reform. (2016). 21st century skills. https://www.edglossary.org/21st-cen tury-skills. Han, S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2016). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics project based learning affects high-need students in the U.S. Learning and Individual Difference, 51, 157–166. Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. Holm, M. (2011). Project-based instruction: A review of the literature on effectiveness in prekindergarten through 12th grade classrooms. Rivier Academic Journal, 7(2), 1–13. Klein, A. (2018, October 15). How does science testing work under ESSA? Education Week. http:// blogs.edweek.org/edweek. Klimaitis, C. C., & Mullen, C. A. (2021). Including K–12 students with disabilities in STEM education and planning for inclusion. Educational Planning, 28(2). Koray, O., Presley, A., Koksal, M. S., & Ozdemir, M. (2008). Enhancing problem-solving skills of pre-service elementary school teachers through problem-based learning. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching, 9(2), 1–18. https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/download/v9_issue2_ files/koksal.pdf. Marra, R. M., Jonassen, D. H., Palmer, B., & Luft, S. (2014). Why problem-based learning works: Theoretical foundations. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25, 221–238. National Education Association (NEA). (n.d.). Preparing 21st century students for a global society: An educator’s guide to the “Four Cs” (pp. 1–37). http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/A-Guide-toFour-Cs.pdf. Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: 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. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31–38. https://www.jstor.org/stable/ pdf/44428296.pdf?casa_token=_mtdoc6-dnqaaaaa:pngbub0-olzfgi0ukennm9z9owcyeb6yqqs ynqiptzfymd1gfhfaoefsstinuibqvy2wjcf54rakntxjxk2kugg0n4mhmrfjs6rfyffixae2s6t9ur4. Strobel, J., & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of metaanalyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 3(1), 44–58. The Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2019). Framework for 21st century learning (pp. 1–2). http://static.battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/p21_framework_brief.pdf. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019a). Profile of a Virginia graduate. http://www. doe.virginia.gov/instruction/graduation/profile-grad/index.shtml. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019b). Virginia’s 5C’s. http://www.virginiaisfo rlearners.virginia.gov/media-library/#:~:text=Students%20in%20every%20grade%20will,com munication%2C%20collaboration%20and%20citizenship%20skills.

Chapter 2

A Review of Literature

Abstract This chapter of Problem-Based Learning in Elementary Schools offers a review of the literature addressing problem-based learning (PBL) in elementary classrooms and other educational contexts. Definitions provided generally uphold PBL as a teaching method in which students gain knowledge and skills by working collaboratively to both investigate and respond to authentic and engaging open-ended questions and/or problems. Also described is the history of PBL and its instructional impact on student learning and achievement. In accordance with the current study conducted in Virginia, key strategies of PBL instruction are identified that contribute to 21st-century skills identified nationally and at the state level, which education policy in Virginia denotes as critical thinking, creativity, communication, collaboration, and citizenship (the 5Cs). While exploring the PBL phenomenon and the relevant literature, academic achievement, student impact, and patterns are discussed. At present, much of the existing research focuses on grades K–12 in general terms or postsecondary education. Elementary grades, while investigated, continue to be underrepresented in explorations of PBL, a gap that this book helps to fill. Keywords Definitions · Elementary school · 5cs · K–12 education · Literature review · Problem-based learning · Project-based learning · Student achievement · 21st-century skills

Overview In this review of the literature conducted, problem-based learning (PBL) in elementary classrooms and other educational contexts is addressed. We provide definitions that generally uphold PBL as a teaching method in which students gain knowledge and skills by working collaboratively to both investigate and respond to authentic and engaging open-ended questions and/or problems. Also described is the history of PBL and its instructional impact on student learning and achievement. In accordance with the current study conducted in Virginia, USA, key strategies of PBL instruction are identified that contribute to 21st-century skills identified nationally and at the state level, which education policy in Virginia denotes as critical thinking, creativity, communication, collaboration, and citizenship (the 5Cs). While exploring © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. S. Reed et al., Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5_2

9

10

2 A Review of Literature

the PBL phenomenon and what the literature has to say about it in concert with 21stcentury skills, academic achievement, and student impact, patterns surfaced and are discussed. At present, much of the existing research focuses on grades K–12 in general terms and postsecondary education. Elementary grades, while investigated, continue to be underrepresented in explorations of PBL, a gap that this book helps to fill. As the chapters progress in this book, we attend to these issues for fourth and fifth graders.

Search Processes and Criteria To better understand how PBL may influence academic achievement, with an interest specifically at the elementary level, relevant literature was identified through our university’s remote online library databases (EBSCO Host, Educators Reference Complete from Gale, and ProQuest). Google Scholar was also searched to locate peer-reviewed, scholarly articles and academic books focused on PBL in education. Among the numerous search terms used were achievement, 5Cs, PBL (activity, concept, instruction, lesson, pedagogy, program, etc.), elementary school, policy, problem-solving, project-based learning (PjBL), and 21st-century skills. Initial searches in both EBSCO Host and Gale using PBL yielded 6,498 results. Elementary school narrowed the results to 617. Achievement further reduced results to 298. Additional searches using K–12 education and student achievement produced limited sources addressing student achievement in elementary grades. Thus, it was decided that results incorporating K–12 and postsecondary education would also be reviewed. While countries outside the United States and private schools were flagged for further review, from the outset, the focus was US-based public schools to maintain consistency with the national context in which data were collected for the current study. Abstracts and overviews from articles and books were scrutinized, out of which 86 sources were selected for close analysis. From the literature reviewed, definitions of PBL identified it as a method of learning and a particular type of pedagogy that can be usefully compared with other instructional methodologies. Also elucidated was the history behind this method and its impact on academic achievement for students in different grades. Our interest was PBL in US public schools, specifically grades 1 to 7 (depending on state and school policies). However, broader research in K–12 was essential for identifying a PBL-related framework and exploring possible application for elementary classrooms. Moreover, non-USA-based inquiries informed insights and possibilities for the elementary level in the United States. We share important information that helped with conceptualizing PBL and comparing it to related concepts, as well as with discerning impacts on children’s achievement and learning.

Synthesis of the Literature

11

Synthesis of the Literature Our interest in PBL and instructional strategies that contribute to elementary students’ 21st-century learning led us to conduct a review of relevant sources. Specific questions guiding this synthesis of PBL literature were: • What are PBL and PBL-oriented student engagement? • Why is research on PBL more focused on learning at secondary and postsecondary levels? • What is the academic impact on elementary students exposed to the PBL instructional method? • What key strategies of PBL instruction contribute to children’s 21st-century learning? • What multiple, specific engaging qualities are typically present in PBL tasks? This review’s focus on PBL at the elementary school level was broadened in light of educational literature trends: Most PBL research addresses what it is and how it relates to secondary and postsecondary levels, with interest in various issues, including impact on student achievement (e.g., Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; HmeloSilver, 2004; Holm, 2011; Kek & Huijser, 2017; Savery, 2006). Consequently, the elementary grades continue to be underrepresented in explorations of PBL. Among the exceptions, elementary-level PBL studies have been conducted by Barron et al. (1998), Drake and Long (2009), Inel and Balim (2010), Merritt et al. (2017), Sage (1996), Siew and Mapeala (2017), and others.

PBL Defined Real-world problems are at the heart of PBL. This teaching method is intentionally rigorous, and it treats complex real-world problems as the means for fostering learning that is not bent on simple solutions or reductionist thinking. In Rigorous PBL by Design (McDowell, 2017), PBL is defined as a “series of complex tasks that include planning and design, problem-solving, decision making, creating artifacts, and communicating results” (p. 122). A “comprehensive activity” (p. 122) or set of tasks, students actively participate in inquiry, create or propose solutions, and perhaps even take action (Tienken, 2020). All such processes occur in the context of a problem, challenge, situation, or scenario of relevance or value to students and their lives. In addition to course content, PBL can promote the development of the 5Cs and generate opportunities for collaborating in groups, locating and assessing materials, and embarking on lifelong learning (Duch et al., 2001). The power of PBL resides in student discovery wherein they gain knowledge and skills by working in groups to both investigate and respond to authentic, relevant, and engaging open-ended questions and/or problems (Duch et al., 2001). In a PBL elementary study specific to

12

2 A Review of Literature

mathematics and science education, Merritt et al. (2017) found that “although there is no consistent definition of PBL, PBL is an effective method for improving K–8 students’ science academic achievement, including knowledge retention, conceptual development, and attitudes.” Both the general definition and Merritt et al.’s finding recognize PBL as an effective instructional method aimed at students’ academic achievement. Importantly, beyond achievement as an end point, definitions of PBL also bring attention to student-centered learning, peer collaboration, and real-world relevance (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Marra et al., 2014; Savery, 2006).

Compared with PjBL Definitions of PBL are not necessarily clear cut and the term is sometimes used interchangeably with other instructional methods like PjBL in which students learn through problem-solving. PjBL is like PBL in some respects (Grant, 2011; Larmer, 2013; Sutton & Knuth, 2017). Both PBL and PjBL • • • • • • • • • •

•

Offer a learning-by-doing methodology Focus on an open-ended question or task Provide authentic applications of content and skills Build 21st-century success skills Emphasize student independence and inquiry Are longer and more multifaceted than traditional lessons or assignments (para. 8). Differences are more subtle: PBL is “more often single-subject, but can be multi-subject,” whereas PjBL is “often multi-subject.” While PBL “tend[s] to be shorter [even a class period], but can be lengthy,” PjBL “may be lengthy (weeks or months).” PBL “classically follows specific, traditionally prescribed steps,” in contrast with PjBL, which “follows general, variously named steps.” With PBL, the “product” may be tangible or a proposed solution, expressed in writing or in a presentation,” in contrast with PjBL, which “includes the creation of a product or performance [and may involve multiple tasks, disciplines, and responses].” PBL “often uses case studies or fictitious scenarios as ‘ill-structured problems,’” whereas PjBL’s focus is on the real world.” (Larmer, 2013, para. 8)

While project oriented, PBL can be adapted to time-limited lessons that emphasize knowledge gains about proposed solutions to complex problems. If PjBL “centers on the production of a learning artifact, PBL learning [involves acquiring] new knowledge,” including solutions that are “tangible or proposed” (Grant, 2011, p. 38). PBL embraces process-based learning and is not product driven. Thus, social or collaborative activities conducive to PBL can lead to learning artifacts (McDowell, 2017),

Synthesis of the Literature

13

such as presentations or performances, logs, diaries, maps, puzzles, illustrations, graphics, scripts, and so forth (Mullen, 2019). Being accountable for learning processes and gains carries over into PBL contexts. Said of different kinds of problem focused settings, “students are encouraged to take responsibility for their own learning. They are provided with resources and guided and mentored throughout the learning process by a supportive teacher who holds them accountable at various points of the project” (Colley, 2008, p. 23). Importantly, beyond achievement as an end point, definitions of PBL draw attention to studentcentered learning, peer collaboration, and real-world relevance (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Savery, 2006). Differences between PBL and PjBL activity settings can even be “semantics” that should not worry or burden practitioners—both extend learning in ways intended to “powerfully engage and effectively teach” students (Larmer, 2013, para. 10). Another clarification concerns problem-solving—while PBL centers problems that are ill structured or messy, “completing any type of project involves solving a problem” (para. 9), which implies that, by default, PjBL ignites problem-solving as well. Illustrating this line of thought, Larmer (2013) named a few problems that could be under study in a PBL or PjBL instructional context: If students are investigating an issue, like, say, immigration policy, the problem is deciding where they stand on it and how to communicate their views to a particular audience in a video. Or if students are building a new play structure for a playground, the problem is how to build it properly, given the wants and needs of users and various constraints. Or even if they’re writing stories for a book to be published about the driving question, “When do we grow up?” the problem is how to express a unique, rich answer to the question. (para. 8)

PBL and PjBL instruction alike should provide both enrichment and skills that students can carry throughout their lives (Buck Institute for Education, 2018).

History of PBL In this section, five major topics shed light on the history of PBL: (1) PBL in the medical field, (2) PBL and constructivism, (3) other historical impacts on PBL, (4) PBL in the field of education, and (5) instructional practices.

PBL in Medicine: Howard Barrows’s Influence PBL originated in the medical field, where its stakeholders were earnest about solving real-world problems that could impact the future (Savery & Duffy, 1995). Such PBL assumed that learning through problem-solving could generate usable knowledge and that patients could readily benefit from physicians with problem-solving skills (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980). Medical schools laid the foundation for future hands-on learning experiences across many fields, including education.

14

2 A Review of Literature

Initially, this method arose from the instructional need to help students in medical schools learn basic science knowledge in a more lasting way while simultaneously cultivating their clinical skills (Marra et al., 2014). As a reaction to traditional health education (Hung et al., 2007), PBL was conceived and implemented in response to students’ unsatisfactory clinical performances (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Chung et al., 2016) resulting from an education geared toward memorization of fragmented knowledge. PBL methods were devised under the direction of Howard Barrows (1928–2011), an American physician and medical educator known for his introduction of PBL and other innovations in medical education (“Howard Barrows,” 2020; Merritt et al., 2017). Barrows promoted student-centered, multidisciplinary education steeped in a problem-based curriculum (Savery & Duffy, 1995). Instead of being subjected to lectures that decontextualized information and restricted it to disciplines and examinations as the only form of assessment, his students explored problems authentic to clinical settings. Medical students’ clinical competencies were assessed using performance-based approaches, notably simulated patients (actors) who animated problems and tested students’ knowledge in real-world scenarios (Savery, 2006). Barrows expressed his pioneering curricular philosophy on PBL as “not simply the presentation of problems to students as a focus for learning or as an example of what has just been learned” (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980, p. ix). In the context of medical learning, Barrows and Tamblyn, who described PBL as problem-based, student-centered learning, claimed that it is the most efficient instructional method for simultaneously developing knowledge, reasoning skills, and study skills. PBL, it was theorized, is a rigorous, structured approach to learning that is based on considerable experience and research and tailor-made for medical education. Explaining how PBL can be used, they wrote that teachers facilitate students’ self-directed study using an attractive, motivating format for learning and guide problem-solving and skills development. Objectives for introducing PBL to the medical field were to deliver knowledge in a clinical context, use varied skills (clinical reasoning and self-directed learning), and excite intrinsic motivation and inquiry (Yaqinuddin, 2013). In this vein, Barrows and Tamblyn (1980) stated that the common factor is the need to actively apply knowledge to the assessment and care of patients, as well as the ability to continue to identify areas of study. Such continuance allows further learning to enhance or improve the practice of these skills. Neville (2009) explained that one of the most important differences between PBL curricula in the medical setting and traditional medical school curricula lies in the learning environment. PBL environments use small-group tutorials combined with a student-centered approach, active learning, cases or problems, and significant time allotted for independent study.

History of PBL

15

PBL in Education: John Dewey’s Influence Dewey’s (1859–1952) innovations were also steeped in experiential learning (i.e., learning by doing). An American philosopher and prominent educator, Dewey is one of the most influential reformers of all time (“John Dewey,” 2020). PBL can be also be traced to Dewey’s (1916) philosophy of learning by doing and advocacy of hands-on approaches to classroom learning (see Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Krajcik et al., 1994; Merritt et al., 2017). Among other progressive educators, Dewey laid the curricular and psychological foundations for PBL (Colley, 2008), and advocated for PBL in promoting K–12 students’ inquiry and construction of knowledge (Drake & Long, 2009). To Dewey, teachers should be actively facilitating learning. Students’ intensive involvement in their own learning lessens the need for teachers to lecture or present knowledge. Sahli (2017) further asserted that maturing students pursue problems of interest to them for the sake of discovery, regardless of initial interests. The PBL approach to learning was used prior to organized education and found mostly in apprenticeships. In the earliest educational processes, whether the learner was working toward a profession or toward obtaining a skill, the instructional methodologies were informal and embedded within daily routine. As the need for a widespread and more academic educational system arose, schools were created. The learning model found in these early institutions followed a lecture-based model that relied heavily on the ability to access and read printed materials; thus, learning was reserved for the wealthy (Sahli, 2017). Hands-on learning was later adopted and focused on design principles that supported student learning. A group of researchers (Barron et al., 1998) described four design principles of PBL that support learning by doing: learning-appropriate goals, scaffolding that supports both student and teacher, frequent opportunities for formative self-assessment and revision, and social organizations that promote participation. Krajcik et al. (1994) stated that both teaching and learning are of primary importance in how learners make sense of what they are learning—to make sense of what you learn, you must do.

PBL and Constructivism Learning by doing, advocated by both Barrows and Dewey, is common to PBL and constructivism. As Neville (2009) stated, “Such a minimally guided approach to learning, which is the essence of PBL, [is also called] discovery learning, inquiry learning, experiential learning and constructivist learning” (p. 2). Constructivism has been defined as a theory of how people learn, process, interpret, and negotiate new information (Wilson, B. G., 2012). To this definition, Savery & Duffy, (1995) added that it is “a philosophical view on how we come to understand or know” (p. 31). The expectation is that students who learn using PBL actively participate in the learning process and even direct their own learning and that of others. Educational constructivism impacts

16

2 A Review of Literature

instruction and curriculum design, and current educational approaches; constructivist theory focuses on the role of the individual, the importance of meaning-making, and the active role of the learner; consequently, it appeals to educators (Jones & Brader-Araje, 2002). Eight “instructional principles deriving from constructivism” (p. 32), articulated by Savery and Duffy (1995), follow (verbatim), with an explanation of each in the original source: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Anchor all learning activities to a larger task or problem. Support the learner in developing ownership for the overall problem or task. Design an authentic task. Design the task and the learning environment to reflect the complexity of the environment they should be able to function in at the end of learning. Give the learner ownership of the process used to develop a solution. Design the learning environment to support and challenge the learner’s thinking. Encourage testing ideas against alternative views and alternate contexts. Provide opportunity for, and support reflection on, both the content learned and the learning process. (pp. 32–34)

A perspective on constructivism encompasses “construction and negotiation of experience; communities of membership; active, transformative learning; multiple identity formation and integration; and leadership, policy, or other impactful spheres of responsibility” (Mullen, 2017, p. 39). Some of these empowering and transformational aspects of constructivist theory can also be found in PBL (Jones et al., 2013). School-aged children—positioned as activists—seek solutions to profound problems that are, in fact, ongoing global threats. Examples include the devastating impact of poverty on families; the effects of pollution, biodiversity, and greenhouse gas emissions on environments; and cultural and spiritual impacts of natural resource extractions. Learning by doing and from experience, the basis of PBL, adheres to constructivist approaches to learning the “hows” and “whys” behind things, as opposed to being restricted to rote memorization or recall of facts. A constructivist approach to PBL in education has strong support (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Miller, 2018). In recent years, instructional design for the 21st-century learner has evolved from established behavioral and cognitive theories and more constructivist methods. Rooted in the educational philosophy of constructivism that came to prominence in the early 1990s (Wilson, B. G., 2012), basic precepts of the PBL model support learning as an active process of meaning-making gained through experiences and interactions. The PBL model also allows opportunities to arise as children and youth encounter challenge and cognitive conflict during problem-solving activities. A social activity involving interaction, collaboration, negotiation, and participation in authentic practices of communities, PBL incorporates reflection and assessment; in fact, feedback or performance assessment is to be embedded naturally within learning activities (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Drake & Long, 2009). Wilson, B.G. (2012)

PBL and Constructivism

17

further explained that the PBL process, constructivist in nature, advances processbased learning that prioritizes meaningful engagement and authentic practice, with students at the forefront of their own learning. In PBL environments, students construct knowledge from the setting in which it was acquired or applied. Marra et al. (2014) explained that “fundamentally, PBL is based on constructivist assumptions about learning” (p. 224) and that knowledge learned can be demonstrated through expressing creativity, meaning making, and breakthroughs. Accounting for an opposing viewpoint, not all researchers support PBL and constructivist approaches to classroom instruction. Among critics, Kirschner et al. (2006) described constructivism as knowledge constructed by learners presented with goals and minimal information from which they form their own meanings and understandings. Their argument is that learning is idiosyncratic, which interferes with developing and implementing a common instructional format; minimally guided instruction like PBL and other types of constructivist learning, they contended, renders teaching and learning ineffective: “The past half-century of empirical research … has provided overwhelming and unambiguous evidence that minimal guidance during instruction is significantly less effective and efficient than guidance specifically designed to support the cognitive processing necessary for learning” (p. 76). However, based on all the literature we reviewed that discussed or studied PBL in relation to young people, effective constructivist instruction supports educational learning and outcomes. Thus, we proceed with this worldview and its assumptions in mind.

