Infusing Problem-Based Learning (PBL) Into Science Methods Courses Across Virginia

This article outlines the results of a collaborative study of the effects of infusing problem-based learning (PBL) into K-12 science methods courses across four universities in Virginia. Changes in preservice teachers’ attitudes surrounding science teaching were measured before and after completing a science methods course in which they experienced PBL first-hand as participants, and then practiced designing their own PBL units for use in their future classrooms. The results indicate that exposure to PBL enhances pre-service teachers’ knowledge of inquiry methods and self-efficacy in teaching science. Introduction: Why Incorporate Problem-Based Learning into Science Methods Courses? A growing number of students in the United States find it difficult to connect science content and skills to real-world scenarios, indicating a true lack of understanding. The most recent Program for International Student Assessment revealed that fifteen-year-olds in the United States could not apply scientific knowledge and skills to real-world issues as well as their peers in sixteen of twenty-nine countries [1]. Data on science achievement in higher education are similarly concerning. The United States now ranks 27 among industrialized countries for the number of students who receive bachelor’s degrees in science or engineering [2]. Regardless of the reasons, it is clear that science is not engaging many students. Rising Above the Gathering Storm Revisited focused on mathematics, science, and engineering not only because they are essential to job creation, but also because the committee concluded that “these 94 K.R. THOMAS, P.L. HORNE, S.M. DONNELLY and C.T. BERUBE are the disciplines in which American education is failing most convincingly” [2]. These data, combined with other performance indicators, led the committee to assert “for the first time in history, America’s younger generation is less well-educated than its parents” [2]. Based on indicators of students’ poor performance in science, it comes as little surprise that research reveals students view school science as neither popular nor pertinent [3]. Science education must do a better job of engaging students. Science is no longer just for “future scientists. ” Today, every student needs a strong foundation in scientific content and process skills. While not all students will go into science fields, all are members of a global society. Individuals can no longer be unaware of how their actions or inactions impact others near and far. The goal of science education must be that of producing scientifically literate citizens. Such citizens would be able to actively participate in decisions on issues that impact their lives, such as: waste disposal, experimental medical treatments, water quality, and other issues of personal health and safety (socio-scientific issues). To do this, they need to have the skills to examine problems, ask important questions, develop plans for collecting evidence, analyze data, communicate and work with others as they propose solutions, and think critically to reflect on choices made. Jobs in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) are projected to be the most abundant careers of the foreseeable future [4]. Science educators in Virginia especially need to focus on equipping students with STEM skills because in 2005, 40% of STEM jobs were located in Virginia and five other states [5]. In addition to anticipated job growth in these fields, workers will also be needed to replace those retiring from STEM careers. These jobs would require workers to apply content and skills to real-world problems, the very knowledge and skills on which U.S. fifteen-year-olds students scored so poorly in 2009. Scientific process skills, much like the skills of a professional athlete, are acquired through sustained and targeted practice, not by sitting behind a desk. Instead of telling students how they will use the information one day, science educators must provide experiences that allow students to apply it now in a meaningful way. For many, this requires a paradigm shift in the way science is taught. This is why inquiry and problem-based learning (PBL) are essential. Literature Review—What Is PBL? Problem-based learning (PBL) can be traced back to Dewey’s emphasis on learning by doing and thinking [6]. He argued that learning “should give students something to do.and the INFUSING PROBLEM BASED LEARNING. 95 doing is of such a nature as to demand thinking or intentional connections” [6]. As early as 1965, Gagné noted PBL’s effectiveness in developing science concepts [7]. McMaster University’s medical school implemented PBL because of concern over the limited application skills of many of their recent graduates [8]. Implementation of PBL in the K-12 setting has recently gained international attention as a way to provide creative inquiry that fosters critical thinking and is aligned with students’ interests and abilities [9]. It is a learning approach that allows for individual flexibility in learning and the social construction of knowledge. Aligned with Vygotsky’s theory of constructivism, PBL pushes students to connect prior knowledge with a current problem and solve it in their own way. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), the National Research Council (NRC), and the Virginia Mathematics and Science Coalition’s (VMSC) visions of inquiry-based and student-centered science is supported by PBL [10-12]. Virginia Initiative for Science Teaching and Achievement (VISTA) researchers define problem-based learning (PBL) as “students solving a complex problem with multiple solutions over time like a scientist in a real-world-context” [13]. They further state the problem must be meaningful to students and is typically embedded in a course of study from one to five weeks in duration [13]. Through PBL, students ask scientific questions relevant to their lives, collect evidence, and develop explanations based on the evidence obtained. This type of inquiry provides students with the highest level of investigative control, unlike traditional teacher-led explorations [14]. Students use “The Problem-Solving Cycle,” which was created by Sterling in 2005 as a roadmap throughout their PBL investigations [13]. Contrary to the lockstep myth of “The Scientific Method,” The Problem-Solving Cycle allows students the flexibility to move forward or retrace their steps in the investigation as needed. This enables student researchers to backtrack in response to new information gained and better represents the way scientists work to find solutions in their profession. Literature Review—Research Findings on PBL Much of the early research on PBL implementation pertains to medical school students. More recent research examines the impact of PBL in the K-12 and post-secondary settings, yet research in this area is still in the early stages [15]. The current study seeks to identify the potential benefits of PBL on pre-service teachers and their future practice so the following literature review focuses on research relevant to this study. 96 K.R. THOMAS, P.L. HORNE, S.M. DONNELLY and C.T. BERUBE Benefits to Students: Affective — Culturally responsive pedagogy, such as PBL, allows students the flexibility to customize their own learning. Sterling reported students (grades 4-6) involved in a PBL camp showed an increase in positive attitudes toward science on preand post-attitudinal surveys [16]. Students indicated that the opportunity to shape the inquiry to meet their abilities and interests made them feel more empowered [16]. Increased confidence may change the way students think of science and a possible career in science as evidenced by findings from Sterling, Matkins, Frazier, and Logerwell who reported greater interest and more positive views of science among PBL participants [17]. Similarly, PBL was found to positively impact post-secondary students’ attitudes toward the learning environment relative to peers in a traditional program [18]. Osborne and Collins found that students want more experience in authentic work, longer inquiries, and more time to discuss these experiences, all components of PBL [3]. Their research with nineto fourteen-year-olds concluded that school science lacks “relevance and greater autonomy” [3]. Relevance and autonomy have been linked to motivation [19]. Research with students of varying ages trained in PBL found that students had increased motivation [16, 20-21]. Benefits to Students: Elementary/Middle Cognitive — More recently, Frazier and Sterling conducted a mixed-methods study on their PBL summer camps for students aged nine to twelve [22]. The camps were offered across a three-year period and included 116 participants designated as at-risk by their schools. The researchers examined student artifacts, teaching curriculum, and students’ performance on preand post-science content assessments. They found students “experienced significant growth in their science content knowledge and skills” [22]. Further research with elementary students support Frazier and Sterling’s findings [15, 23-24]. Drake and Long also determined that PBL students were better able to create problem-solving strategies than students in a comparison group [15]. Benefits to Students: Middle and Secondary Cognitive— Studies provide conflicting reports of the degree of student academic performance related to PBL implementation. Results of PBL implementation in a grade 11 chemistry class revealed PBL positively impacted students’ achievement and helped address misconceptions in a significant way [20]. Additionally, PBL was found to promote test success in science among twelveand thirteen-year-olds according to Wong and Day [21]. Research documents evidence of academic success of students in other content areas taught through PBL [25]. Gallagher and Stepien found students in American studies performed at least as well on multiple choice tests as students taug