PBL in K–12 Public Education While PBL is not new, its prevalence has grown. Further clarifying the range, scope, and benefits of PBL pedagogies, it is worth underscoring that student exploration, interest, passion, motivation, problems, relevance, and so forth extend beyond formal learning settings. Note that in informal environments, youth benefit from participating in programs that provide opportunities to ask questions without penalty, explore new concepts, and think through realistic problems that society faces. When youths’ interests increase, their excitement increases. When youth are more connected with their passions, they are more willing to learn about and correct society’s problems, thus potentially affecting global sustainability. (Evans et al., 2014, p. 625)

Dispositions and aptitudes occurring in informal settings translate in formal contexts as a push for cultivating students with contemporary mindsets and skills evidencing the 5Cs. K–12 public school teachers are formally charged in some school divisions and districts with addressing students’ interests, peer cultures, and academics (course content/knowledge). “Merging interests, peer culture, and

18

2 A Review of Literature

academics” are arguably applicable not only in “informal learning settings where PBL informs participants of current global issues to utilize design processes to solve those problems” (Evans et al., 2014, p. 625; also, Delisle, 1997) but also in formal learning contexts. As such, PBL instruction is a potentially powerful vehicle for building capacity of state-of-the-art skills acquisition in both formal and informal settings and across grade levels and subject areas. The skills set forth as an expectation of education policy can be developed in and out of school, with graduates having learned to • Achieve and apply academic and technical knowledge • Demonstrate workplace skills, qualities, and behaviors • Build connections and value interactions with others as a responsible and responsive citizen • Align knowledge, skills, and personal interests with interests with career opportunities (VDOE, 2019b) With pressure from education policy and agencies, as well as businesses and corporations, teachers seek to nurture problem-solving capacities (Duch et al., 2001). As viewed by Delisle, (1997), “Educators who use [PBL] recognize that in the world outside of school, adults build their knowledge and skills as they solve a real problem or answer an important question—not through abstract exercise” (p. 12). Graduates with problem-solving abilities are lifelong learners capable of critically and creatively analyzing complex problems and generating solutions (Koray et al., 2008). PBL places students in realistic, contextualized problem-solving environments wherein complex problems connect the classroom, studio, or other setting to reallife experiences (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). K–12 curriculum today reflects many of the characteristics that typify PBL in medical education: teacher as a facilitator of learning, self-directed and self-regulated learners, and ill-structured (messy) or instructional problems as the driving force for inquiry (Marra et al., 2014; Savery, 2006). Utilizing these characteristics of PBL, a comparative study examined how instruction using PBL and traditional learning (whole-class, instructor-driven, lecture-based delivery of curriculum) affected retention of knowledge; Strobel and van Barneveld (2009) found that PBL was superior for long-term retention, skills development, and satisfaction. Through PBL, students absorb important content knowledge and develop cognitive, socioemotional, and democratic skills by tackling authentic problems or completing projects reflecting a perceived need in the global community (Sutton & Knuth, 2017). PBL learners not only investigate but also respond to an authentic, engaging, and complex question, problem, or challenge (Buck Institute for Education, 2018). Skills learned through PBL instruction should aid in real-life situations within and beyond the immediate school–community. The teacher role differs from the traditional approach of direct instruction, which many educators may be accustomed to—and comfortable with—in their classrooms; this also extends to teacher preparation programs that all too often place little emphasis on field-based experiential learning. In PBL, teachers accelerate learning by seeking to find out what students already know, what they need to know, and where

PBL in K–12 Public Education

19

to find information relative to the given problem (Drake & Long, 2009). The teacher models strategies for thinking and learning and scaffolds learning through modeling and coaching (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Students are moved through these processes while the teacher monitors peer groups’ progress. PBL teachers model and coach a skill and encourage groups to practice the skill on their own (Sage, 1996). More than this, PBL teachers in their facilitative capacity prompt learning sequences: “PBL typically follows prescribed steps” (Larmer, 2013, para. 6): • presentation of an “ill-structured” (open-ended, “messy”) problem • problem definition or formulation (writing a “problem statement”) • generation of a “knowledge inventory” (creating a list of “what we know about the problem” and “what we need to know”) • generation of possible solutions • formulation of learning issues for self-directed and coached learning • sharing of findings and solutions (para. 6). PBL is amenable to any subject, learning situation, and timeframe ranging from individual lessons to entire semesters, with the latter more common because of the time it affords problem-oriented projects, especially those of greater complexity and magnitude (Duch et al., 2001). Case studies, role-plays, and simulations are all used for staging or distributing PBL problems. The problems identified for PBL settings come from any kind of media, whether printed or digital text, or a combination thereof. Ideally, PBL problems transcend disciplines rather than being limited to them. Typically, interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary problems are interesting and motivate participants to learn more about the concept(s) under study (a process known as deeper learning). The decisions being made by students involve reasoning processes that they should be ready to explain, such as through presentations and demonstrations of artifacts (Evans et al., 2014). In formal learning environments, the problem is not isolated from the goals and content of courses but rather incorporates the goals/content and advances pertinent knowledge. Problems that groups tackle should be complex enough that all members must cooperate to work together, thereby taking ownership of, and responsibility for, the artifact/project/outcome. For projects that span an entire semester or multiple sessions, students need to participate in open-ended projects with multiple stages or processes (Duch et al., 2001). Students are expected to carry forward the capacities and skills learned through PBL instruction: “PBL prepares students for academic, personal, and career success, and readies young people to rise to the challenges of their lives and the world they will inherit” (Buck Institute for Education, 2018, p. 1). Finally, guidelines from different sources can be adjusted for developing, implementing, and assessing PBL curriculum. Steps for undergraduate classes utilizing the PBL method can be modified for elementary, middle, and secondary grades (see Duch et al., 2001). Our summary that follows is based on a blend of sources (e.g., Duch et al., 2001; Evans et al., 2014; Illinois Center for Innovation and Teaching & Learning, n.d.; Semiscoalition.org, 2013):

20

2 A Review of Literature

1.

Choose a concept (“big idea”/universal theme summarized in one word like sustainability) that is fundamental in each course (or setting) but not restricted to it or subject-specific content or topics. Identify a task to be completed by students to help them learn that concept in the context of the problem (e.g., build a solar-powered vehicle for advancing human use of renewable energy sources). List the learning objectives that should be met when students work through the problem (e.g., capacity to work theoretically and practically in the processes of renewable energy by planning, designing, and presenting results to peers). Think of a real-world problem context for the concept under consideration (e.g., human use of nonrenewable energy sources at a rate far outpacing alternative energy sources). Introduce the problem in stages so students will be able to identify learning issues that can lead them to research the targeted concepts. Here are some prompts that may help guide this process:

2.

3.

4.

5.

• What open-ended questions can be asked? What learning issues will be identified? • How will the problem be structured? • How long will the problem be? How many class periods or sessions will it take to complete? • Will students be given information at the outset or in subsequent stages as they work through the problem? • What resources will the students need and how might they find them? • What product/artifact, if any, will the students produce at the completion of the problem? • What knowledge will be acquired and skills developed in anticipation of the completion of this exercise? • Address specially the outcomes or gains for 21st-century learning relative to the Four Cs, 5Cs, or another relevant framework.

PBL and STEM No “single definition or conceptualization of what STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) integration is or should look like at the elementary level” exists (Estapa & Tank, 2017, p. 2). By STEM, we refer to STEM in education befitting “an interdisciplinary approach to learning where rigorous academic concepts are coupled with real-world lessons as students apply [STEM] in contexts that [connect] school, community, work, and the global enterprise” (Hallinen, 2019, p. 6). Gerlach (2012) expounded, “Everyone knows what [STEM] means within their field,” yet meanings of STEM “all have one thing in common: It is about moving forward, solving problems, learning, and pushing innovation to the next level” (p. 3). We extend these definitions to fully include K–12 students with special needs so they too can reap the benefits of STEM education.

PBL in K–12 Public Education

21

Importantly, PBL is heavily utilized in STEM education, which integrates knowledge from diverse disciplines to immerse students in authentic problem- and projectbased learning experiences (Klimaitis & Mullen, 2021). Instruction in STEM content areas is embedded in the scientific method, design processes, and modern-day skills (Basham et al., 2010). PBL-driven studies of STEM frequently accentuate one of the disciplines (e.g., engineering). Perspectives vary as to what needs attention in STEM education. In engineering, for example, STEM learning is guided by a “social constructivist perspective” that supports students making meaning from their interactions and experiences; not only are they “active[ly] problem-solving” but also “creat[ing] impactful change” (Carroll, 2014, p. 16). STEM-embedded PBL involves integrating “the engineering design process into theories of learning and topics in STEM subjects” (Evans et al., p. 626). Both Carroll and Evans et al., then, incorporated engineering design into STEM concepts and practices for the purpose of tackling global challenges, whereas Zollman (2012) upheld STEM literacy as the pressing problem context for “satisfy[ing] societal, economic, and personal needs” (p. 1). Sometimes PBL activities occur outside regular school hours, wherein testing preparation may dominate and curricular choices are limited. There are benefits from considering alternative scenarios from informal or out-of-school learning, so we briefly illustrate Carroll’s (2014) and Evans et al.’s (2014) studies involving middle school students. We end this section by summarizing similar studies of elementary student engagement in STEM-related PBL contexts. Making Water Accessible Everywhere—Problem Context. In urban California, USA, a university group reached out to the Diamond Afterschool Program involving 36 underserved middle school students (Carroll, 2014). To enact peer mentoring, 18 university engineering students were assigned to mentor youth facing poverty, language, and other barriers to success. The general PBL goal (called a “problem”) was water accessibility. This STEM setting focused on consciousness-raising about basic resource deficits and making water accessible everywhere and eliciting empathy and creativity. During class, the university students designed activities aligned with “engineering and design thinking” goals for middle school youth, extending to STEM design, “adolescent development,” “mentoring,” and more (p. 18). PBL components were apparent. University students in this problem context decided the activities to use with the youth. They collaboratively designed activities using research and resources, handled the youths’ participation themselves, and reflected in journals on their learning using prompts. Water activities were experienced. For the “Gummi Bear Water Tower Challenge,” children “worked in teams to build a water tower with playing cards [gummi bears, etc.]. A hair dryer was used to test each structure’s stability. Students learned about physics as they built their towers” (p. 18). In the “Water Without Faucets” activity, “[University and middle] students compared their own experiences of water use with [life] in developing countries.” Children “were divided into teams [with and without a faucet nearby] to replicate what it would be like to not have access to a faucet.” Then, “the teams competed to see who filled their buckets more quickly [and the children] reflected on the difficulties of living in a place where there is not easy access to water” (p. 18).

22

2 A Review of Literature

This experiential study supported relevant learning in six ways (Carroll, 2014, p. 29): • A “prototyping mindset” for engaging in design thinking forged “a bond” for the university students who were learning to work together to experiment and find answers to their questions; the children, also learning to develop a “sense of resourcefulness,” “experienced what it meant to adopt a prototyping mindset.” • Empathy, “a critical component of human-centered innovation” that enhances problem contexts, was developed as the university students read pertinent literature and got to know the children. • Uncertainty on the part of the university students was channeled into action as they “built prototypes” that led to activities to be tested with the children. • Collaboration supported the creation of “team culture,” which in turn made it possible to generate many “creative ideas” and keep the work going. • Becoming “a STEM role model” depended, for the university students, on having “strong personal connections”; these mentors shared their STEM career “biographies” with the children who could imagine having a career in STEM. • Most importantly, “design thinking provided a frame within which [the university] students learned” about mentoring, “creat[ing] user-centered learning experiences,” and “shar[ing] their experiences as developing STEM professionals with [children].” Building a Winning Solar Vehicle—Problem Context. Within an out-of-school STEM studio in rural Virginia, USA, 14 youth from middle schools participated in a 4-day studio challenge to build a solar vehicle. Evans et al. (2014) sought to know if learning could deepen for youth immersed in a STEM-embedded PBL situation, so they geared the program’s “designed features” and engineering process to potentially influence participants’ deeper learning, motivation, and interest. Using pre- and post-assessments and individual interviews, deeper learning was tracked for each participant. In this STEM studio, the global problem of sustainable energy was presented to the entire group. Small teams were challenged with creating a design to save seabirds using an engineering kit. Cases featuring Ryan (female) and Sam (male) probed whether they progressed and gained “deeper learning about science concepts related to energy sustainability” from experiencing PBL, team collaboration, and “new media” utilization (e.g., “social networking forms”; pp. 626–627). Ryan and Sam’s teams built winning solar vehicles to “carry” and “save” (plastic) seabird eggs. Over just 4 days, there was evidence of deeper learning about engineering concepts, design, and problem-solving. Ryan extensively interacted with her peers, initiated team consultations, and heavily used technology (e.g., iPad). Sam’s test score dropped, yet he was active and collaborative in building the vehicle. Wanting to win the challenge, he threw himself into preparing for the presentation. Sam seemed more collaborative in her approach. A finding was that “problemsolving, new media, and peer interaction as designed features of Studio STEM [stimulated] interest in STEM for deeper learning” (Evans et al., 2014, p. 638).

PBL in K–12 Public Education

23

Other Research on Elementary Students’ Engagement. A grade 4 classroom study highlighted the potential for engineering at a young age, like the engineering investigations just described. English and King (2015) described how, with balanced scaffolding by the teacher, student groups partook in a design and redesign process for 3-D model planes. Another study conducted at a STEM institute used video recordings of students to rate their engagement in the design process. This research team (i.e., Nadelson et al., 2015) developed a rubric for 142 K–5 elementary teachers; after the training, classroom observations were conducted. The rubric measured the success of engineering design–based STEM lessons and their facilitation. Students’ high “motivation and engagement” was revealed; “beyond their excitement about creating solutions, students were also eager to develop and refine their products” (p. 7). They explored possibilities and made modifications and provided explanations and evaluated their own products. Examples of participation for which evidence is sought are problem-solving, collaborating with peers, designing accurately, communicating, contributing to the group, and presenting results (Carroll, 2014; Evans et al., 2014; Nadelson et al., 2015). Engagement and PBL-oriented STEM. What is engagement, and how is student engagement defined? Being immersed in a particular activity, such as problemsolving, and being “energized by four goals—success, curiosity, originality, and satisfying relationships” means one is engaged (Strong et al., 1995, para. 1). Students who are absorbed in these ways “are attracted to their work [and persist] despite challenges and obstacles, [and] they take visible delight in accomplishing their work” (Strong et al., para. 4). Various concepts in the literature describe engagement (e.g., “emotional engagement,” “cognitive engagement,” and “situational engagement”). To ensure student involvement is beneficial, those conducting PBL lessons, activities, and programs must thoughtfully prepare. Advice to teachers is to “provide a safe, caring, and energetic environment,” “make things interesting,” “demonstrate why the content is important,” and “help student realize that personal effort is the key to success” (Marzano, 2013, paras. 1–5). Determining if students are, in fact, involved in a PBL-oriented STEM setting needs to be revealed in the context, although tracking of engagement (quantitative and qualitative) has been demonstrated (e.g., Evans et al., 2014). Student participation is not to be viewed as an add-on, despite pressure from testing. In fact, engagement is “a robust predictor of student learning, grades, achievement, test scores, retention, and graduation” (Skinner & Pitzer, 2012, p. 21). K–16 STEM education programs and curricula offer relevant contexts for learning in which STEM content is integrated using PBL and other strategies (Klimaitis & Mullen, 2021). In STEM settings, PBL is expected to align with best practices that adhere to instructional approaches like those that follow (Kennedy & Odell, 2014, p. 255). • STEM is taught in a way that challenges students to create, innovate, and invent. • Student engagement is directed at specific learning outcomes. • Meaningful learning opportunities are created using applied and collaborative learning.

24

2 A Review of Literature

• Students demonstrate understanding of the pertinent disciplines (e.g., science) in an environment that models learning and work in the real world. • New perspectives (e.g., multicultural) developed illustrate STEM’s global reach and linkage with STEM communities and workforces. Indicators for monitoring or measuring progress toward successful K–12 STEM education extend to the US education system. Capacity for PBL-oriented STEM programming in classrooms is built around teachers who are educated in their discipline, quality learning opportunities, supportive policies, and available funding (National Research Council of the National Academies, 2013). All in all, it can be said that students’ commitment to PBL tasks depends on their attention, curiosity, and interest, in addition to the perceived value of the activity. As explained by Evans et al. (2014), “interest-driven learning” occurs when students seize the “opportunity to self-direct learning,” relating the “situation or problem at hand [to] their interests and experiences” (p. 630). Participation in STEM projects involves peer interaction and collaboration aimed at fostering deep learning (Evans et al., 2014). PBL approaches to active learning enable learners to improve and experience success (Parsons et al., 2014). With so much emphasis on student engagement, it would be wise to prioritize learners’ interests and strengths, interaction with peers, and attraction to curricular formats with STEM-designed features (e.g., media and digital technologies with embedded social groups) that focus participation while stimulating interest (Evans et al., 2014). Experimenting pedagogically, investing in best practices, incorporating design features, advancing creative learning, taking calculated risks, building on success, monitoring progress, overcoming stumbling blocks, and learning from failure are all attributes of STEM learning environments that strategically expedite PBL (e.g., Carroll, 2014; Evans et al.; Klimaitis & Mullen, 2020). By closely attending to their influence on participation and learning, teachers can cultivate dynamic 21st-century STEM classrooms. To check for learners’ commitment to tasks in PBL-driven contexts, teachers can reflect on Marzano’s (2013) advice by asking themselves: Has the importance of the content been established? Is the environment they are providing interest-driven? Does it allow for choices, and is it challenging? Is it conducive to engrossing students in activities? Has the value of effort been conveyed to students? Reflective questions like these are especially applicable to STEM lessons, as many involve PBL activities and projects. As emphasized in studies, for increased participation, learning must involve student choice and be authentic, collaborative, and challenging (e.g., Parsons et al., 2014). The PIRPOSAL framework can assist teachers with fostering hands-on learning during STEM lessons: P = problem identification, I = ideation, R = research, P = potential solutions, O = optimization, S = solution evaluation, A = alterations, and L = learned outcomes (Wells, 2016). As Klimaitis and Mullen (2020) described, this organizer can be used to guide PBL projects, in addition to students’ development of executive functioning skills (e.g., organizing tasks, staying focused, regulating emotions, self-monitoring; Marino, 2010), step-by-step procedures enable struggling learners to follow a process for investigating problems and communicating results.

PBL in K–12 Public Education

25

To be remembered, children are curious beings that ask why, build things, and take risks. Implying a gap between natural and formal learning, Couros (2015) remarked, “Kids walk into schools full of wonder and questions, yet we often ask them to hold their questions for later, so we can get through the curriculum” (p. 4). When students leave schools less curious than previously, Couros argued, public education has failed them. Students need to be able to think for themselves. Natural curiosity, independent thinking, and keen interests are strengths for gearing activities, curricula, and programs in PBL settings.

Closely Related Instructional Practices Instructional practices closely related to PBL—case-based, design-based, and problem-based—are popular with K–12 practitioners. Many have similar components or general themes to PBL and are based on similar research studies. Larmer (2013) explained that many newer learning models are modernizations of the PBL concept. These fall under the general category of inquiry-based learning. Inquiry is key: Dewey, a science teacher, encouraged K–12 teachers to “do” inquiry as the primary teaching strategy in science classrooms (see Friesen & Scott, 2013). Like PBL, inquiry-based learning is student-centered, active learning that advances questioning, critical thinking, and problem-solving (Savery, 2006). Inquirybased learning also encourages the use of real-world problems to facilitate higherorder thinking. The main difference between inquiry-based learning and PBL involves the teacher. Teachers facilitate learning and provide students with information in inquiry learning-oriented classrooms. But in PBL classrooms, teachers support the process of learning without directing or supplying information. However, this could very well be an overstatement. Many variations exist in terms of how teachers operationalize PBL, with contextual dynamics, developmental appropriateness, and more driving decision making in practice. For example, Duch et al. (2001) explained that while students need to learn to identify and utilize learning resources on their own in PBL environments, instructors may get them started with leads and good sources, encouraging them to use the library and other sources, not only the Internet. In contrast, teacher collaboration through coteaching, planning, and troubleshooting is a feature of inquiry-based learning, the aim of which is to avoid or resolve issues and provide direction (Jones & Eick, 2007). One type of learning closely related to PBL and inquiry-based learning is casebased learning. This type of based learning helps students understand important elements of a problem in a clinical setting and develop critical thinking by assessing information and identifying flaws or false assumptions. Student learning is assessed after instruction (Savery, 2006). (For comparison of PBL with case-based learning, consult Srinivasan et al. [2007].) PBL, inquiry-based learning, and case-based learning promote active learning and task immersion and provoke higher-order thinking. Major distinctions among them are noted in Table 2.1. Generally, in PBL settings, the student is involved in open

26

2 A Review of Literature

Table 2.1 Comparing case-based learning, inquiry-based learning, and problem-based learning Concept

Case-based learning

Inquiry-based learning

Problem-based learning

Method

Guided inquiry

Leads to open inquiry

Open inquiry

Pre-reading material

Provided

Provided

Not provided

Teacher advance preparation

Yes

Yes

Yes

Role of facilitator

Active Uses guiding questions, moderates loud learners, provides feedback

Mixed Provides problem, procedures, and materials to guide student exploration

Passive Does not guide discussion even when learner explores tangents

Role of student

Active

Active

Active

Interaction with teacher

Less

Moderate

More

Skills learned

Clinical

Problem-solving

Problem-solving

inquiry, and the role of the teacher is passive, compared with the other two types of inquiry where the teacher is more directly involved. Like PBL, inquiry-based learning encourages the use of real-world problems to leverage student thinking. Figure 2.1 reviews the similarities and differences of project-based and problem-based learning. Goals of PBL are to help students develop flexible knowledge, effective problemsolving skills, self-directed learning skills, effective collaboration skills, and intrinsic motivation (Hmelo-Silver, 2004), like best practices currently being utilized in elementary classrooms in public schools. Fig. 2.1 Virginia’s 5Cs: Preparing future-ready graduates Source Adapted from VDOE (2019b)

PBL in K–12 Public Education

27

Impact of PBL on Student Achievement PBL in secondary classrooms and the 5Cs competency-based Profile of a Virginia Graduate are taken up in this section. PBL in Secondary Classrooms. Through research on how PBL or PjBL impacts student achievement, it was found that many classrooms follow a specific model (Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Grant, 2011; Horak & Galluzzo, 2017; Jones & Eick, 2007; Summers & Dickinson, 2012) with a driving question or problem and the production of an artifact(s). Sources (Chung et al. 2016; Drake & Long, 2009; Krajcik et al., 1994; Miller, 2018) indicate that PBL includes analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation of the problem in addition to following a design process. Student immersion through an authentic question or problem ignites PBL. They begin by identifying the question or problem and organize information. Then, they pursue investigations of the question or problem. Curriculum in a PBL model is organized around problems (not disciplines), with emphasis on cognitive skills and knowledge (Drake & Long, 2009). Also, PBL is a process-based model that bridges phenomena in the classroom and real-life experience (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). PBL models allow students to develop flexible knowledge, effective problemsolving and collaborative skills, self-directed learning skills, and intrinsic motivation (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007). Some sources address the academic effect of PBL on student achievement. A majority focused on secondary grades, specifically middle and high school math and science classes (Geier et al., 2008; Horak & Galluzzo, 2017; Jones & Eick, 2007; Krajcik et al., 1994; Sage, 1996; Summers & Dickinson, 2012). These studies describe PBL’s effect on achievement at the middle and secondary level. Geier and colleagues (2008) compared student achievement in seventh- and eighth-grade classes receiving PBL instruction versus classes receiving traditional instruction using quasi-experimental methods. PBL was shown to be more effective in delivering content, and students performed better on high-stakes standardized tests in science. Similarly, in Horak and Galluzzo’s (2017) study, academic and student perceptions of PBL instruction favored the PBL group. An indirect and constructivist approach to teaching can outperform a more direct approach to teaching. Students in this study found the PBL setting created a better learning environment than the traditional learning approach. Earlier, Summers and Dickinson’s (2012) study of a high school social studies class identified this outcome. Students receiving PBL instruction had higher standardized tests scores and more positive learning outcomes than students receiving traditional instruction. Also, the PBL group had higher rates of promotion to the next grade. These findings all demonstrate the positive effects of PBL in secondary classrooms. PBL in Elementary Classrooms. Research on the impact of PBL on student achievement in elementary grades has produced similar, albeit fewer, findings. Sage (1996) reported that much has been written about PBL and its effects on learning at the postsecondary level (especially medical school) and that literature on PBL at the high school level is increasing. Little research has been found in K–12 classrooms using

28

2 A Review of Literature

PBL—main barriers to investigation include constraints of classroom organization and state-mandated assessments of students in specific subject areas. Also, it requires careful planning to succeed at captivating learner attention in the scheduled class period. Furthermore, there is a lack of qualified PBL facilitators who can model good strategies for thinking and learning, including those who can scaffold student learning through modeling (e.g., Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Therefore, more documentation is needed of PBL’s relationship to academic achievement, especially at elementary and middle school levels (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Although fewer studies have been found on PBL in the elementary setting, studies that look at elementary achievement do support the use of this instructional method (Barron et al., 1998; Drake & Long, 2009; Inel & Balim, 2010; Sage, 1996; Siew & Mapeala, 2017). According to Inel and Balim’s (2010) quasiexperimental study, the use of PBL in science and technology is more effective in enhancing students’ academic achievement than traditional instruction. Students rely on previous knowledge to identify a problem and resolve it. Students learn new information simply by participating in the learning and discussing of knowledge with peers. Koray et al. (2008) concluded that students participating in PBL performed significantly better on a problem-solving skills assessment. They developed problemsolving skills, enhanced communication, and improved group-working skills and knowledge. In a pilot study of fourth graders in science, Drake and Long (2009) found that there was significant growth in content knowledge of the PBL group compared with the control group receiving only traditional instruction. Students receiving PBL instruction demonstrated problem-solving strategies, unlike their peer counterparts in the control group. The researchers concluded that PBL has promise in the elementary classroom. Siew and Mapeala’s (2017) study of fifth-grade science students’ motivation found that the PBL method can foster science learning and the attainment of performance goals. However, they found that PBL “is not a sufficient condition to effectively promote students’ motivation toward science learning”—“The more explicit teaching is about thinking and for thinking, the more substantial the impact it has on students’ motivation towards science learning” (p. 392). As Kain (2003) stated “Given that PBL has a record of success in sparking such curiosity and motivation, it is well worth considering as another tool to engage students” (p. 5). The demands of highstakes testing make the teaching of science secondary to math, reading, and writing (Drake & Long, 2009). Priority attention given to reading and math instruction in elementary grades can reduce instructional time for science instruction. Using PBL, multidisciplinary instruction becomes the focus of learning. Holm (2011) concurred that PBL fosters critical thinking and collaboration: With renewed emphasis being placed on the basics of education, and increasing pressure to streamline instruction and teach to specific standards, the idea that the most effective instruction for these goals is also one that fosters depth of learning and engages students on a personal level is quite appealing. (p. 10)

PBL in K–12 Public Education

29

Answering one question or problem can allow students the opportunity to use skills relevant to reading, math, science, and other areas of curriculum through the facilitation of the teacher. In Sage’s (1996) study, facilitators in first and second grade found that their coaching skills, especially questioning strategies, were critically important in helping students bring out prior knowledge, distinguish fact from opinion, and push deeper for knowledge and ideas from students. Sage further explained a “model/coach/fade” strategy in elementary classrooms (p. 21). To facilitate effective small groups, the teacher may need to model a skill, coach group members on that skill, and fade input to allow the groups to do it on their own. This supports the notion that elementaryaged students need to be taught how to think for themselves and build a strong foundation for inquiry.

Profile of a Virginia Graduate—The 5Cs The push for graduates equipped with contemporary mindsets and the accompanying skills has become the charge of schools in Virginia where “students in every grade [are expected to] experience a new approach to instruction that focuses on key skills for success in a modern world” (VDOE, 2019b). The Profile of a Virginia Graduate asserts that the 5Cs—critical thinking, creativity, communication, collaboration, and citizenship—need to be comprehensively addressed across grades in the state. This profile of graduates is one state’s policy initiative (i.e., VDOE 2019a, b) for meeting requirements (set forth by the 2016 Virginia General Assembly) to identify the knowledge and skills that students should attain by the time they graduate to achieve success. In developing the profile, the Virginia Board of Education determined that a life-ready graduate can apply content knowledge, demonstrate productive workplace skills, build community involvement and civic responsibility, and participate in career exploration. PBL is an instructional method that allows students to develop and build these skills. The Profile of a Virginia Graduate reflects a commitment to “preparing futureready graduates” who, in Virginia, have been prepared “with the content knowledge” and skills needed to be successful after graduation (VDOE, 2019b). Because of the need for high school graduates to possess these capacities and younger students to be making the expected developmental gains, we are incorporating information about the 5Cs. PBL has good potential for furthering state-level goals and impact student achievement. To achieve success, the development of the 5Cs should occur through PBL instruction in a classroom and school environment, ideally extending to informal learning, as illustrated by Evans et al. (2014). Figure 2.1 is a visual of the 5Cs. We now describe the 5Cs, each considered an essential skill for preparing futureready graduates that together constitute the framework of a high school graduate (a state-level adaptation of the Portrait of a Graduate; see BattelleforKids

30

2 A Review of Literature

[2018]). Offering more detail, the VDOE’s (2019a) description of each component is summarized in what follows, with extrapolations in the citizenship summary. Critical Thinking. One of the most valuable skills in life and learning is the ability to think critically. Students should be provided with opportunities to grow as critical thinkers, and they need to be able to identify issues and formulate questions for investigation. They should discover and appreciate multiple solutions and perspectives. Students need the opportunity to apply, analyze, interpret, evaluate, and synthesize information in a variety of ways, as well as reason, make inferences, and reflect on their own thinking. Allowing students to question and encouraging them to wonder builds capacity for critical thinking. Creative Thinking. Valuing original work means that the process of producing it will be welcomed. Creative thinkers need to be pushed beyond surface understandings to experience deeper learning that will promote content knowledge. Using their imagination confidently during tasks will produce success. To actively create in a classroom, students need the opportunity and freedom to take risks. Their interests and strengths, as well as background knowledge unique to themselves, should be usefully tapped for propelling open-ended questions and interest-driven learning. They should feel compelled to locate and creatively use information, be resourceful, develop new knowledge, and present it. Innovating, they will experiment and fully immerse themselves in the flow of activity while monitoring progress and learning from mistakes and failures. Students should be encouraged to embrace new ideas and perspectives and direct their own explorations. Embracing creative collaboration with peers and sharing results with other groups, in addition to giving and receiving feedback, are also important. Communication. Communication is more than just speaking. One must be able to listen, articulate, evaluate, and respond. Students need opportunities to partake in activities that develop these communication skills, which in turn advance collaboration, creativity, and so forth. During such opportunities, they need to actively listen and should know and respect their audience. They need to recognize and effectively use verbal and nonverbal cues. Utilizing all forms of communication will allow students to be successful and effectively communicate with others. Collaboration. Working toward a common goal with others is a difficult task for many children. Learning to compromise, demonstrating flexibility, and sharing responsibility will enable students to develop this skill. Students should value and seek others’ opinions, perspectives, and abilities and use those to work toward a common goal. Obtaining feedback on their contributions to joint work is also a related skill. To grow and thrive in an ever-changing world, students need to make synergistic connections; initiate or help plan, organize, and complete tasks; and be a valuable team member. Citizenship. Regarding children’s membership in the world community, one of the best ways they can grow is to experience citizenship in action. This way, they will internalize formulations of citizenship such as “birthplace alone does not define a citizen” (Mason, 2013) and explore enriching ideas and examples. Because being a citizen does not automatically make them a good one, students need opportunities to demonstrate civic duty, trustworthiness, respect, fairness, responsibility, and

Profile of a Virginia Graduate—The 5Cs

31

caring. Learning about the past, participating in the present, and caring about the future can produce strong citizens. Understanding that citizenship involves “rights, obligations, and identity,” and that it has racial, gender, and other dimensions allows for complexity and meaning making (Mason, 2013). To this we add that using themes of citizenship to approach PBL with children can generate high interest. Elementary teachers can “help them learn how to positively contribute to their community”; “citizenship themes” that could work in PBL citizenship-themed lessons include “honesty, compassion, respect, responsibility, and courage” (Kaplan Early Learning Company, 2017). To promote good citizenship and explore intrinsic issues, teachers can use books, websites, and other resources that feature citizenship values and actions (e.g., the Born This Way Foundation led by Lady Gaga and her mother supports the emotional wellness of youth through action and creative problem-solving [https://bornthisway.foundation/ourmission]). Teachers can also allocate time for writing and art activities; designing creative citizenship displays, models, etc.; and using citizenship enrichment kits. Any themes explored with students should help them develop understanding of “good citizenship,” activism and agency, and applicability, such as to human life or the planet. By preparing critical thinkers, embracing creative thinking, practicing communication skills, encouraging collaboration, and developing citizenship skills, students are enriched by experiences that prepare them for high school and life beyond graduation. Incorporating the 5Cs into classrooms, and in formal and informal learning alike, promotes well-rounded students intent on making a difference in the world. An instructional model, PBL-oriented settings can leverage growth by focusing child development on the 5Cs so students will flourish.

Engaging Qualities Present in PBL Tasks Activities that are truly engaging are sought after in the classroom. As such, this leads us to explicitly list the various engaging qualities, as defined in the literature, that are typically present in PBL tasks. PBL problems are said to “transcend fields” even though “core problems vary among disciplines” (Duch et al., 2001); thus, PBL focuses on problems, not disciplines (Drake & Long, 2009). Elaborating, Duch’s team identified five characteristics of PBL activities (we highlighted [in parentheses] the qualities of engagement): • The problem must motivate students to seek out a deeper understanding of concepts. (motivation) • The problem should require students to make reasoned decisions and to defend them. (decision-making) • The problem should incorporate the content objectives in such a way as to connect it to previous courses/knowledge. (connection)

32

2 A Review of Literature

• If used for a group project, the problem needs a level of complexity to ensure that the students must work together to solve it. (complexity) • If used for a multistage project, the initial steps of the problem should be openended and engaging to draw students into the problem. (open-ended) Other qualities specific to PBL activities include authentic, ill-structured problem, student choice, discovery, challenging, scenario-based, skills-building, independence, inquiry, solution-focused, expression, and learning artifact (Larmer, 2013; Parsons et al., 2014), as well as student-centering, real-world problem-solving, questioning, and active learning (Savery, 2006). Besides self -directed learning (independence), engaging qualities are constructive learning, collaborative learning, and contextual learning (Yew & Goh, 2016). Intrinsic motivation, not just motivation, is a desirable characteristic of PBL assignments (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007; Jones et al., 2013). Overarching emphasis is on the presence of citizenship learning, collaborative learning, communicative learning, creative learning, and critical thinking in PBL tasks (e.g., NEA, n.d; VDOE, 2019b). As such, the 5Cs were consistently identified as essential skills (key elements) for implementing PBL and involving students in learning across contexts and grade levels. Recognized albeit less commonly cited engaging qualities of PBL activity were two others: empowerment, as experienced through, for example, the functioning of groups and practice of “equal say” (Jones et al., 2013) and transformative learning, which looks to “impactful change” beyond immersive problem-solving (Carroll, 2014); it requires transformation of students’ “existing knowledge” and involves changes in perspective. These qualities of engagement can be designed as learning outcomes (Donnelly, 2016).

Summary The PBL-related literature reviewed in this chapter considered elementary student engagement and achievement and extended to other areas of interest. Student achievement not only refers to academics but also growth in the 5Cs. Much of the research examined the effects of PBL in K–12 classrooms; however, middle and secondary classrooms were more central than elementary classrooms. Young learners need to learn how to utilize PBL strategies under the guidance of the teacher; hence, teachers function as facilitators of learning. Students can become increasingly independent, motivated learners who are able to apply their skills to real-world problems through personal and group inquiry. This review of sources covered the background of PBL and its evolution into public education and classrooms. It also supported the distinctiveness and interchangeability of PBL, project-based learning, and other forms of participatory involvement for the purpose of learning by doing. PBL is not new; however, its exploration in elementary settings is limited. Studies that do address PBL at the elementary level focus on students’ perceptions and attitudes toward PBL, with very few addressing the impact on academic achievement. This review

Summary

33

adds to the knowledge base regarding PBL instruction, with attention on PBL strategies utilized in elementary, middle, and secondary levels, extending into informal settings. All can be developmentally adapted to benefit elementary children and their skills’ development. We hope that the identification and analysis of PBL instruction will help educators think about how they can plan, implement, and assess it. Chapter 3 explains the interview methodology used for this study, with coverage of data collection and analysis processes.

References Barron, B. J., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., 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. Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. Springer. Basham, J. D., Israel, M., & Maynard, K. (2010). An ecological model of STEM education: Operationalizing STEM FOR ALL. Journal of Special Education Technology, 25(3), 9–19. BattelleforKids. (2018). Portrait of a Graduate: A first step in transforming your school system. https://portraitofagraduate.org. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 369–398. Carroll, M. P. (2014). Shoot for the moon! The mentors and the middle schoolers explore the intersection of design thinking and STEM. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 4(1), 14–30. Chung, P., Yeh, R. C., & Chen, Y. C. (2016). Influence of PBL strategy on enhancing student’s industrial oriented competences learned: An action research on learning weblog analysis. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(2), 285–307. Colley, K. (2008). Project-based science instruction: A primer—An introduction and learning cycle for implementing project-based science. Science Teacher, 75(8), 23–28. https://eric.ed.gov/?id= EJ817851. Couros, G. (2015). The innovator’s mindset. Dave Burgess Consulting. Delisle, R. (1997). How to use problem-based learning in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Macmillan. Donnelly, R. (2016). Application of Mezirow’s transformative pedagogy to blended problem-based learning (Unpublished resource paper, pp. 1–21). https://arrow.tudublin.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article=1032&context=ltcoth. Drake, K. N., & Long, D. (2009). Rebecca’s in the dark: A comparative study of problem-based learning and direct instruction/experiential learning in two 4th grade classrooms. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(1), 1–16. Duch, B. J., Groh, S. E, & Allen, D. E. (Eds.). (2001). The power of problem-based learning. Stylus. English, L. D., & King, D. T. (2015). STEM learning through engineering design: Fourth-grade students’ investigations in aerospace. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(14). https:// doi-org.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu/10.1186/s40594-015-0027-7. Estapa, A. T., & Tank, K. M. (2017). Supporting integrated STEM in the elementary classroom: A professional development approach centered on an engineering design challenge. International Journal of STEM Education, 4(6), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0058-3. Evans, M. A., Lopez, M., Maddox, D., Drape, T., & Duke, R. (2014). Interest-driven learning among middle school youth in an out-of-school STEM studio. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(5), 624–640.

34

2 A Review of Literature

Friesen, S., & Scott, D. (2013). Inquiry-based learning: A review of the research literature (Alberta Ministry of Education report). https://galileo.org/focus-on-inquiry-lit-review.pdf. Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., & ClayChambers, J. (2008). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curricula in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 922–939. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20248. Gerlach, J. (2012, April). STEM: Defying a simple definition. NSTA WebNews, p. 3. [Report]. [National Science Teachers Association]. https://www.nsta.org. Grant, M. M. (2011). Learning, beliefs, and products: Students’ perspectives with project-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 5(2), 37–69. Hallinen, J. (2019). STEM education curriculum. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica. com/topic/STEM-education. Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark. Educational psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. Holm, M. (2011). Project-based instruction: A review of the literature on effectiveness in prekindergarten through 12th grade classrooms. Rivier Academic Journal, 7(2), 1–13. Horak, A. K., & Galluzzo, G. R. (2017). Gifted middle school students’ achievement and perceptions of science classroom quality during problem-based learning. Journal of Advanced Academics, 28(1), 28–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X16683424. Howard Barrows. (2020). Howard Barrows. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/howard_bar rows. Hung, W., Jonassen, D. H., & Liu, R. (2007). Problem-based learning. In J. M. Spector, J. G. van Merrienboer, M. D., Merrill, & M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 1503–1581). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Illinois Center for Innovation and Teaching & Learning. (n.d.) Problem-based learning (PBL). https://citl.illinois.edu/citl-101/teaching-learning/resources/teaching-strategies/problembased-learning-(pbl). Inel, D., & Balim, A. G. (2010). The effects of using problem-based learning in science and technology teaching upon students’ academic achievement and levels of structuring concepts. AsiaPacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 1–23. https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/dow nload/v11_issue2_files/inel.pdf. John Dewey. (2020). John Dewey. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey. Jones, B. D., Epler, C. M., Mokri, P., Bryant, L. H., & Paretti, M. C. (2013). The effects of a collaborative problem-based learning experience on students’ motivation in engineering capstone courses. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7(2), 1–71. https://doi.org/10. 7771/1541-5015.1344. Jones, M. G., & Brader-Araje, L. (2002). The impact of constructivism on education: Language, discourse, and meaning. American Communication Journal, 5(3), 1–10. https://ac-journal.org/ journal/vol5/iss3/special/jones.pdf. Jones, M. T., & Eick, C. J. (2007). Providing bottom-up support to middle school science teachers’ reform efforts in using inquiry-based kits. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(6), 913–934. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-007-9069-0. Kain, D. L. (2003). Problem-based learning for teachers, grades K–8. Allyn & Bacon. Kaplan Early Learning Company. (2017). How to teach citizenship in the elementary school classroom [Blog]. https://www.kaplanco.com/blog/post/2017/06/06/how-to-teach-citizenship-in-theelementary-school-classroom. Kek, M., & Huijser, H. (2017). Problem-based learning into the future. Springer. Kennedy, T. J., & Odell, M. R. L. (2014). Engaging students in STEM education. Science Education International, 25(3), 246–258. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1044508.pdf. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and

References

35

inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://www.tandfonline.com/ doi/pdf/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1?needAccess=true. Klimaitis, C. C., & Mullen, C. A. (2020). Access and barriers to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education for K–12 students with disabilities and females (pp. 1–24). In C A. Mullen (Ed.), Handbook of social justice interventions in education. Springer. http://doiorg-443.webvpn.fjmu.edu.cn/10.1007/978-3-030-29553-0_125-1. Klimaitis, C. C., & Mullen, C. A. (2021). Including K–12 students with disabilities in STEM education and planning for inclusion. Educational Planning, 28(2). Koray, O., Presley, A., Koksal, M. S., & Ozdemir, M. (2008). Enhancing problem-solving skills of pre-service elementary school teachers through problem-based learning. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching, 9(2), 1–18. https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/download/v9_issue2_ files/koksal.pdf. Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (1994). A collaborative model for helping middle grade science teachers learn project-based instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 94(5), 483–497. Larmer, J. (2013). Project based learning vs. problem based learning vs. XBL [Blog]. https://www. pblworks.org/blog/project-based-learning-vs-problem-based-learning-vs-xbl. Marino, M. T. (2010). Defining a technology research agenda for elementary and secondary students with learning and other high-incidence disabilities in inclusive science classrooms. Journal of Special Education Technology, 25(1), 1–27. Marra, R. M., Jonassen, D. H., Palmer, B., & Luft, S. (2014). Why problem-based learning works: Theoretical foundations. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25, 221–238. Marzano, R. J. (2013). Art and science of teaching/ask yourself: Are students engaged? Educational Leadership, 70(6), 81–82. Mason, P. L. (2013). Encyclopedia of race and racism (2nd ed.). Macmillan. McDowell, M. (2017). Rigorous PBL by design: Three shifts for developing confident and competent learners. Corwin. Merritt, J., Lee, M. Y., Rillero, P., & Kinach, B. M. (2017). Problem-based learning in K–8 mathematics and science education: A literature review. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 11(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1674. Miller, A. M. (2018). Sustainable education and the use of problem-based learning as a conceptual framework for implementation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Spaulding University, Louisville, Kentucky. https://pqdtopen.proquest.com/doc/2029839168.html?FMT=ABS. Mullen, C. A. (2017). Critical issues on democracy and mentoring in education: A debate in the literature. In D. A. Clutterbuck, F. K. Kochan, L. G. Lunsford, N. Dominguez, & J. Haddock-Millar (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of mentoring (pp. 34–51). Sage. Mullen, C. A. (Ed.). (2019). Creativity under duress in education? Resistive theories, practices, and actions. Springer. Nadelson, L. S., Pfiester, J., Callahan, J., & Pyke, P. (2015). Who is doing the engineering, the student or the teacher? The development and use of a rubric to categorize level of design for the elementary classroom. Journal of Technology Education, 26(2), 22–45. National Research Council of the National Academies. (2013). Monitoring progress toward successful K–12 STEM education: A nation advancing? The National Academies Press. https://www.nap.edu/login.php?page=%2fbooksearch.php%3frecord_id%3d13509%26t erm%3dengagement. National Education Association (NEA). (n.d.). Preparing 21st century students for a global society: An educator’s guide to the “Four Cs” (pp. 1–37). http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/A-Guide-toFour-Cs.pdf. Neville, A. J. (2009). Problem-based learning and medical education forty years on. A review of its effects on knowledge and clinical performance. Medical Principles and Practice, 18 (1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1159/000163038. Parsons, S. A., Nuland, L. R., & Parsons, A. W. (2014). The ABCs of student engagement. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(8), 23–27.

36

2 A Review of Literature

Sage, S. M. (1996, April). A qualitative examination of problem-based learning at the K–8 level: Preliminary findings (pp. 1–27) (ERIC Number: ED398263). A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/ED398263.pdf. Sahli, R. (2017). An examination of the effectiveness of project-based learning on student academic achievement and teacher perceptions of project-based learning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). http://hdl.handle.net/11414/3337. Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: 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. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31–38. https://www.jstor.org/stable/ pdf/44428296.pdf?casa_token=_mtdoc6-dnqaaaaa:pngbub0-olzfgi0ukennm9z9owcyeb6yqqs ynqiptzfymd1gfhfaoefsstinuibqvy2wjcf54rakntxjxk2kugg0n4mhmrfjs6rfyffixae2s6t9ur4. Semiscoalition.org. (2013). Getting the big idea: Concept-based teaching and learning [Handout]. https://semiscoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/getting-the-big-idea-handout.pdf. Siew, N. M., & Mapeala, R. (2017). The effects of Thinking Maps-aided Problem-Based Learning on motivation towards science learning among fifth graders. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(3), 379–394. http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/jbse/files/pdf/vol16/379-394.siew_jbse_vol. 16_no.3.pdf. Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 21–44). Springer. Srinivasan, M., Wilkes, M., Stevenson, F., Nguyen, T., & Slavin, S. (2007). Comparing problembased learning with case-based learning: Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions. Academic Medicine, 82(1), 74–82. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.acm.0000249963.93776.aa. Strobel, J., & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of metaanalyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 3(1), 44–58. Strong, R., Silver, H. F., & Robinson, A. (1995). Strengthening student engagement: What do students want. Educational Leadership, 53(1), 8–12. Summers, E. J., & Dickinson, G. (2012). A longitudinal investigation of project–based instruction and student achievement in high school social studies student achievement in high school social studies. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 6(1), 82–103. https://doi.org/10. 7771/1541-5015.1313. Sutton, P. S., & Knuth, R. (2017). A schoolwide investment in problem-based learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(2), 65–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721717734193. The Buck Institute for Education. (2018). PBL works. https://www.pblworks.org. Tienken, C. H. (2020). Cracking the code of education reform: Creative compliance and ethical leadership. Corwin. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019a). Profile of a Virginia graduate. http://www. doe.virginia.gov/instruction/graduation/profile-grad/index.shtml. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019b). Virginia’s 5 C’s. http://www.virginiaisfo rlearners.virginia.gov/media-library/#:~:text=Students%20in%20every%20grade%20will,com munication%2C%20collaboration%20and%20citizenship%20skills. Wells, J. G. (2016). I-STEM ed exemplar: Implementation of the PIRPOSAL Model. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 76(2), 16–23. Wilson, B. G. (2012). Constructivism in practical and historical context. In B. Reiser & J. Dempsey (Eds.), Current trends in instructional design and technology (3rd ed., pp. 51–62). Pearson Prentice Hall. Yaqinuddin, A. (2013). Problem-based learning as an instructional method. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan, 23(1), 83–85. https://jcpsp.pk/archive/2013/Jan2013/18. pdf. Yew, H. J., & Goh, K. (2016). Problem-based learning: An overview of its process and impact on learning. Health Professions Education, 2, 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpe.2016.01.004. Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 12–19.

Chapter 3

Methodology

Abstract Initiating this study were general questions of pedagogic interest: What is PBL, and what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’ 21st-century learning? The methodology used for this exploratory qualitative study for which interviews served as the main data collection source is the focus of this chapter of Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School. The interview context gave participating elementary educators the opportunity to share their classroom experiences of PBL as an instructional method. This chapter provides an overview of the research design and justification; original PBL Teacher Interview Protocol; study site and participants; limitations and delimitations; and procedures for collecting, managing, and analyzing data. The study was created to identify key strategies used by selected participants during PBL instruction in grades four and five. Additionally, the methods were designed to examine how PBL strategies reported and used by the educators contributed to the development of 21st-century learning approached as the 5Cs (critical thinking, creativity, communication, collaboration, and citizenship) in Virginia. One-on-one interviews with teachers who had been using PBL instruction in their classrooms for 2 years yielded insights into perceptions of PBL. Data collected from a school site were analyzed to identify teaching strategies used during PBL implementation that contributed to the development of the 5Cs. An extended focus of the data collection process targeted support for teachers and administrators interested in PBL instruction and curriculum in elementary classrooms. Keywords 5cs · Interview methodology · Project-based learning · Qualitative study · Themes · Elementary teacher participants · Elementary school · 21st-century skills

Overview General questions of pedagogic interest steered this study: What is PBL, and what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’ 21st-century learning? The methodology used for this exploratory qualitative study for which interviews served as the main data collection source is the focus of this chapter of

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. S. Reed et al., Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5_3

37

38

3 Methodology

Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School. The interview context gave participating elementary educators the opportunity to share their classroom experiences of PBL as an instructional method. This chapter provides an overview of the research design and justification; original PBL Teacher Interview Protocol; study site and participants; limitations and delimitations; and procedures for collecting, managing, and analyzing data. We created this study to identify key strategies used by selected participants during PBL instruction in grades four and five. Additionally, the methods were designed to examine how PBL strategies reported and used by the educators contributed to the development of 21st-century learning approached as the 5Cs in Virginia. One-on-one interviews with teachers who had been using PBL instruction in their classrooms for 2 years yielded insights into perceptions of PBL implementation. The data collected from a school site, as discussed herein, were analyzed to foster understanding of the strategies teachers used during PBL implementation that contributed to the development of the 5Cs. An extended focus of the data collection process was to gain insight for supporting teachers and administrators interested in implementing PBL instruction and curriculum in elementary classrooms.

Research Questions and Design Driving this exploration is our pedagogic interest in PBL and instruction at the elementary level that benefits 21st-century learning. A basic qualitative methodology was used to investigate the specific research question, What key strategies of PBL instruction contributed to the development of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth grade students at one elementary school? We looked to the strategies teachers reported using in their PBL instruction they thought supported development of the 5Cs. Data collected were used to determine the strategies used by teachers during PBL instruction in elementary classrooms and their contribution to 21st-century skills. The Profile of a Virginia Graduate’s expectations of the 5Cs, an expression of 21st-century skills at the state level (Virginia Department of Education [VDOE], 2019a, b), drew particular interest in light of our work as education leaders in the Commonwealth of Virginia. In accordance with Virginia state law, “Elementary school means a public school with any grades kindergarten through 5” (Commonwealth of Virginia, 2020, para. 9). At the site-based level of elementary education, we (the research team) set forth to (a) identify key strategies used in effective PBL instruction and (b) discern the relationship between these strategies and progress with, or improvement in, the 5Cs. Also, our sampling methods were purposive (Miles et al., 2020), meaning that our population was well defined and preselected—teaching personnel eligible to participate in the research met specified criteria, which we clarify (see “Participant Selection” subsection). We located and analyzed relevant literature on an ongoing basis and wrote summaries that integrated research methods and findings. We also generated a detailed matrix (not included herein). The sources are organized around themes,

Research Questions and Design

39

including ways PBL has worked in various educational and situational contexts, particularly with children; what PBL-embedded STEM looks like for young people; and how PBL compares with closely related instructional strategies. We chose the setting and eligibility criteria for participating in the study, created the interview instrument, conducted all interviews in person through a member of our team who is at arm’s length from both the school and division, and independently analyzed the data sources. Each of us led, as a collaborative unit, different aspects of the study (i.e., literature review, interview procedure, data analysis). We made constant comparisons in the analysis of the interview data before arriving at themes. Through data-based analysis and conversations, we gained an understanding of key strategies of PBL instruction. General practical outcomes anticipated for this study were that key strategies for implementing PBL in elementary schools would be identified and that the results could steer practitioners’ informed decision making about PBL classroom instruction. Another projected outcome was that PBL instructional strategies would connect with the development of students’ 5C skills. Methodological exploration of PBL strategies and 21st-century skills development was expected to help fill the gap in the literature surrounding the use of PBL as a means for instruction in elementary school, as well as support current and future practitioners in implementing PBL in elementary contexts. This small-scale analysis of a specific situation involving a small sample size is in keeping with qualitative research and open-ended (interview) questions said to work best in studies with small populations. Such open-ended questions allow for deeper understanding of people’s perspectives on their own experiences (Yin, 2018). Setting Selection. An (PK–5) elementary school within a rural division in southwest Virginia was chosen for exploratory study. One of the top elementary schools in the division, it has been graded as above average. During the research period, the school had around 525 students, with a student–teacher ratio of 14 to 1. According to recent state test scores, 80% of students are at least proficient in math and 81% in reading. The school is predominantly White, with 90% White, 7% Hispanic, 2% multiple races, and 1% Black. All seven participating teachers/staff (interviewees) were White. There were 42 certified teachers at this school (all White): 26 classroom teachers and an additional 16 teachers (specialty, Title I, special education, English as a second language). Building personnel served multiple classrooms, mostly grades 4 and 5. Because they spent a lot of time in the grade 4 and 5 classrooms, they were accustomed to providing support for PBL-centered curriculum and guidance to these students. With divisional leaders’ encouragement, a PBL program supporting the Profile of a Virginia Graduate initiative (VDOE, 2019a) was implemented 3 years prior to our study. The onsite application had taken place in four grade 4 and 5 classrooms during the 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 school years. The first author has been serving as principal at the research site since 2015. Because of her inside knowledge, it was possible to generate a purposive sample of teachers and teacher teamers. With the school and district culture’s receptivity to pedagogic improvements, we were drawn

40

3 Methodology

to study this school, with an eye on how it was adapting to 21st-century policies and practices as reflected by the division and state. Teacher Participants. Eight elementary educators—general education, special education, and Title I teachers and aides—who had been using PBL as an instructional method since 2017 and for 2 school years fulfilled eligibility criteria for participation. Seven of the teachers/staff who worked in grades 4 and 5 PBL classrooms during those 2 years were voluntarily interviewed one-on-one. Teaching personnel eligible to participate in the research met four criteria: (a) occupy a teaching or staff post in an elementary school in Virginia, (b) possess pedagogic experience with PBL instruction in the elementary classroom, (c) utilize PBL as the main method of teaching and learning in the classroom, and (d) participate in teacher teams organized to advance experimentation with PBL teaching and learning. This specific teacher profile was fulfilled by select teachers who accepted the invitation to participate in interviews in February 2020. In 2017, these teachers decided to experiment with an alternative learning opportunity, rising to meet the challenge of the former superintendent to have students learn in ways that were unique to elementary classrooms within the division. This challenge was carried forth with the strong support of the new superintendent (who started July 2017) and the assistant superintendent, director of instruction, and principal. The teachers decided to reorganize the traditional structure of grades 4 and 5 as two distinct, cross-grade-level teams: The PBL team focused on exploratory PBL instruction and the traditional team attended to a traditional approach to instruction. (Each team had four classroom teachers.) Limitations and Delimitations. This research only accounted for the responses of elementary teachers/staff who worked in classrooms using PBL instruction. As such, teachers and staff from the same school whose instructional methods were not primarily PBL centered were not included. The major limitation, though, was Samantha’s role as the principal—her researcher role during the data collection phase needed to be offset in all studyrelated contact with participants to protect her supervisees. To shield participants from potential or perceived supervisory bias, a creative solution was endorsed not only by the research team but also university stakeholders and the ethics review board: Interviews were conducted by a member of the research team (coauthor Emily). As a “substitute researcher,” she was briefed on the interview protocol and procedures prior to conducting interviews. Having a substitute researcher with recent experience conducting research-based interviews and with a school practitioner background who was employed in a different division in Virginia ensured her credibility with all parties involved. Emily’s presence allowed the teachers and staff at the research site to report honestly and openly without fear of consequences due to their supervisory relationship with their principal. Regarding delimitations of this study, the research team chose to focus on PBL within a specific elementary school. It was also decided to exclude other instructional methods (e.g., project-based learning) that may have been in used in the building. Another decision was not to compare PBL to traditional or conventional methods of teaching while allowing teachers to make any such comparisons even though the interview prompts did not guide them in this direction.

Research Questions and Design

41

Confidentiality and Ethics. To monitor potential bias in the supervisory relationship, measures taken beyond utilizing a researcher substitute to conduct interviews were ensuring the anonymity of participants’ identities and responses, as well as conducting member checks (McMillan & Wergin, 2006). The substitute researcher guaranteed all participants’ anonymity, which was important so that their identities would not be revealed. With this assurance, they were free to speak about their views, experiences, and opinions without fear of personal judgment or retaliation by their principal. Participation was voluntary, and the participant consent letter, which briefly explained the study, stated there would be no negative repercussions if identifying information were to arise. All research correspondence was also handled by the third party. The principal was neither present during the actual interviews nor given interview notes. Following the interview sessions, the substitute researcher uploaded the recorded interviews directly to GMR Transcription Services, an online company. After receiving the electronic transcriptions, she forwarded the transcription to the corresponding interviewee who, after reviewing the record, verified it by email. Using this process, member checks occurred to accurately record their perspectives (McMillan & Wergin, 2006). Once verification from the interviewees was received, the substitute researcher shared the transcriptions for coding purposes.

Data Collection Procedures Data collection occurred through a single one-on-one interview with Emily. Each interview lasted up to 45 min, followed interview protocol, and was digitally recorded. Electronic transcriptions of the recorded interviews were forwarded to the corresponding interviewee, who then verified the record by email response. Once verification from the interviewee was received and member checking concluded, Emily moved the transcribed interviews to the research team for analysis. Samantha closely reviewed each transcribed interview, noting possible themes and trends, which were independently reviewed by the research team. Coded themes and notes were entered into a Microsoft Excel sheet to organize data collected. (Specific analysis procedures are discussed in the “Data Analysis” section.) Prior to beginning the study, permission was obtained, as noted below. As listed on Table 3.1, besides the primary data source, which was teacher/staff interviewees’ responses, another source was the literature identified and analyzed (see previous chapter). A secondary data source was relevant contextual information provided by local, district, state, and federal sources, such as expectations for 21st-century graduates from a state education agency (e.g., VDOE; www.doe.virgin ia.gov). Before data collection, approval was received in February 2020 from the Human Research Protection Program through our home university’s (Virginia Tech) Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB research protocol and appending materials (e.g., participant consent letter), modified for the school division in accordance with

42

3 Methodology

Table 3.1 Alignment of research and interview questions, data sources, and analytic procedures Research and interview questions

Data sources

Data analytic procedures

Research question: 1. Interview transcriptions of What key strategies of PBL teacher/staff responses 2. Local, district, state, and instruction contributed to the federal informational development of the Profile of a sources (e.g., reports, Virginia Graduate’s policies, and websites) expectations of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth grade students 3. Literature documenting PBL in K–12 public at one elementary school in education and associated Virginia? research-based themes

Deductive and inductive coding of PBL strategies and 5Cs identified Interview transcriptions read numerous times by coders and codes recorded in margins Labels created in Microsoft Excel to organize data generated from eight interview questions

Interview questions (sample): PBL teaching strategies considered important → Interview Q2 and others

Strategy (code): Teachers identified PBL strategies used during implementation they considered important Strategies commonly used were coded

5Cs skills development: 5Cs development resulting from PBL instructional strategies used → Interview Q3, 4, and others

Teachers reported which skills were developed through PBL instruction Commonalities coded in responses Teachers pinpointed which strategy impacted which skill Commonalities coded in responses

→ Interview Q3a, 4a Critical thinking (CT) skill → Interview Q3b, 4b Creativity (CR) skill → Interview Qc, 4c Communication (COM) skill → Interview Q3d, 4d Collaboration (COL) skill → Interview Q3e, 4e Citizenship (CZ) skill

5Cs codes: CT = critical thinking CR = creativity COM = communication COL = collaboration CZ = citizenship

its procedures, were also approved. Specifically, a meeting was held with the division superintendent to request permission to conduct the study at the selected school, and a letter followed describing the research, purpose, and data collection process, including procedures for protecting participant anonymity. A letter was then sent to selected teachers explaining the study and inviting voluntary participation. The university’s required Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative course on ethical standards in research was also completed by the research team. Data collection and analysis procedures were organized around established processes:

Data Collection Procedures

43

“data collection; manage and organize the data; read and memo emergent ideas; describe and classify codes into themes; develop and assess interpretations; represent and visualize the data; and account of findings” (Creswell & Poth, 2018, p. 186; also, Miles et al., 2020).

Instrument Design and Validation To validate our account of the research and establish its reliability, we used at least six “validation strategies” (Creswell & Poth, 2018, pp. 256–264): • “Consensual validation”—as a research team, we worked in concert with multiple stakeholders who gave input regarding the conduct of the study at the research site, including data collection procedures involving the ethical treatment of participants. • “Triangulation of multiple data sources”—select literature, teacher interviews, and state-level information was assessed by all members of the research team. • Clarified “researcher bias”—to monitor potential researcher bias, the use of a researcher substitute proved necessary and the justification for this action was previously explained. • Member checking—interview transcriptions were given to the teacher interviewees soon after each interview took place and checked by them to ensure accuracy. • “Peer review of the data and research process”—the study was carried out by a school–university team of expert practitioners and scholars; also, multiple stakeholders from the university and division provided invaluable feedback, in particular, a university committee of professors involved from 2019 to 2020 proved especially attentive to all methodological details and the process of considering alternate ways of proceeding with the data collection, as well as re-interpreting and displaying data; also, a full ethics review by the same university added to the multiple enactments of peer review and critique that deepened researcher reflexivity and produced sound research. • “Intercoder agreement”—This was reached by coders who analyzed the interview transcription data and agreed on codes and themes (see Table 3.1 for details). Study Instrument. We created the study instrument titled PBL Teacher Interview Protocol based on our research questions and initial literature results (see Appendix). Words/ concepts were extracted from these two sources to inform interview questions: citizenship, classroom, collaboration, creativity, communication, critical thinking, PBL instruction, and strategies. Published sources aided the construction of prompts involving challenges and strengths of using PBL in elementary classrooms from the perspective of the PBL teacher. The interview questions and procedures were pilot tested (with a divisional coordinator steeped in elementary knowledge). Questions were refined and reworded. A decision was to list each of the 5Cs without specifically naming them; we simply

44

3 Methodology

specified each of the widely known 21st-century skills. Another point is that our methodological plan and procedures were subjected to multiple reviews over time by university project and ethics review committees, extending to an independent review of the division in which the elementary school was located. Table 3.1 was another procedural clarification and source of validity that resulted from this process. It served as a check for ensuring close alignment between the interview questions and research question. Once teachers/staff agreed to participate, interview dates and times were scheduled. The in-person interviews with PBL teachers took place in a one-on-one format with the research substitute. The location, decided by the teachers, accommodated their busy schedules and eliminated their travel time. Interviews lasted up to 45 min, took place in one sitting, and were digitally recorded.

Data Organization, Coding, and Analysis Interview transcriptions containing de-identifying participant data were stored on a password-protected laptop computer. The seven transcripts were read fully several times and color-coded to note points of interest; a preliminary ordering of each transcription was created. Initiating these and other data analysis processes, transcribed interview responses were arranged in Microsoft Excel. A data summary form aided us with organizing and categorizing the interview information. Each interview question and subquestion constituted a column heading, and each row was labeled A, B, C, D, E, F, and G (in accordance with the seven participants). Keywords were extracted from the research and survey questions and converted into a list of codes for deductive coding (as per Miles et al., 2020). We coded the transcriptions and transferred the information into the data summary form, organizing the codes into small groups, then larger groups, and eventually themes. Notes taken in the margins of the electronic transcriptions were simultaneously coded around these key points of high interest: • Key strategies used in PBL instruction • Identification of each of the 5Cs • Impact on 5Cs skills development Inductive coding (Miles et al., 2020) of these key points led to additional codes that emerged while analyzing the survey data. We searched for strategies commonly used during classroom implementation reported by the teachers/staff; beyond this, we noted strategies that were thought to have had an impact on the 5Cs. Using these coding processes, we extended the predetermined codes, made connections, synthesized the data, and completed the within-case analysis. To break down these various processes a little more, we adopted Stage and Manning’s (2016) content analytic approach. As such, the transcriptions were treated as documents that were coded deductively and inductively, and the interview protocol’s embedded keywords were turned into deductive codes. Within the Excel

Data Organization, Coding, and Analysis

45

file, keyword usages were counted as an indicator of the relative weight/importance; then, the context surrounding each keyword was studied to gain insight into wordsin-context and their nuances. Emergent themes were identified using these procedures, with the goal of identifying PBL strategies, each of the 5Cs, and 5Cs skills development and impact. All these processes and observations were tracked in the researchers’ separate notes on coding and analysis. By following Harding and Whitehead’s (2020) steps for analyzing data in qualitative research, we coded words and phrases line by line (in an Excel file). The multiple “fractured” codes were grouped then hierarchically arranged. A search for connections between and among the groupings led to discoveries that are described in the next chapter. In the process of creating linkages, we moved back and forth among the steps. Returning to read the full transcriptions during coding and revisiting the coding process enabled rich coding to evolve and detailed notetaking to occur. Tentative themes with data-based evidence were summarized. In keeping with recommendations for visualizing qualitative data sources (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Miles et al., 2020), we created data-based tables and figures of our transcriptions, research findings based on the interviews, and select literature analyzed.

Summary General questions initiating this study of pedagogic interest were: What is PBL, and what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’ 21st-century learning? Interviews with elementary teachers served as the main data collection source for this exploratory qualitative study. The interview context gave seven elementary educators the opportunity to share their classroom experiences of PBL as an instructional method. This chapter provided an overview of the research design and justification; original PBL Teacher Interview Protocol; study site and participants; limitations and delimitations; and procedures for organizing, coding, and analyzing the interview data collected. The study was created to identify key strategies used by selected teachers/staff during PBL instruction in grades 4 and 5. Additionally, the methods were designed to examine how PBL strategies reported and used by the educators contributed to the development of 21st-century learning approached as the 5Cs in Virginia. One-on-one interviews with teachers who had been using PBL instruction in their classrooms for 2 years yielded insights into PBL implementation at the elementary level. Chapter 4 is a data analysis and findings snapshot, complete with teacher participant views and discussion of thematic outcomes.

46

3 Methodology

References Commonwealth of Virginia. (2020). Virginia law. https://law.lis.virginia.gov/admincode/title8/age ncy20/chapter131/section5. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage. Harding, T., & Whitehead, D. (2020). Analysing data in qualitative research. In Z. Schneider, D. Whitehead, G. L. Biondo-Wood, & J. Haber (Eds.), Nursing & midwifery research: Methods and appraisal for evidence-based practice (4th ed., pp. 141–160). Mosby. McMillan, J. H., & Wergin, J. F. (2006). Understanding and evaluating educational research (3rd ed.). London, England, UK: Pearson. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage. Stage, F. K., & Manning, K. (Eds.). (2016). Research in the college context: Approaches and methods (2nd ed.). Routledge. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019a). Profile of a Virginia graduate. http://www. doe.virginia.gov/instruction/graduation/profile-grad/index.shtml. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019b). Virginia’s 5 C’s. http://www.virginiaisfo rlearners.virginia.gov/media-library/#:~:text=Students%20in%20every%20grade%20will,com munication%2C%20collaboration%20and%20citizenship%20skills. Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed). Sage.

Chapter 4

Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

Abstract This chapter of Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School details elementary educators’ responses to interview questions about their experiences of, and views about, PBL instruction. Teachers/staff describe what PBL is or means to them, and which PBL instructional strategies specifically contributed to 21stcentury learning and how. A safe environment enables sharing with peers, asking questions, taking risks, and making new discoveries, all of which were considered strengths of PBL intervention. The successes and benefits, as well as concerns and challenges, of PBL instruction are described. The voices of pioneering individuals come alive with descriptive examples of PBL units, lessons, and activities; the quality of learning experiences; and advice and cautionary words. As narratively and numerically presented, the data analysis identified two major findings: (1) key instructional strategies (29 in total, 10 emerging as top and 19 as additional) and (2) overarching thematic outcomes pertaining to the development of the Profile of a Virginia Graduate. Together, these findings provide insight into strategies of PBL instruction that influenced the development of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth graders. The findings snapshot, based on the data analysis, illuminates outstanding strategies that facilitated PBL education in elementary classrooms. Keywords Citizenship · Collaboration · Communication · Creativity · Critical thinking (5Cs) · Interview · Elementary school · Finding · PBL instruction · Real-world relevance · 21st century

Overview Here we present our analysis of data and snapshot of the findings. The interview responses are from elementary teachers/staff experimenting with PBL learning in their classrooms at one school for 2 years. Their pedagogic strategies emerged as themes from their firsthand accounts of experiential learning. This chapter reveals findings from the interview’s eight questions, with narrative and numerical support. We begin with a close-up of each of the findings that allows for entry into, or at least glimpses of, each teacher’s PBL classroom. Table 4.1 includes the basic demographics of participating teachers/staff to assist with following the narration © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. S. Reed et al., Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5_4

47

48

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

Table 4.1 Basic demographics of teacher/staff interviewees Participant

Gender

Age

Highest degree

Years teaching

Grade levels

Content area

Angelica (1/A)

Female

40

Master

20

K–5

Reading specialist

Bethany (2/B)

Female

45

Master

20

K–5

General education

Connor (3/C)

Male

50

Bachelor

20

4&5

Math

Destiny (4/D)

Female

40

Master

15

K–5

Special education

Ethan (5/E)

Male

25

Bachelor

4

K–5

Special education

Felix (6/F)

Male

50

Master

6

K–5

Science

Gabriela (7/G)

Female

50

Bachelor

10

K–5

Reading specialist

Note Pseudonyms for the teachers/staff are used. Age and years of experience are indicated as numerical approximations to ensure privacy (non-identification). Race/ethnicity was White (EuroAmerican) for all participants

of individual responses. Participants included four females and three males, all but one 40 years of age or older, and they ranged from 4 years of teaching experience to 20. All but one teacher had taught grades K–5 at the school. Regarding their content/subject expertise, two were reading specialists (Angelica and Gabriela), two were special education specialists (Destiny and Ethan), one was a general education specialist (Bethany), another was a math teacher (Connor), and one individual was a science teacher (Felix). To clarify, Connor, Ethan, Destiny, and Felix were elementary classroom teachers, and Angelica, Bethany, and Gabriela were support staff.

Analysis of Interview Questions While there are 8 interview questions, question 3 contained 5 prompts, with 12 areas of questioning in all (Q1, Q2, Q3a, Q3b, Q3c, Q3d, Q3e, Q4, Q5, Q6, Q7, and Q8). While Connor, Ethan, Destiny, and Felix responded to the PBL and 5Cs questions as tenured teachers, Angelica, Bethany, and Gabriela reflected on their involvement as support staff. How Would You Describe the PBL Instruction That was Used in Your Classroom? (Q1) All seven interviewees shared personal experiences of PBL instruction in the classroom over the course of 2 school years. Peer collaboration (7 out of 7), student choice (5 out of 7), and hands-on learning (3 out of 7) were overarching themes. Angelica observed the importance of children having content choices, which “kids seem to really, really like.” As described by Destiny, PBL is a handson experience that facilitates real-world application of subject matter, about which

Analysis of Interview Questions

49

Felix used phrases like “highly effective” and “very engaging for the students.” Connor portrayed PBL as “a hands-on, critical thinking, integrated type of teaching and learning that kids love” and shared images of students engaging in teamwork. Connor also mentioned teachers facilitating rather than “actually teaching in front of the class.” Angelica described students building scenery and characters, creating videos, presenting projects to classmates, and partaking in tasks that demonstrated their literacy knowledge and skills with books and other materials. Bethany noted that students struggled in the beginning with working together or wanting to “do their own thing,” but with modeling and practice, they learned how to cooperate as teams. Gabriela emphasized the value of hands-on learning for students and noted that it fostered peer collaboration. What Strategies Used in Your PBL Instruction Do You Think are Important? (Q2) Noteworthy PBL strategies these teachers/staff identified are modeling, collaboration, and communication. Destiny explained that by introducing a subject/topic, modeling it, and allowing students to be creative in the search for solutions enables them to grow as learners. She noted that there is more than one solution to a problem, and that giving students the freedom to explore and self-discover was essential to the spirit of PBL. To Gabriela, students need to be able to openly express themselves, to improve not only their academic performance but also their ability to communicate with peers, teachers, and other adults. Similarly, Connor revealed, “I didn’t really tell my students how to think.” Instead, they were encouraged to discuss their thinking process and approaches to solving a problem, which became increasingly natural for them. During this process, they would open to their teams, demonstrating the value of peer collaboration. Collaborative learning and problem-solving were viewed as interdependent by Connor and other participants. (For empirical evidence of the symbiotic nature of the collaborative learning–problem-solving ability relationship in an empirical study with children aged 6 and 7 years, see Fawcett & Garton, 2011.) According to our findings, the importance of PBL strategies varied somewhat, depending on the educator’s viewpoint, expertise, role, and approach. For example, Bethany and Gabriela emphasized the value of individualized learning as a PBL strategy. They monitored each student’s learning and progress in case the whirlwind of activity otherwise overwhelmed the teacher’s awareness of what was happening not only at the group level but at the individual level. As Gabriela explained it, structured freedom helped teachers track what was working (and what was not) while allowing for student choice within learning situations. Structured freedom and student choice enabled learners to express themselves in meaningful ways while having ownership over their own learning. Connor upheld passion projects as key for fostering student development. In his classroom, passion projects are student-selected activities that (a) embed PBL strategies and instructional skills and (b) allow children to explore their passions in relation to the world. Connor promotes passion in learning by, for example, allowing students to select materials (e.g., books) of interest to them, as opposed to having to read the same thing as the entire class. As Connor explained, children are thus motivated to

50

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

read: “When they are excited about a book and it’s something they want to read and aren’t forced to, you’d be amazed by how much reading they do.” While Connor’s content area is math, his approach to PBL is multidisciplinary, in keeping with the PBL method. Table 4.2 displays the PBL strategies that teachers/staff reported using in their PBL instruction. Teacher modeling was named more frequently than the other strategies, with individualized learning a close second. Each educator’s response to the openended question for which no examples of strategies were named or given to them are denoted with an “X.” In effect, we were able to not only discover what strategies the teachers/staff used but also what they considered important in their PBL instruction. We cannot help but think that if they had been handed a list of PBL strategies (like those in Table 4.2) and asked to identify the ones used in their classroom, the resulting strategies would have been more consistently recognized. On the other hand, we feel confident venturing that the PBL strategies they named were indeed authentic. As such, the interviewees were prompted to verbally generate or name PBL strategies on the spot during the interview. How Have Strategies You’ve Used Helped Students Develop Critical Thinking Skills? (Q3a) Table 4.3’s strategies were identified for nurturing criticalthinking skills. Asking questions, using real-world problems, and fostering learner independence were referenced more frequently than the other strategies, suggesting their greater utility in the classroom. Table 4.2 Interview Q2: PBL strategies used by teachers A–G PBL strategies used

A

B

D

E

F

×

× ×

Cross-curricular learning

×

Hands-on learning ×

High engagement Imaginative detail Individualized learning

× ×

×

× ×

Justify thinking/responses ×

Modeling

×

×

× ×

Movement ×

Multiple solutions ×

Open-ended Organized/structured

×

× ×

Real-life application Self-discovery Student choice

G

×

Collaboration Communication

C

× ×

×

Analysis of Interview Questions

51

Table 4.3 Interview Q3a: Strategies used to develop critical thinking by teachers A–G Strategies to develop critical thinking

A

Asking questions

×

B

C

D

E

F

×

Collaboration

×

Context clues ×

Independence

×

Open-ended problems

×

Real-world problems

×

×

× ×

Self-motivation

×

Student choice Summarizing

G

×

×

Asking questions was regarded as a tool for critical thinking and engagement. From Angelica’s perspective, “Students need to be asking questions themselves, think about what happened in a story, and pull all of that together into a product that displays thinking.” Connor, too, explained that questioning plays a crucial role in shaping students’ intellect; for example, asking students questions at different points, including during the learning process, prompts them to think critically and reflectively. Bethany and Ethan similarly responded that independent learning and selflearning promote students’ capacity for critical thinking. To Bethany, the teacher is not pointing out specific things to the children—the goal is for them to learn to think for themselves and gain independence. Ethan concurred, illustrating the value of student-driven learning and independent thinking with an analogy: overcoming fears despite feeling overwhelmed and swimming in the deep end for the first time. Along these lines, he says to students, I’m gonna throw you in the deep end [with the PBL unit ahead]—there are going to be moments where you feel like the water is rushing in but, I promise you, you have a life preserver. You’re going to move up to the top. Oxygen is coming. It’s going to be okay.

Felix, also addressing the importance of children developing independence, spurs this on by making student choice central to the PBL setting: I believe putting children in the driver’s seat of making choices in the learning environment by selecting a topic of investigation or a problem to explore gets them more excited about researching and discovering what it is they like or don’t like.

Promoting choice as to the type of assignment to complete or real-world, openended problem to tackle makes for more involved students and better learning. Such student-centered learning processes facilitate decision making and critical-thinking skills. Connor and Destiny emphasized real-world problems for aiding in the development of critical thinking and making creative connections. Big ideas/universal themes summarized in a single word (e.g., “sustainability”) help shape the PBL setting and challenging tasks. Asserting that real-world problems spur critical thinking

52

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

and creativity, Connor gave the example of a PBL unit from his classroom titled “Shark week—sharks are coming to shore—what are we going to do about it?” Children added to the sustainability of the world’s oceans and marine life. Open-ended learning tasks challenging students’ critical and creative capacities were tied to the high-interest ecological problem of sharks migrating to shorelines (which humans may be populating, such as the Jersey Shore and Cape Cod Bay in the US), owing to human-induced, ocean-warming climate change. Such change has a devastating impact on oceans—activities like overfishing greatly reduce great white and other sharks’ hunting opportunities, causing them to behave unnaturally and search for food and safe breeding places in beach areas where people swim. Through this multidisciplinary, problem-based curriculum, asking questions, open-ended problems, and real-world problems were all executive-level strategies used by Connor to foster critical thinking. Rather than have his students address “sustainability” in the most general and perhaps elusive sense, he created a smaller problem context (grounding the more general one) for them to relate to—shark migration to shores, which is a meaningful problem in their own home state. (See Mullen [2020] for an exploration in transnational cultures wherein issues of sustainability, ecology, nature, and human agency are all creatively expressed and revealed through the critical engagement of undergraduate student teams.) Destiny’s students were also collaboratively challenged to come up with solutions to global problems. Regarding real-world problems and application, Destiny talked about “taking assignments outside the classroom to see how they might apply in different areas.” Applying class work to real-world situations allows students to see the importance of what they are doing, she explained. According to the interviewees, PBL empowers students to think “outside the box”; make connections to the real world, themselves, and their peers; become immersed in high-interest topics; and take ownership of their learning. How Have Strategies You’ve Used Helped Students Develop Creativity Skills? (Q3b) Examples of teachers/staff using creativity to support PBL were cited, including how students use various classroom and home materials to make things that demonstrate understandings of concepts. Value was expressed for students making connections between classroom tasks and the real world. Student choice was again a common refrain, but in this case as a catalyst for creativity. Considering real-world connections when demonstrating creativity, Angelica described an educational recycling activity. This was part of an environmental problem context that taught the importance of turning trash into new products or artifacts, thus reducing waste, conserving natural resources, and lowering pollution levels. With the additional guidance of the school’s cafeteria staff, students learned to reuse materials (e.g., cans, packaging materials, utensils, etc.), understanding that they were making the world a better place while expressing their creativity. Connor, also illustrating the power of creativity as a 21st-century skill, narrated how one of his students wanted to build a bird sanctuary for a learning task involving how to build habitats. The sanctuary reflected the girl’s love of birds, which she had as pets at home. The miniature bird-friendly sanctuary was constructed as an ecologically minded, safe structure for wildlife (or pets who could not escape). It

Analysis of Interview Questions

53

was something that birds could use to eat, fly around in, and raise their young, all the while getting plenty of fresh air. Through this project, the student demonstrated her ability to think creatively about habitats and their essential elements (e.g., water). Bethany, too, felt that students showed their best creativity when allowed to generate a problem to work through, including their own fresh ideas for presenting information. The classroom teacher had posed an initial problem to the class about needing to stack cups without using hands. Students were given cups and rubber bands and no further direction. Bethany exclaimed, “About the ideas the kids came up, I was thinking, ‘Wow! I wouldn’t have thought of that.’” Watching the student groups work together and come up with solutions to problems was as beneficial to her own learning as it was to the students’. Allowing all students in a class to work through one problem and emerge from it with a multitude of solutions and impressive content knowledge was Ethan’s goal. He seemed to treasure how each solution to a given problem was unique and that student groups were able to successfully collaborate: “Students all worked as part of a team and closely with partners to solve a problem, and they even worked together to ‘show’ the end result.” As illustrated by similar responses from Ethan, collaboration was the basis of PBL activity in his classroom. Besides approaching teamwork as an opportunity for nurturing creativity, Ethan closely attended to how the problem context connected to the curriculum. As he put it, when selecting a task, he asks himself, “How does this one problem tackle multiple areas of content?” Keeping this question at the forefront of planning helps Ethan ensure that subject matter is strategically addressed through PBL activity. Student choice was clearly valued by Felix. For example, he had the students read a fictional text and then create something nonfictional that was connected to the storyline: I would give them some kind of choice, like the book about little boy called Fang. They were using a fictional text to make them think about a nonfictional piece. One group created a little clay museum of animals that have fangs.

The novel read by the class titled The Family Fang (Wilson, K., 2012) is about a dysfunctional artist family trapped together under one roof, forced to endure the parents’ art performances. Playing off the family name “Fang,” the team that made a clay museum of animals with fangs (e.g., pointed teeth) learned about different kinds and uses of fangs. A second group made a game board, and a third came up with a jingle, like a commercial. All team members chose how to demonstrate their understanding of knowledge, channeling their own creative preferences and styles of creativity and eventually sharing with the class. By encouraging students to express themselves in ways they found enriching, they seemed more likely to want to learn from one another; for example, one asked another, “I would like to know how you did that slideshow—can you show me?” Felix added, “Something like a community of learners was being created in an environment in which they felt safe and could express their creativity.” Gabriela also cited examples of students using art to illustrate their creative thinking and creativity skills. She shared that while reading Skeleton Creek (Carman,

54

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

Table 4.4 Interview Q3c: Strategies used to develop communication by teachers A–G Strategies to develop communication

A

Collaboration

×

B

D

E

F

G

×

×

×

×

×

Involving community Modeling

×

Questioning Teamwork

C

×

×

2016), a children’s horror mystery novel, students drew out what they thought was happening in the story and what might happen next. These students found writing to be a challenge, but because drawing was an outlet they enjoyed, they were guided to express themselves in a way that was meaningful to them. Destiny viewed each solution to a problem as unique, typical of PBL, saying, “No two solutions are the same.” To her, a wealth of knowledge became apparent as groups shared with one another. It was beneficial for students to observe their peers presenting solutions to the class. How Have Strategies You’ve Used Helped Students Develop Communication Skills? (Q3c) Instructional approaches to developing communication skills identified in the interviews are listed in Table 4.4. All the educators indicated that the children had to be taught how to effectively communicate with one another. Across the interviews, five approaches were identified (collaboration, involving the community, modeling, questioning, and teamwork). Ethan discussed how students needed to be taught how to ask specific questions rather than just say, “I don’t get this” or “I don’t understand.” To him, students require teacher modeling to express exactly what they need help with and how to ask a question. By the end of the year, students were becoming proficient at asking specific, intelligent questions. Felix was also keen about teaching students how to communicate successfully: “We spent a lot of time at the beginning of the year talking about what effective communication was.” The children even played games to learn communication skills: One game was like the old telephone game where if you don’t clearly enunciate your words or don’t clearly communicate an idea, by the time it gets through several people, it’s completely different than what you started with.

Perhaps readers played this game as children or at least know of it, but Felix used it for educational purposes. He shared a second example of students standing back-to-back holding six pretzels. One participant had to design something using the pretzels and explain to their partner how to create the same design. Once finished, they compared their designs and discussed the outcomes, identifying where miscommunication on the designer’s part had hindered the task (or misinterpretation at the receiving end had had the same effect). These were among the examples shared by the teachers/staff demonstrating the effectiveness of modeling, in this case by peers. Angelica and Bethany attributed importance to all students having an equal voice when cooperating or collaborating. Bethany divulged, “You always have one student

Analysis of Interview Questions

55

that wants to be the leader in charge and take over.” Angelica stressed that, as the teacher, you must make sure all students are involved because you’ll always have that one who will just watch everyone else do all the work. The implication was that even in PBL settings, teacher nudges, reminders, and behavioral modifications are present. Both these staff members thought that by modeling good communication skills and verbalizing expectations, students could develop the ability to work well together, not only to produce a product but also to have a healthy learning experience. As Connor explained, a different way to foster the communication capacities of students is to facilitate tasks that involve community members. For one task in his classroom, students had to interview a community member and report findings to the class. Interview questions were crafted by one of the student groups that conducted the interviews by phone, by email, or in person. After all groups presented their final community based PBL products to the class and visiting parents, the audience asked questions. The students had to prepare for this public forum and demonstrate effective communication skills through speaking, listening, and responding. Destiny’s discussion around developing communication skills focused on three areas: (a) teacher modeling extending to peer-to-peer modeling, (b) freedom for group work and communication, and (3) tracking/monitoring to ensure that everyone stays on task. Gabriela echoed the importance of teacher modeling for facilitating communication skills. She revealed that, in the beginning, many students did not seem inclined to want to talk to each other in groups. They also seemed to lack confidence speaking in front of others and did not know how to ask specific taskrelated questions. However, as they worked in a PBL-oriented environment as teams, they “finally started opening up” and communicating with peers and teachers. The learning process allowed students to “find their own voices” and realize that “their voices matter.” How Have Strategies You’ve Used Helped Students Develop Collaboration Skills? (Q3d) Five teachers/staff stated that collaboration and communication go hand in hand. As Angelica put it, “If students aren’t communicating and collaborating with each other, then they won’t work well in a group.” Ethan reported that communication and collaboration are interlocking pieces of the PBL puzzle: “In order to be effective at collaboration, you have to be able to communicate with one another.” He added that “when students realized that sometimes their best friends weren’t the best communicators, they would react by thinking that they should not be in their group if they want to do well.” Such interpersonal judgments are part of the collaborative experience—people tend to want to find out with whom they work better to allow for a more productive environment. Bethany focused on working together to consider a dilemma or solve a problem, which necessitated effective communication. The interviewees emphasized the value of teamwork and sharing ideas. Bethany also talked about how the classroom teacher did not tell students how to solve the problem or even how best to work together. The children had to figure this out themselves, with the aim of making the challenges and breakthroughs relevant to students’ lives. Consequently, these young people had to learn each other’s styles and strengths to navigate working together to address the challenge before them.

56

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

Connor expressed that because teamwork is essential, this PBL feature needs to be highlighted in problem-setting and solving contexts. Many groups utilized students’ individual strengths in the various PBL classrooms, according to Connor. In the role of teacher monitor, he added, “I didn’t want any of the kids just sitting around, waiting on others in their group to do something, so they all choose a job every day.” A “job” was a student’s designated role in the group for that session: facilitator, timekeeper, recorder, illustrator, etc.: “The students would sometimes switch around their jobs while figuring out how to be work together.” Like Connor, Destiny found that some students would be just fine sitting back and letting the others do all the work, so the teacher had to somehow “draw those kids in and get them to contribute to the team.” Teachers/staff also mentioned the struggle students faced working with peers they did not like. Connor tackled this problem head on by disclosing, You know what, when I got this job, I didn’t get to choose everybody I work with. I adapted to the people I work with because that’s what you have to do in the real world. So, you’re going to learn to work together.

Interestingly, a counterargument to arranging work groups for students, regardless of the reason, exists in the literature. Allowing them to choose “the peers with whom they work” can actually motivate students while “capitaliz[ing] on their strengths” and “meet[ing] their individual learning needs” (Parker et al., 2017). These comments were made about high school classrooms. While giving youngsters the chance to influence what and how they learn is certainly important (Parker et al.), context is everything. Complexities like pedagogical beliefs, values, and prior experiences shape the decisions teachers make. Another point is that tacit concerns may influence their decisions, such as the concern that when individuals are put above the group, students will end up not being flexible enough for the job market. Moreover, the developmental level of the children being served and their readiness to solve problems and make decisions for which they assume responsibility may also factor into what teachers think and do. Felix described a structured lesson he used to demonstrate collaboration and then had students practice with examples of good and bad collaboration. The lesson’s focus was how to collaborate (instead of just diving in and trying to do it without knowing about the expected conduct). Students received specific, precise feedback and were “encouraged to interact and inquire respectfully.” Felix shared, I think that pays off, not just in our classroom, but at home or as they’re moving on up through elementary school and middle school—to be able to state something in a way that’s respectful and kind.

Gabriela found that just being able to work together through PBL challenges comforted many students, leading them to share ideas and express themselves in new ways. Teaching students the importance of collaboration and how to work together well was considered an essential PBL skill. How Have Strategies You’ve Used Helped Students Develop Citizenship Skills? (Q3e) Respect was a common theme regarding PBL strategies used to develop citizenship. A secondary theme was peer-to-peer support. Both ideas involved the

Analysis of Interview Questions

57

Table 4.5 PBL strategies used to develop citizenship by teachers A–G Strategies to develop citizenship

A

B

C

Peace circles

×

Peer-to-peer support

×

Positive attitude Respect

D

E

F

G

×

Ownership

×

×

×

× ×

×

×

×

×

use of students’ strengths in supporting one another. Table 4.5 illustrates the five PBL strategies—ownership, peace circles, peer-to-peer support, positive attitude, and respect—that the interviewees identified. Connor explained that citizenship meant “learning to love each other” and used peace circles in the classroom to solve problems and ensure students were held accountable: “Everybody would sit in a circle and we would talk about things that didn’t go well and how we could do better.” Students used this opportunity to build each other up, saying, “You messed up, but we forgive you. Tomorrow you have to work harder.” Connor elaborated, “Students want to do better because they want to, not because the teacher is making them.” A restorative justice model from Indigenous cultures, peacekeeper (peacemaking) circles can teach students about care and compassion, feelings, and life skills. They are brought together in a circle for conflict resolution, healing, support, decision making, and more. Such processes can aid in productivity and enhancing learning environments. The idea is to “listen to the children” and move toward “restorative practice” and away from “punitive discipline”—testimonies of elementary teachers who use peacekeeper circles is available on the Internet, along with YouTube videos of actual circles involving children (see Peacekeeper Circles, n.d.; https://www.peacecircles.com). Regarding peer-to-peer relationships, Ethan and Gabriela each saw students’ strengths as a vital resource for nurturing relationships. If a student were struggling, Ethan would find a peer who was succeeding to provide help, noting, “Help doesn’t look like giving the answer. Help looks like explaining the process and using fifth-grade language, as opposed to a teacher kind of language.” To Ethan, it was important for students to feel empowered as well as comfortable giving and receiving feedback: “There are moments you need help. We’re in this together.” Gabriela similarly noted, “Everybody has a voice. A peer sitting beside a student can assist. It’s great to see students asking each other for help and feeling comfortable doing this.” Felix noted that some students think differently or have unusual ideas, and that they are a resource for building relationships in new and unexpected directions. The PBL classroom needs to be a place where thinking in a different way is recognized as an avenue for success. Are There Specific Strategies That Contributed to Stronger Development of Any of These Skills (Critical Thinking, Collaboration, Creativity, Communication, or Citizenship)? (Q4) Collaboration and communication are important skills developed by PBL instructional strategies. Getting students to work together

58

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

and communicate effectively was challenging. Angelica shared that closely monitoring students to ensure they are on task was vital. She added, “Often, facilitation was necessary to show students what was expected (especially in the beginning).” Connor also thought facilitation was vital early on: “I’m going to guide you, but I’m not going to tell you everything. I’m going to give you these questions to think about, but I’m not giving you the answers.” Connor believed that boundary-setting helped set the tone for PBL learning and clarify task-related responsibilities. The idea was that while elementary children must have some guidance in PBL contexts, and likely more of it than older students, they also need to be able to learn freely within a flexibly structured environment while being accountable to their own learning. They cannot make discoveries and explore on their own or become absorbed in sensemaking around a problem or issue, if the teacher is excessive is some way, such as by controlling the process, rescuing students, providing answers, or constantly hovering. Explicitly stated expectations and guidelines were common strategies discussed by teachers/staff. Destiny noted that very clear guidelines of what students needed to do were important. When just “thrown in,” students became frustrated and misunderstand what is intended or what to do. Ethan offered, “I would say to them, ‘here is what I want done in X amount of time.’” As such, his students didn’t just have a “freefor-all” learning experience. Additionally, the goal in Ethan’s classroom was pitched around this strategic question: “What are we learning and how do we demonstrate that learning?” Being direct about his expectations and attuning students to their own learning were strategies he cited as bringing out the best from them. Teacher modeling and student practice were strategies that supported collaboration. Felix noted, “I think the modeling at the beginning, the practice at the beginning, and defining things at the beginning are all pretty key.” He also used rubrics for assessing student work, saying, “This is I’m looking for.” And he encouraged them to work together on tasks conveyed as problems. In sum, specific strategies that helped with developing the 5Cs are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6.

Giving clear and explicit guidelines for tasks Providing students with structured choices that are meaningful Establishing boundaries for teacher and student responsibilities Demonstrating effective teacher monitoring to ensure on-task learning, engagement, and behavior Enacting teacher modeling and facilitation of activity-based performances, particularly at the outset, to aid students’ understanding what is expected of them Utilizing metacognitive techniques that help students understand how they learn, like helping them become aware of their own learning

Based on Your Teaching Experiences, What Are Some Strengths of Using PBL in Elementary Classrooms? (Q5) Educators described the pride they felt when their students committed to and successfully completed tasks and passed an end-of year-test for the first time. Interviewees referred to the Standards of Learning

Analysis of Interview Questions

59

(SOL) test that requires minimum expectations for achievement of students at the end of each grade or course (VDOE, 2020). Gabriela described the strengths of a PBL classroom this way: The kids were up, moving around the classroom. Someone was sitting the floor. As a support teacher, you walk in there for the first time and think, “What in the world are they doing? The teacher has no control of the classroom.” In reality, the teacher is working with two students in one corner. Three kids are working individually. In another corner, students are reading, and in another some are coloring a scene for a project, all super engaged. That was one of the things I truly enjoyed, taking kids to another level of learning.

With this visual snapshot of PBL learning, Gabriela revealed the power of controlled chaos in the classroom and the use of space, which was occupied differently from traditional learning. Movement was a strength of PBL that the educators identified. Bethany offered that PBL instruction helps students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) because it is conducive to movement: “They can get up, move around, learn how to calm themselves, and not be stuck in a seat all day.” Moving is part of communicating and learning how to work with teammates. Connor noted, “Kids are so overstimulated. They come to school in a traditional classroom and are expected to just sit down and listen to the teacher all day. They are not there mentally.” PBL allows students to use their senses, such as by seeing and touching, as they move about, explore, and discover. As Connor put it, “Somebody can tell you a million times, but once you do it, it clicks. PBL keeps them awake, motivated, and wanting to work.” Movement in PBL contexts simulates real-world contexts. For Destiny, creativity and real-world experiences were PBL strengths: “[Humans] have a tendency, sometimes, to become imitators of what we hear. So, as the students are listening to us [in traditional classrooms], they just do whatever it is simply because we tell them to.” In contrast, PBL approaches give children the opportunity to see how and why things work, and to appreciate the practical application of knowledge, theory, and concepts. Felix stated, “I saw acquisition of knowledge that was far above and beyond anything I could have presented to them.” He then described how trust was built between students as well as between the students and himself. Working together was a crucial strength of PBL and learning how to do this constructively—not in a “mine is better” way—is imperative for growth and success. Creativity in students was also a noted strength. Felix shared a game created by students that displayed knowledge of content. Those involved had yet to pass Virginia’s (2020) SOL test in science but were able to express their knowledge through a board game. Felix shared, “That was the proudest I’ve ever seen them.” In that creative and collaborative departure from standardized testing, they were indeed successful. Angelica confirmed that students were learning more from presenting what they had learned than through a paper/pencil assignment: “Lots of kids do better with hands-on activities, and you can see them excelling.” Seeing the growth in students through PBL instruction was as beneficial for Angelica as it was for her students. Being able to share their knowledge in a way that was meaningful to them reinforced the value of PBL.

60

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

Returning briefly to the picture Gabriela painted of controlled chaos, self-directed PBL tasks can simultaneously unfold in various performance spaces and ways as children move around and read, draw, talk, and so forth. PBL learning can be treated as a movement intervention that departs from traditional learning. Because schooling privileges cognition as the mode of learning, discovery learning is not a focus, which is compounded by depersonalized approaches to teaching and learning. In response to this problem, university researchers examined a US-based middle school with African American and White children from lower-income families engaging in a project involving hands-on, “body-based” activities (physical movement and roleplaying; Mullen & Cancienne, 2003). The objective was to enable eighth graders to develop “sensory self-awareness” in anticipation of real-world career challenges (p. 166). Students participated in verbal and nonverbal movement activities designed around a career unit that was integrated into a language arts class. The children experienced many of the elements common to PBL classrooms, making strides in their development of 21st-century skills. Based on interviews with the eighth graders (Mullen & Cancienne, 2003), they had become attuned to the importance of communication, power, and self-awareness in their own development. Specifically, participation in project activities (e.g., selecting from among career options, creating and enacting skits without speaking, preparing job interview questions, conducting mock interviews, creating imaginary businesses) the children learned that bodies convey messages and are expressive (as opposed to neutral) vessels of communication. They connected the new learning with life, such as how to knowingly express themselves in job interviews in the real world. While not a PBL curriculum per se, much of it did qualify as such, considering the emphasis placed on student choice, open-ended problem-solving, movement, and more. Students learned to “move” and think differently and approach sense-making more holistically when considering problem contexts, themselves, and others. This group of students experienced a new instructional approach directed at building skills for success, which in today’s state-level policy world favorably satisfies readiness expectations for high school graduates (e.g., the Profile of a Virginia Graduate; VDOE [2019]). Based on Your Teaching Experiences, what are Some Concerns or Challenges with Implementing PBL? (Q6) The main issues educators identified with implementing PBL were primarily time and organization, in addition to funding (and costs), the lack of PBL instruction in some classrooms, and trust and buy-in (see Table 4.6). Concerns and challenges with time revolved around time-consuming planning and organizing, time constraints owing to pacing guides and state mandates, and instructional time spent on PBL lessons and activities. Ethan explained that deciding how much time to devote to each PBL lesson or activity was challenging: “In the beginning, students don’t understand what to do, they ask a lot of questions, and they need you to hold their hand through a task.” On the flip side, clarified Ethan, the more teachers act on PBL in the classroom, the more students understand what to do in terms of task objectives, how to work together as collaborative problem-solvers, how to work creatively and think critically for themselves, and what becoming less

Analysis of Interview Questions

61

Table 4.6 Concerns/challenges with implementing PBL addressed by teachers A–G Concern/challenge

A

B

Not used in some classes

C

D

×

Funding ×

×

E

F

×

Organization

×

×

×

Time

×

×

×

Trust and buy-in

G

×

×

×

dependent on the teacher “looks like.” Staying focused on the task at hand was important, according to Ethan; otherwise, “you could go down a path you did not intend and waste time.” He added that sometimes exploring what was unintended is valuable, whereas at other times it is a distraction. To help with time and organization in the classroom, Ethan suggested that students need to learn to distinguish between what is and what is not important. Connor addressed the time it takes to plan for and organize PBL instruction. As a group, teachers at this school spent time together planning PBL units and lessons. “It took a lot of work,” Connor insisted. “The planning time took forever.” However, he added that once the actual planning was completed, the implementation “was easy.” Similarly, Felix thought that the planning consumed a lot of time but that the investment was worth it: “If you put in the work up front, it’s much easier in the long run.” Anticipating roadblocks, preparing for questions students may ask, organizing resources students will need, and prompting questions you can ask students are all important in the preparation for PBL. Advanced planning, even when it includes discussion and work with colleagues, is expected to pay off in the implementation or application of PBL curriculum and its success. Another challenge stipulated was funding. When selecting PBL tasks, the teachers carefully considered the cost of materials. For Connor, providing supplies for activities got more costly when students were not able to buy or secure their own. In general, it is not uncommon for teachers to spend some of their own money on supplies. With PBL classroom activity, however, “a lot of money was spent out of pocket, even though we spent some school’s money too,” clarified Connor. Ethan added, “We teachers were given additional funds to purchase materials” for 2 years of PBL experimentation. But “Now that we are not doing PBL full-fledged, the money is not there because it is being spent elsewhere.” Connor also felt that larger class sizes impact the ability to fund certain PBL activities that require lots of materials or expensive ones. Another challenge came from Angelica, Bethany, and Destiny, who noted that PBL instruction was not used in all classrooms within the school. A traditional learning environment where “the teacher wants you to do things a certain way” was challenging for students who had experienced the PBL-oriented classrooms. This difficulty was brought back to PBL teachers through casual conversation with students providing feedback and observations, and during their visits at open house events and over summer break. Conversation among teachers within the school and

62

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

the division were other sources of information along these lines. These sources also conveyed that students who were struggling academically at the middle school level had become accustomed to PBL instruction in elementary school and had to adapt to traditional instruction. A final difficulty mentioned was trust and support, as in the acceptance and willingness to trust in PBL instruction and actively support it. Ethan noted that, while not at this school but others in which he had worked, “buy-in from above” was challenging: “When administrators, teachers, or visitors walked into a classroom, they saw a lot going on.” Gabriela described PBL as “unstructured structure—from the outside looking in it’s chaotic, but the teacher knows what’s going on, students are on task, and there’s purpose holding everything together.” Connor, Ethan, and Felix echoed that PBL spaces may seem (or be) noisy and hectic, but productivity is at a premium. Trust from leaders and colleagues was essential—they needed to understand the basics of PBL learning and what to expect, and, importantly, how this process can develop students’ 21st-century skills and lifelong capacities as critical and creative thinkers, communicators, collaborators, and citizens. Based on Your Experiences With PBL, Have You Continued Using PBL in Your Classroom? Why or Why Not? (Q7) In February 2020 at the time of the interviews, all seven grades 4 and 5 teachers/staff reported that they were “still using PBL” in their classrooms but “not as much as they would like.” The frequency of having utilized PBL on a daily or weekly basis had changed, but the pedagogic concept and approach were being honored. In actuality, they were comparing the immediate present with the recent 2 years in which they were experimenting with PBL. At the same time, all interviewees confirmed the ongoing use of pedagogic strategies like hands-on experiences, communicating with peers, and teaming among students. Angelica, Bethany, and Gabriela continued to support the classroom teachers and provide students with instructional guidance and support. The question as to what had brought about the systemic change in PBL teaching and learning in the building that the teachers/staff mentioned was explained by Samantha. The lessening in frequency and intensity of PBL instruction was mostly due to a restructuring of the fourth and fifth grades. An administrative decision had been made to reduce the four classes per grade level to three, which was challenging for the teachers. Due to budgetary restrictions, divisional level decision makers decided not to replace the teacher who had resigned, which left a vacancy in personnel for grades 4 and 5; instead, central office consolidated these two grade levels that just happened to be the ones in which PBL experimentation had been occurring for 2 years. Due to the Code of Virginia’s Standards of Quality guidelines for maximum class size and teacher–student ratios, grades 4 and 5 can have more students (up to 35) than grades K–3 (see VDOE, n.d., for the policy document), so this change was legally allowable. An unintended consequence associated with the restructuring was the lessening of teaming among the teachers, adding to the difficulty of continuing PBL. In Connor’s words, “It’s hard when you don’t have everybody on board, so I haven’t done PBLs as much.” Obviously, this comment underscores the limits on cultural transformation within the school culture. At the same time, creatively responding to the restructuring,

Analysis of Interview Questions

63

Connor was experimenting with “mini-PBLs” that are more project than problembased. Ethan confirmed that while some PBL components were being implemented, the scheduling of classes in the restructuring phase was making it difficult to do “full-fledged PBL.” He liked the excitement coming from students when PBL was in use, commenting that they enjoyed the hands-on activities and working together on tasks. They were more apt to demonstrate knowledge because of being exposed to and immersed in PBL, he reflected. Felix was also continuing to use PBL in the classroom environment, feeling motivated by the task immersion that follows: “I just love the look on the kids’ faces when they’re engaged and excited.” As such, scheduling was noted by Connor, Ethan, and Felix as the reason they were not using PBL as much. Gabriela had changed positions since the study period but indicated that she was incorporating PBL strategies in her new job. Overall, PBL instructional strategies were still in use to some extent by all educators. They also revealed that there was “more interest in PBL in the building” among those teaching other grades. Is There Anything Else You Would Like to Add? (Q8) An overwhelming message—an encouragement really—these K–5 educators conveyed was for elementary teachers elsewhere to try PBL in their classroom. Felix responded, I really think all teachers should challenge themselves to do PBL and not even because of the benefit to the students so much as the benefit to the teacher. You just learn so much more about your kids. It’s overwhelming, so use baby steps.

Echoing this, Connor thought that every teacher should at least try PBL. By experimenting with PBL instruction, “maybe people would see what kids can do and then realize that PBL really works.” Ethan, too, encouraged PBL experimentation: “PBL doesn’t necessarily have to be large in scope. Start small and incorporate the basic components of PBL into what you do. Encourage students to work together. Relinquish some control within your classroom and give students the power.” Angelica similarly explained that PBL takes a different mindset for teachers. You’ve got to kind of get out of that “I’m in control” and allow kids to be in control. It doesn’t mean it’s a free-for-all, but students can be allowed to have more ownership over their learning.

Felix’s words of encouragement to practitioners spoke to inclinations like feeling uncomfortable about taking curricular risks. Based on personal experience, he decided to lend perspective to failure, explaining that failure is part of the real world and acceptable in the context of experimentation. Failure can even serve as an opportunity for demonstrating teacher modeling while propelling reflection, appraisal, discussion, analysis, and new understanding: Teachers need to be prepared to be a little bit uncomfortable and try new things. If it’s a total disaster, it’s okay. Kids need to see adults model failure. They need to hear adults say, “I didn’t do this the best way. What could I have done to make this better? What is not making sense?” This shows adults make mistakes, too. I think PBL brings that into a classroom.

Angelica also said it’s okay to take a risk and fail: “That’s the hardest for teachers, to let go.”

64

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

Another point Felix raised was the importance of students explaining their thinking. He encouraged educators new to PBL to establish a collaborative classroom where students feel safe to express themselves, ask questions, work together, and fail. In addressing his own classes, Felix would establish a PBL tone appreciative of open-ended, process-based learning and authentic, engaging problem-solving. He said to his students, I want to know that you’re thinking. I want to know that you’ve put some thought into it and that you’ve learned something from the process. And I never want you to get into a situation where you think there’s only one answer because very few things in life are really like that.

All interviewees stated in one way or another that preparing students for real life is the goal of PBL. They attested to developmental advances in children’s capacity to communicate effectively, work together, and consider dilemmas or solve problems. In a world that is ever changing, students need to be prepared to tackle the unknown. To this end, they offered advice and cautionary words to educational practitioners for consideration.

Findings for the Research Question To restate, the research question driving the interviews was, What key strategies of PBL instruction contributed to the development of the Profile of a Virginia Graduate’s expectations of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth grade students at one elementary school in Virginia? Our data analysis identified two major findings: 1. 2.

Key instructional strategies (29 in total, 10 emerging as top and 19 as additional) Overarching outcomes regarding the development of the Profile of a Virginia Graduate.

Key strategies of PBL instruction in elementary classrooms are listed in Table 4.7. The order of entries reflects prioritization according to the number of interviewees (starting with seven, the highest number, to one, the lowest number) who discussed the specific PBL strategy directly or indirectly. The word count for each PBL strategy refers to how frequently participants said it (from 37 times for collaboration, which occupies the highest position, to one time for summarizing, which, among other strategies, is in the lowest position). A strategy was categorized as vital if four or more interviewees referenced it during the interview over 12 times (averaging once per question). While individualized learning did not quite make it into the top 10, it does deserve recognition for its value to PBL, as reflected in the present chapter. Table 4.8 lists the top 10 PBL strategies teachers/staff identified that helped develop the 5Cs. Real-world relevance and hands-on learning comprehensively contributed to the development of these skills, with collaboration and student choice influencing growth for four of them. Asking questions, communication, and peerto-peer relationships furthered learning for three of the skills. And modeling and student choice provided support for two skills.

Findings for the Research Question

65

Table 4.7 Key instructional strategies of PBL identified through data analysis PBL strategies

Number of teachers Word frequency Examples of supporting data

Top 10 strategies Collaboration

7

37

Learn to work with others

Asking questions

7

28

Express to me what you need help with—students need guidance on how to ask that question

Communication

7

31

By the end of the year, students could openly communicate with peers

Modeling

7

24

Introduce and model, then let them be creative

Real-world relevance

7

21

Taking the assignment outside the classroom to see how it can apply in the real world.

Hands-on learning

4

20

Provide a hands-on experience of the concept being instructed

Small groups

6

19

Students were able to openly express themselves in small groups

Student-centered learning 4

18

More facilitating occurs than actual teaching in front of the class

Student choice

5

16

Kids did research and decided what problem to study from among the specific choices given to them

Peer-to-peer relationships

4

13

Allow students to communicate among themselves.

Individualized learning

3

10

Passion projects—everyone did their own individual thing

Respect

5

9

It came down to being able to respect others’ thoughts and ideas

Ownership

1

9

Give kids ownership over their ideas—they’ll shine and struggle

19 Additional strategies

(continued)

66

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

Table 4.7 (continued) PBL strategies

Number of teachers Word frequency Examples of supporting data

Organized/structured

2

7

Give clear guidelines for the task. Students need organization and structure but also free thinking

Positive attitude

1

7

Keep a positive attitude; certain people in groups want to be the boss

High engagement

1

5

Kids enjoy it, so they want to do it. Everyone has a part to play

Independence

2

5

The teacher is not pointing out “this is what this is,” so kids have to think for themselves

Cross-curricular learning

1

4

Incorporate this standard of learning for that part of that subject

Multiple solutions

1

4

Open-ended problems allow for multiple solutions, making kids think

Movement

1

3

Kids were up and moving around, good for kids with ADHD

Self-discovery

1

3

Kids would discover things on their own

Open-ended

2

3

Start with some type of question or problem that is very open ended

Justify thinking/responses 1

2

Students must justify their thinking—don’t just take their word anymore

Imaginative detail

1

2

Allow students to be creative and use their own imagination

Involve community

1

1

Involve the community in PBL service projects (e.g., interview people)

Context clues

1

1

Use context clues to find the meaning of unknown things to improve critical thinking (continued)

Findings for the Research Question

67

Table 4.7 (continued) PBL strategies

Number of teachers Word frequency Examples of supporting data

Peace circles

1

1

At the end of each PBL class, we would sit in a circle and talk about things that didn’t go well and how we could do better

Self-motivation

1

1

I have to contribute my part if I don’t want my friends to be mad

Summarizing

1

1

Pull together all the information in their final presentations

Table 4.8 Top 10 PBL strategies that contributed to the 5Cs PBL strategies

Critical thinking Creativity Collaboration Communication Citizenship

Collaboration

×

×

×

Asking questions ×

×

×

Communication

×

×

× ×

×

×

Real-world relevance

×

×

×

×

×

Hands-on learning

×

×

×

×

×

Small groups

×

Modeling

×

×

×

Student-centered × learning

×

×

×

×

Student choice

×

× ×

×

Peer-to-peer relationships

×

Figure 4.1 is a visual snapshot of the top 10 instructional strategies that influenced the development of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth graders, according to their teachers, and the corresponding number of educators who discussed each strategy. As demonstrated in this chapter, the educators’ responses to the interview questions illuminated their professional experiences of, and opinions about, using PBL in the elementary classroom. All thought PBL was a beneficial instructional method that offered alternative approaches to teaching and learning that realized multiple gains, including high student engagement and increased motivation. When prompted to offer additional comments, they encouraged other teachers to try it in their own classrooms. They reported that communication and collaboration were essential skills taught, practiced, and built upon through PBL lessons and activities, and that key PBL

68

4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot

Student choice 5/7 Hands-on learning 4/7

Collaboration 7/7

Real-world relevance 7/7

Asking questions 7/7

Modeling 7/7 Top 10 strategies of PBL instruction

Small groups 6/7

Studentcentered learning 4/7

Communication 7/7 Peer-to-peer relationships 4/7

Fig. 4.1 Top 10 PBL instructional strategies that nurtured the 5Cs

strategies furthered student development in the 5Cs. Notably, real-world relevance and hands-on learning comprehensively contributed to the development of the five skills, with collaboration, student choice, asking questions, communication, peer-topeer relationships, modeling, and student choice all furthering these developmental goals. PBL education sponsors children collaboratively working on open-ended problems in critical and creative ways as developing global, humanitarian citizens and communicative beings. A safe environment enables sharing with peers, asking questions, taking risks, and making new discoveries, all of which were considered strengths of PBL interventions. While the educators felt that PBL instruction was successfully implemented for the most part, challenges were present. The greatest concern was the time involved in planning PBL instruction and implementing it. The success of PBL implementation depended on considerable effort and organization beyond traditional instruction, and it seemed to thrive with the support of administration and the school culture more readily, as well as funding.

Summary

69

Summary In this chapter, the data analysis and findings snapshot were provided. Two major findings were narratively and numerically addressed: (1) key instructional strategies influencing students’ 21st-century skills and (2) overarching outcomes (see next chapter) regarding the Profile of a Virginia Graduate. Insights associated with these findings were articulated, illuminating strategies of PBL instruction that influenced the development of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth graders. The findings snapshot, based on the data analysis, surfaced outstanding and supplementary strategies that facilitated PBL education in elementary classrooms. The analysis of findings based on interview responses from teachers/staff led to overarching outcomes. These outcomes are the subject of Chapter 5, along with key instructional strategies.

References Carman, P. (2016). Skeleton Creek. CreateSpace. Fawcett, L. M., & Garton, A. F. (2011). The effect of peer collaboration on children’s problemsolving ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1348/ 000709904X23411. Mullen, C. A. (2020). Revealing creativity: Exploration in transnational education cultures. Springer. Mullen, C. A., & Cancienne, M. B. (2003). Résumé in motion: Sensory self-awareness through movement. Sex Education: Sexuality, Society and Learning, 3(2), 157–170. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (n.d.). Guidance regarding maximum class size and student–teacher ratios in the Standards of Quality (pp. 1–3) [Code of Virginia]. http://www.doe. virginia.gov/boe/quality/soq_max_class_size.pdf. Parker, F., Novak, J., & Bartell, T. (2017). To engage students, give them meaningful choices in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(2), 37–41. https://kappanonline.org/engage-students-give-mea ningful-choices-classroom. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019). Virginia’s 5 C’s. http://www.virginiaisforlearn ers.virginia.gov/media-library/#:~:text=Students%20in%20every%20grade%20will,commun ication%2C%20collaboration%20and%20citizenship%20skills. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2020). Standards of Learning (SOL) & testing. http:// www.doe.virginia.gov/testing. Wilson, B. G. (2012). Constructivism in practical and historical context. In B. Reiser & J. Dempsey (Eds.), Current trends in instructional design and technology (3rd ed., pp. 51–62). Pearson Prentice Hall.

Chapter 5

Overarching Outcomes, Implications, and Conclusion

Abstract In this last chapter, overarching outcomes, implications for practice and research, and conclusions are covered. In a discussion of overarching outcomes, a summary of seven findings is provided about PBL instruction and 21st-century skills in elementary education. Each finding is separately addressed, and insights are articulated, illuminating strategies of PBL instruction that influenced the development of the 5Cs. Building on the key instructional strategies previously reported, the information provided effectively addresses the research question asking what key strategies of PBL instruction influenced the Profile of a Virginia Graduate’s expectations of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth graders at one elementary school in Virginia. Implications for practice and research are also described, with school principals and educational researchers in mind. The study’s purposes are re-examined involving what PBL instructional strategies were in use within elementary classrooms and which aided in skills development from the point of view of educators. The gap in PBL at the elementary level and in relation to 21st-century learning is also revisited. The chapter ends with a look at the present and future, with applicability to PBL education, using the metaphor of navigating uncharted waters. Keywords Conclusion · Key strategies · Overarching outcomes · PBL instruction · Principals · Relevance and implications for practice · Relevance and implications for research

Overview Here we cover overarching outcomes, implications for practice and research, and conclusions. In a discussion of overarching outcomes, we summarize seven findings about PBL instruction and 21st-century skills in elementary education. Each finding is separately addressed, and insights are articulated, illuminating strategies of PBL instruction that influenced the development of the 5Cs. Building on key instructional strategies previously reported, we effectively address the research question asking what key strategies of PBL instruction influenced the Profile of a Virginia Graduate’s expectations of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth graders at one elementary school in Virginia. Implications for practice and research are also described, with school © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. S. Reed et al., Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5_5

71

72

5 Overarching Outcomes, Implications, and Conclusion

principals and educational researchers in mind. We re-examine the study’s purposes involving what PBL instructional strategies were in use within elementary classrooms and which aided in skills development from the point of view of educators. The gap in PBL at the elementary level and in relation to 21st-century learning is also revisited. We end by looking at the present and future, with applicability to PBL education, using the metaphor of navigating uncharted waters.

Discussion of Overarching Outcomes In this section, light is shone on the findings identified regarding PBL instruction and 21st-century skills in an elementary school in Virginia. First, we identify the overarching thematic outcomes from this elementary-level PBL study with participating teachers/staff, and then discuss each in turn. The seven themes culled from participant responses were: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

The implementation of PBL successfully supported student gains. Working in small groups increased student communication and collaboration skills. Student-centered learning and choice aided in developing creativity and communication skills. PBL instruction increased students’ critical-thinking skills. Peer-to-peer relationships aided in furthering citizenship skills. Modeling was a helpful strategy for guiding students in PBL classroom environments. PBL and project-based learning co-exist and function as PBL.

PBL Implementation Successfully Supported Student Gains (Finding 1). All teachers/staff shared that students made academic and social gains from PBL instruction. They confirmed that communication and collaboration skills improved with PBL interventions. Similarly, Koray et al. (2008) reported that students participating in PBL performed significantly better on a problem-solving skills assessment than on an assessment following traditional instruction. Specifically, they indicated that students experiencing PBL “developed problem- solving skills,” “enhanc[ed] their communication,” improved their “group working skills,” and acquired “knowledge” (p. 16). In their case, the students were 85 preservice elementary school teachers in an education faculty in Turkey. Interestingly, just as the teachers in the current study indicated that PBL instruction takes more time and effort than traditional instruction, students in Korey et al.’s study mirrored this comment, reporting that while “PBL required more time and effort than projects in other courses” the learning process was far richer and results superior (p. 15). The researchers recommended that PBL be integrated into preservice teacher education to expose students to student-centered inquiry through which communication, collaboration, and so forth are advanced. A balance needs to be struck between giving students freedom and providing feedback, and PBL should favor facilitation over instruction. Also, participants need to

Discussion of Overarching Outcomes

73

be patient with the process of learning because the results can take time and success comes from the willingness to navigate all such tensions. A slight point of departure in the PBL instructional dynamics within the elementary classrooms we studied is that there was likely more of a heavy-handed instructional approach, at least at the outset of activity-based tasks, than with secondary and postsecondary level research. Children who are learning the ropes simply need more time and attention, which the teachers/staff pointed out numerous times in the interviews. For example, the interviewees described how students need guidance on how to work collaboratively on a task because often the children in groups would work individually on their own part of the task rather than collaborate. It was if they had to be taught how to work productively with others. With the proper instructional guidance, children can then become absorbed in PBL learning and collaborate, create, communicate, think critically, and accept responsibility. Development of such 21stcentury skills was also broken down into specific gains, like learning to make choices, finding one’s voice, researching challenging problems, creating artifacts of learning, and presenting said artifacts. All such developments were realized by the children who participated in PBL learning, as reported by the educators we interviewed. Working in Small Groups Increased Student Communication and Collaboration Skills (Finding 2). Most of the educators shared how working in small groups allowed students to freely share ideas, work as a team, and establish viable roles to complete tasks effectively. One educator shared that students realized working with a good friend might not be the best fit because they did not always communicate well. Neville (2009) supported the idea of working in a small group and noted that one of the most important differences between PBL curriculum in the medical setting and traditional medical school curriculum lies in the learning environment. “PBL curricula,” Neville (2009) clarified, “use small group tutorials with a studentcentered approach, active learning, the use of cases or problems, and a significant amount of time for independent study” (p. 2). The interviews conducted for our study support this premise of PBL—that using small groups enables students to develop their communication and collaboration skills in an exploratory fashion and more quickly and thoroughly than in traditional classroom environments. Student-Centered Learning and Student Choice Aided in Developing Creativity and Communication Skills (Finding 3). Allowing students to make choices in PBL settings—within such areas as topics to be studied, problems to be undertaken, activity-based tasks to be completed, and presentational style of the knowledge acquired or learning gained—was discussed by interviewees. A fifth area of student choice that unevenly appeared in the interview data was choosing whom to work with as partners and group members. However, as explained earlier, while this option was weighed by the teachers, in some cases it was dismissed as problematic or just not realistic for youngsters, whereas in other cases it was the norm, typically for the more involved, time-consuming projects and units. By allowing students a role in actively making choices, the process of learning became meaningful, according to most of the interviewees. In this way, students could leverage their personal strengths and develop creative and critical minds to explore ideas and demonstrate knowledge and understanding. Allowing students

74

5 Overarching Outcomes, Implications, and Conclusion

to choose among topics, activities, and so forth puts learners at the center of their learning. Student choice is an important element of PBL that fits with Savery’s (2006) explanation of PBL as a student-centered learning experience that empowers participants to research and apply knowledge to arrive at one or more solutions to a defined problem. While referring to PjBL and its utilization in a study involving new and practicing science teachers, Colley (2008) asserted that student-centered teaching approaches enable students to “produce tangible learning outcomes by posing and answering research questions that are relevant to their own lives and communities” (p. 75). Another benefit noted by Colley is that such learning processes put students in charge of their own learning. Most of the interviewees in our study felt that allowing students choice and focusing on student-centered learning improves their creativity and communication skills. PBL Instruction Increased Students’ Critical-Thinking Skills (Finding 4). All participants thought that PBL provided the students with the opportunity to learn how to become critical thinkers. The children were developing critical-thinking skills by making choices, asking questions, and applying PBL tasks to the real world. Simultaneously, they were learning to consider multiple possibilities in the realm of solutions to problems (rather than only one definitive solution), explain/justify solutions, and become independent thinkers. They were learning how to grow as critical thinkers, which involves identifying issues, formulating questions, discovering multiple solutions, and making inferences (VDOE, 2019b). Peer-to-Peer Relationships Aided in Furthering Citizenship Skills (Finding 5). Working together through peer-to-peer relationships was considered a major strength of PBL approaches in elementary settings. PBL allowed students to partner or collaborate constructively and provide feedback to one another in a nonthreatening way that promoted respect, such as by welcoming ideas and thoughts, including different ones. Students need opportunities to demonstrate trustworthiness, respectfulness, fairness, responsibility, and caring (VDOE, 2019a). Learning about the past, participating in the present, and caring about the future can produce strong citizens. Allowing students to work together (while focusing on individual student strengths) promoted the development of citizenship skills. Modeling Helped Guide Student Learning in PBL Classroom Environments (Finding 6). PBL instruction is not something that came naturally to the teachers or students. All participants felt that it succeeded in their classrooms largely owing to teacher modeling. Elementary-aged students need guidance on how to work together, how to communicate their thinking, and how to provide constructive feedback. PBL gives students a structured opportunity to practice these skills with guidance and facilitation from teachers. Hmelo-Silver (2004) described the PBL teacher as a facilitator of knowledge who models good strategies for thinking and learning and scaffolds learning through modeling and coaching. Sage (1996) explained the coaching strategy known as “model/coach/fade” for PBL in elementary classrooms—wherein the “teacher as coach” carries out essential steps—prepares students to “meet the problem” and define it, and provides guidelines and information (pp. 21, 26). Students are likely

Discussion of Overarching Outcomes

75

gathering some or all the information needed in the problem context and generating possible solutions, as well as assessing their own performance and/or having it assessed. And the teacher debriefs about the problem and anything else, such as the students’ performances, which may involve artifacts, and learning outcomes. To facilitate effective small groups, the interviewees described how they fulfilled the very steps outlined by Sage (1996)—they set the problem context, modeled a skill and associated PBL strategies such as how to ask questions, coached group members on that skill, and faded instructional input to allow the groups to work on their own and learn interdependently. The group process involved organization, planning, struggle, brainstorming, negotiation, discovery, appraisal, and many other elements of independent learning, in addition to peer modeling. PBL and PjBL Co-exist and Function as PBL (Finding 7). When discussing PBL in their classroom, some teachers/staff stuck with the acronym PBL while others interchanged it with PjBL, problem, project, problem-based, and problemsolving. Regardless, the idea of student-centered learning involving a real-world complex problem remained at the forefront of their responses. Their views were consistent with PBL as described in the literature—anchored in student-centered learning and incorporating real-world relevance, collaboration, and other dynamic features (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Marra et al., 2014; Savery, 2006). All interviewees discussed projects they used or assigned within single classes, for an entire week, and for longer periods. One perspective on PBL is that it is typically conducted in a short time and involves a simpler problem, whereas PjBL encompasses a longer period and often includes multiple tasks, disciplines, and responses (Buck Institute for Education, 2018). However, the implication of PBL as always or by default occurring in a short period and involving a simpler problem is a source of debate. The controversy to which we refer is literature that addresses as well as illustrates complexities of learning challenges in PBL settings at all grade levels. These extend to engineering, science, and other (multi)disciplinary settings, formal and informal alike (e.g., Evans et al., 2014).

Relevance and Implications for Practice Elementary school principals and education leaders can do a lot to support PBL learning in their domains. Understandably, the COVID-19 pandemic has been systematically disrupting schools, worldwide, and the work of personnel responsible for educating the young. Budgets are shrinking in public education, with fewer resources available for classroom learning. The restructuring and consolidation of grade levels, units, and so forth, including the shrinkage of teachers and support personnel is unprecedented in this historic moment, with no end in sight. Regardless, leaders and their teams can work to offset the negatives with positives. Knowing that their administrative leaders support PBL instruction, trust their teachers/staff, and have buy-in can be enough for some practitioners to proceed. While it may not be

76

5 Overarching Outcomes, Implications, and Conclusion

realistic or practical to carry out PBL on a comprehensive scale in and across grades levels and even within single classrooms during rapid changes and crises, mini-PBL initiatives are still possible, as a teacher interviewee exclaimed based on experimentations with this alternative. As more groups in education utilize electronic spaces like “break rooms” in the Zoom conferencing interface for carrying out teamwork, just as we (the authors) are doing these days, it is certainly possible that PBL activities can unfold using cloud-based technologies. Anyone interested in supporting the implementation of PBL initiatives in individual classrooms, schools, or districts can benefit from consulting our study findings. There are three actions that school principals can take: 1.

2.

3.

Principals should provide professional development or training for teachers/staff interested in PBL implementation. This support will give teachers background knowledge about PBL; enable them to brainstorm with their colleagues and create teacher support networks and planning teams; and help them figure out how to go about implementing, facilitating, and assessing PBL instruction in their own classrooms. Our data analysis confirmed that PBL instruction encompasses crucial skills, namely communication and collaboration, for developing activity-based conditions and realizing student success. As such, coming to terms with the 5Cs in the context of PBL and how it can advance 21st-century capacities is on target with local, state, national, and international expectations of global-ready graduates. Strengthening PBL practices beyond the schoolhouse, principals can look to family engagement strategies for innovatively building curriculum like e-platforms where youngsters need informed guidance at home (Boyles & Mullen, 2020). Principals should be knowledgeable about PBL instruction relative to such realities as changing norms, risk taking, delayed outcomes, and failed attempts. PBL is often viewed as chaotic and unorganized, and it is said to be timeconsuming, laborious, and potentially expensive. Those trying it for the first time, both teachers and students, will find themselves feeling uncertain of what to do, how, and when. However, principals should be knowledgeable of the structure, processes, and conditions of PBL. Understanding that PBL is upheld in education as a best practice approach to rewarding teaching and learning should be motivating. Far from being “the flavor of the month,” PBL has long been confirmed by scholars and practitioners from widely ranging disciplines and different countries. Many in schools and universities have experimented with this teaching method and sponsored active learning and real-world and meaningful projects. Knowing about PBL’s credibility, staying power, and even transformative effects on instruction, pedagogy, teacher morale, collegiality, and collaboration can help justify the time and attention it takes. Being creative and resourceful about the funding involved and helping teachers with supplies would be applauded. Principals should ensure that teachers understand the expectations associated with 21st-century development to benefit student learning, social development, and academic attainment. In the study context of this book, the associated

Relevance and Implications for Practice

77

policies at the state level concern the Profile of a Virginia Graduate and the 5Cs, which are consistent with the expectation that students’ knowledge and skills will reflect the demands of a global economy and society (VDOE, 2019a, b). PBL in today’s educational world addresses standards (possibly testing oriented) and subject-specific content. It involves such teaching practices as designing and planning (e.g., aligning with standards), identifying the problem context and building the culture, generating and operationalizing the activitybased tasks to be fulfilled, engaging and coaching, scaffolding student learning, and assessing student learning. Anyone interested in seeing PBL operate will be looking for a challenging problem, question, task, or assignment; student voice, choice, and reflection; student commitment and motivation; authenticity and real-world relevance; critical and creative thinking; citizenship values; and learning performances (including artifacts or products).

Relevance and Implications for Research Based on our research findings and the gaps in the literature that were addressed by this study, we offer 13 suggestions for further inquiry. These ideas expand on PBLoriented elementary inquiries and 21st-century skills investigations, both of which are aimed at developing young students for school, career, and lifelong success. 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Investigate PBL instruction, implementation, and engagement at the elementary (or middle school) level with relevance for fostering development of 21st-century skills. This study could be adapted or expanded to gain more information about teacher-reported strategies used during PBL implementation. It would be advantageous to do this study with different grade levels to see if strategies operationalized to develop skills change with student age or other demographic variables (e.g., socioeconomic class). Conduct research on the key PBL instructional strategies identified through this interview study with elementary teachers/staff (see Table 4.7); alternatively, explore beyond the top 10 strategies to consider all 29, which together played important and supplementary roles in influencing 21st-century skills development in a Virginia school context. Further research could narrow the key PBL instructional strategies identified in the study to one or a few: collaboration, asking questions, communication, modeling, real-world relevance, hands-on learning, small groups, studentcentered learning, student choice, peer-to-peer relationships (Table 4.7). Modern-day PBL units, activities, lessons, and tasks embed 21st-century skills. Further research could be conducted on which skills are incorporated into PBL curriculum in elementary, middle, or high schools. Standardized testing is a reality of contemporary schooling, as was evident whenever teachers/staff mentioned it in connection with how they would approach PBL activities to facilitate gains for students, especially struggling

78

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

5 Overarching Outcomes, Implications, and Conclusion

test-takers. Research could examine the role of standardized testing in shaping PBL curriculum in the academic subjects that are tested. The influence of testing on PBL teaching and learning can be monitored to understand how learners are being prepared to develop as 21st-century citizens. Focus inquiries on underrepresented student populations at risk of academic, occupational, and other struggles in life, and challenges/barriers and successes/gains relative to urban/rural/suburban, race/ethnicity, class, dis/ability, and so forth. Further research on PBL learning and 21st-century skills could be conducted with feedback from various education stakeholders (e.g., district/division leaders, principals/other building leaders, teachers and staff, parents, and students). To gain a deeper contextual or broader sense of key PBL instructional strategies with children, expand the present study to consider more US-based schools, divisions/districts, and states. Explorations can encompass many different possibilities and configurations. The current study was qualitative in nature, so new studies could be qualitative (involving interviews and/or other data sources), quantitative, or methodologically mixed. Researchers are welcome to adapt our PBL Teacher Interview Protocol for carrying out interviews with education stakeholders. PBL explorations carried out in cyberspace could be designed by researchers in partnership with classroom teachers, with the aim of involving students in problem-solving endeavors within virtual spaces that produce growth in the 5Cs. Obtaining feedback from students participating formally or informally in PBL could not only benefit PBL instruction and curriculum but also professional development opportunities and training for principals, teachers/staff, and others. Utilizing the literature cited in this book, research-based instructional programming could be incorporated into university-based preparation programs for aspiring teachers and leaders to expose adult students to PBL theory and practice, instruction, curriculum, and assessment.

Conclusion This book pursued a knowledge gap in investigations of PBL at the elementary level, which is underrepresented in the literature. Based on individual interviews with seven PBL teachers/staff at one elementary school in a rural area of Virginia, key PBL instructional strategies were identified. The top 10 strategies operationalized by the educators were described from their frame of reference. A total of 29 strategies were recognized for playing a role in influencing the 21st-century skills development of children in grades 4 and 5.

Conclusion

79

The study contributes to the body of research on key strategies used during implementation of PBL in the classroom and how 21st-century skills were developed. The focus on PBL in elementary school, in addition to the Profile of a Virginia Graduate, makes this study especially helpful for educators who work with children. A valuable finding was that PBL is a worthwhile instructional tool for engaging as well as improving elementary students’ capacities in critical thinking, creativity, citizenship, and particularly communication and collaboration. Modeling by teachers was identified as an essential method for guiding elementary students in the facilitation of new learning in PBL activity-based settings. The participating teachers/staff made it known that children need explicit guidance and direction on how to effectively communicate and collaborate with peers and interact with their teachers. Through PBL, students were able to develop and practice the 5Cs, which generated momentum for meeting expectations associated with global-ready, literate graduates. As verbalized by the participating educators, the support of building principals is crucial for PBL to be realized in elementary classrooms. From the outside looking in, PBL appears noisy and chaotic, so it can be easily misconstrued as lacking structure. However, PBL structures student freedom, choice, and problem contexts, and it gives space to process-based learning and the practicing of skills. Gains are tracked in 21stcentury skills and in relation to the academic content to be mastered or understood. With permission to try something new and allowing teachers and students to find their own way with non-traditional learning, principals who understand the purposes and character of PBL instruction make it possible. Because the school principal serves as the instructional leader in elementary buildings, the principal should encourage the implementation of research-based instructional strategies and attend to such matters as the budgeting of resources. Our research purposes have been fulfilled. We have pinpointed key instructional strategies from interviews with teachers/staff with knowledge and information to share about PBL, having experimented with this approach during the 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 school years. We also found out what strategies aided in the skills development of the 5Cs for elementary students about the expectations of graduates who have been prepared for college, careers, and life. The study context benefitted from the leadership of the superintendent, who had encouraged experimentation with alternative classroom pedagogy. We offer pedagogic strategies endorsed by educators for creating the conditions for 21st-century learning and meeting the expectations of global societies and workforces. Our hope is that other researchers and practitioners will find value in this book and make good use of it for their own purposes.

Summary In this last chapter, overarching outcomes, implications for practice and research, and conclusions were covered. The study’s purposes have been fulfilled involving what PBL instructional strategies have been in use within elementary classrooms

80

5 Overarching Outcomes, Implications, and Conclusion

and which ones aided in skills development from the point of view of educators. The gap in PBL at the elementary level and in relation to 21st-century learning has been addressed. The understandings relayed benefitted from those on the frontlines— educators who are teaching and learning in new ways and who generously shared their personal stories.

Navigating Uncharted Waters The PBL literature we reviewed considered elementary student engagement and achievement and extended to related areas of interest. This book covered the background of PBL and its evolution into public education and classrooms. Together with our elementary study, it adds to the knowledge of PBL instruction, with attention on PBL strategies utilized in elementary, middle, and secondary levels, extending into informal settings. Those answering the call seek non-traditional approaches to classroom learning that enrich the quality of educational experience extending into the future. Thus, they are future-minded in their preparation of students for lifelong learning and contribution. While we recognize that PBL is certainly not new, it is new to teachers in Virginia, which puts the teachers/staff who participated in our study at the leading edge of instructional change. Researching PBL and gaining insight from teachers through this investigation has allowed us to share research with the global educational community. We are excited about emboldening preK–12 teachers to try something new and encouraging principals and other leaders to get behind their initiatives and join them in their journey. The Portrait of a Graduate (BattelleforKids, 2018) and Profile of a Virginia Graduate (VDOE, 2019a) can add value for preparing learners to enter the global economy with the capacity to be not only effective but also public-spirited. We are pleased to have added to the breadth of literature surrounding PBL in elementary classrooms and to have had this opportunity to feature the experimentation at one school in Virginia. Based on our research results, coupled with insights gained from the literature reviewed, we think that PBL is a worthwhile instructional tool that has great potential to improve children’s 21st-century skills. However, the support of principals and other building leaders is vital for the success of PBL implementation. We hope that principals who wish to support PBL at their school review the findings and reflect on their own practices. Finally, we encourage principals to implement PBL in their schools and support teachers who wish to experiment with PBL in their classrooms. We encourage the utilization of this book in any way that can help with making PBL-related decisions in the context of 21st-century learning. During the COVID-19 pandemic, educational systems suddenly went from daily face-to-face instruction to being physically closed and moving to online instruction, with a new kind of schooling dependent on creative adaptations presently emerging. PBL in the world of online learning is largely unchartered. However, we believe that the basic components of student-centered learning and real-world application are adaptable to online learning. Also, online learning can allow teachers and students the

Navigating Uncharted Waters

81

time needed for PBL, which was said to be the greatest challenge of PBL instruction in the physical classroom. In electronic spaces there are innovative tools for enabling collaboration, communication, and so forth, with cost savings a noteworthy benefit. Students’ creativity, choice, and much more can be maximized in electronic spaces. Sponsoring PBL learning can help with closing equity gaps in elementary schooling and for all student groups, particularly vulnerable populations. Constraints allow us to exercise our imaginations in entirely new ways. By imagining new possibilities for PBL, we push boundaries in the world of learning. PBL of tomorrow is being charted today.

References Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. Springer. BattelleforKids. (2018). Portrait of a Graduate: A first step in transforming your school system. https://portraitofagraduate.org. Boyles, E. T., & Mullen, C. A. (2020). Principals’ responsibility for helping impoverished students succeed in rural Appalachia. In C. A. Mullen (Ed.), Handbook of social justice interventions in education (pp. 1–27). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29553-0_93-1. Buck Institute for Education, The. (2018). PBL works. https://www.pblworks.org. Colley, K. (2008). Project-based science instruction: A primer—An introduction and learning cycle for implementing project-based science. Science Teacher, 75(8), 23–28. https://eric.ed.gov/?id= EJ817851. Evans, M. A., Lopez, M., Maddox, D., Drape, T., & Duke, R. (2014). Interest-driven learning among middle school youth in an out-of-school STEM studio. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(5), 624–640. Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. Koray, O., Presley, A., Koksal, M. S., & Ozdemir, M. (2008). Enhancing problem-solving skills of pre-service elementary school teachers through problem-based learning. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching, 9(2), 1–18. https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/download/v9_issue2_ files/koksal.pdf. Marra, R. M., Jonassen, D. H., Palmer, B., & Luft, S. (2014). Why problem-based learning works: Theoretical foundations. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25, 221–238. Neville, A. J. (2009). Problem-based learning and medical education forty years on. A review of its effects on knowledge and clinical performance. Medical Principles and Practice, 18(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1159/000163038. Sage, S. M. (1996, April). A qualitative examination of problem-based learning at the K–8 level: Preliminary findings (pp. 1–27) (ERIC Number: ED398263). A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/ED398263.pdf. Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 9–20. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019a). Profile of a Virginia graduate. http://www. doe.virginia.gov/instruction/graduation/profile-grad/index.shtml. Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019b). Virginia’s 5C’s. http://www.virginiaisfo rlearners.virginia.gov/media-library/#:~:text=Students%20in%20every%20grade%20will,com munication%2C%20collaboration%20and%20citizenship%20skills.

Correction to: Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School

Correction to: S. S. Reed et al., Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5 In the original version of the book, the following belated corrections have been incorporated: The references in the book backmatter have to be removed. This correction to the book has been updated with the changes.

The updated version of the book can be found at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5 © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. S. Reed et al., Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5_6

C1

Appendix

PBL Teacher Interview Protocol

Opening Statement: Thank you for agreeing to participate in this interview with the substitute researcher to collect information regarding problem-based learning (PBL) instruction during the 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 school years in grades 4 and 5 at your school. PBL is defined as a teaching method in which students gain knowledge and skills by working collaboratively to investigate and respond to authentic and engaging questions and problems. I will ask each question as stated. Based on your responses, follow-up probes may be asked. A record of the transcribed interview will be sent to you for verification. 1. How would you describe the PBL instruction that was used in your classroom? 2. What strategies used in your PBL instruction do you think are important? 3. How have the strategies you have used helped students develop the following skills? a. Critical thinking b. Creativity c. Communication d. Collaboration e. Citizenship 4. Are there specific strategies that contributed to stronger development of any of these skills? Please explain. a. Critical thinking b. Creativity c. Communication d. Collaboration e. Citizenship 5. Based on your teaching experiences, what are some strengths of using PBL in elementary classrooms? 6. Based on your teaching experiences, what are some concerns or challenges with implementing PBL? 7. Based on your experiences with PBL, have you continued using PBL in your classroom? Why or why not? 8 Is there anything else you would like to add?

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 S. S. Reed et al., Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5

83