You are here:

Systematic Design of Blended PBL: Exploring the Design Experiences and Support Needs of PBL Novices in an Online Environment
ARTICLE

, University of West Georgia, United States

CITE Journal Volume 13, Number 1, ISSN 1528-5804 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Designing problem-based learning (PBL), especially blended PBL, is very different from designing traditional teacher-centered instruction and requires a new set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes. To be successful, teachers must step out of their comfort zone, adopt new roles and responsibilities, and develop new knowledge and skills required in PBL environments as well as technology integration skills. The purpose of this study was threefold: (a) to examine the difficulties and challenges that PBL novices faced as they designed their first blended PBL in an online environment, (b) to explore effective strategies for supporting PBL novices in the design process, and (c) to examine the impact of PBL design experience on PBL novices’ perceptions of PBL. The researcher collected qualitative data from multiple sources, including an online survey, initial design documents, feedback meeting notes, revised design documents, and reflection papers. The findings of this study provide practical insights into how to support PBL novices in designing blended PBL. The implications for teacher professional development, especially online professional development, and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Citation

An, Y.J. (2013). Systematic Design of Blended PBL: Exploring the Design Experiences and Support Needs of PBL Novices in an Online Environment. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 13(1), 61-79. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved August 9, 2024 from .

© 2013 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Al-Salman, S.M. (2009). The role of the asynchronous discussion forum in online communication. Journal of Instruction Delivery Systems, 23(2), 8-13.
  2. An, Y.J. (2010). Scaffolding wiki-based, ill-structured problem solving in an online environment. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(4).
  3. An, Y.J., & Reigeluth, C.M. (2011). Creating technology-enhanced, learner-centered classrooms: K–12 teachers’ beliefs, perceptions, barriers, and support needs. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(2), 54-62.
  4. Barrows, H.S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20, 481-486.
  5. Barrows, H.S. (2000). Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.
  6. Barrows, H., & Tamblyn, R. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York, NY: Springer.
  7. Becker, H.J. (2000). Findings from the teaching, learning, and computing survey: Is Larry Cuban right? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(51).
  8. Blumenfeld, P.C., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J.S., Guzdial, M., & Palinscar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 369-398.
  9. Bonk, C.J., & King, K.S. (1998). Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  10. Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  11. Buck Institute for Education. (2012). Project based learning for the 21st century. Retrieved from http://www.bie.org
  12. Butler, S.M., & Wiebe, E.N. (2003). Designing a technology-based science lesson: Student teachers grappling with an authentic problem of practice. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11(4), 463-481.
  13. Chong, S.M. (1998). Models of asynchronous computer conferencing for collaborative learning in large college classes. In C.J. Bonk& K.S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 157-182). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  14. Cooney, D.H. (1998). Sharing aspects within aspects: Real-time collaboration within the high school English classroom. In C.J. Bonk& K.S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 263-287). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  15. Cornelius-White, J.H.D., & Harbaugh, A.P. (2009). Learner-centered instruction: Building relationships for student success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  16. De Simone, C. (2008). Problem-based learning: A framework for prospective teachers’ pedagogical problem solving. Teacher Development, 12(3), 179-191.
  17. Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J.O. (2005). The systematic design of instruction (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 13(1)
  18. Dolmans, D.H.J.M., Gijselaers, W.H., Schmidt, H.G., & VanderMeer, S.B. (1993). Problem effectiveness in a course using problem-based learning. Academic Medicine, 68(3), 207-213.
  19. Dolmans, D.H.J.M., & Snellen-Balendong, H. (1997). Seven principles of effective case design for a problem-based curriculum. Medical Teacher, 19(3), 185-189.
  20. Duch, B. (2001). Writing problems for deeper understanding. In B. Duch, S.E. Groh, & D.E. Allen (Eds.), The power of problem-based learning: A practical “how to” for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline (pp. 47-53). Sterling VA: Stylus Publishing.
  21. Ertmer, P.A., & Simons, K.D. (2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K-12 teachers. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1, 40-54.
  22. Gerbic, P. (2006). Chinese learners and online discussions: New opportunities for multicultural classrooms. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(3), 221-237.
  23. Gerbic, P. (2010). Getting the blend right in new learning environments: A complementary approach to online discussions. Education and Information Technologies, 15, 125-137.
  24. Gijselaers, W.H., & Schmidt, H.G. (1990). Development and evaluation of a causal model of problem-based learning. In Z.H. Nooman, H.G. Schmidt, & E.S. Ezzat (Eds.), Innovation in medical education: An evaluation of its present status (pp. 95-113). New
  25. Goodnough, K.C., & Hung, W. (2008). Engaging teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge: Adopting a nine-step problem-based learning model. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 2(2), 61-90.
  26. Hmelo-Silver, C.E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266.
  27. Hung, W. (2006). The 3C3R model: A conceptual framework for designing problems in PBL. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 55-77.
  28. Hung, W. (2009). The 9-step problem design process for problem-based learning: Application of the 3C3R model. Educational Research Review, 4(2), 118-141.
  29. International Society for Technology in Education. (2007). National educational technology standards for students. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/nets-sstandards.pdf?sfvrsn=2
  30. Jonassen, D.H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research& Development, 45(1), 65-94.
  31. Jonassen, D.H. (2000). Toward the design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63-85.
  32. Land, S.M. (2000). Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research& Development, 48(3), 61-78.
  33. Lim, C.P., & Chan, B.C. (2007). MicroLESSONS in teacher education: Examining preservice teachers’ pedagogical beliefs. Computers& Education, 48(4), 474–494.
  34. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
  35. McCombs, B.L., & Whisler, J.S. (1997). The learner-centered classroom and school: Strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  36. McGrath, D., & Sands, N. (2004). Taking the plunge: A school district commits to a fiveyear plan for technology-infused PBL. Learning and Leading with Technology, 31(7), 3436.
  37. Park, S.H., & Ertmer, P.A. (2008). Examining barriers in technology-enhanced problembased learning: Using a performance support systems approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(4), 631-643.
  38. Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  39. Peterson, P.L. (1990). Doing more of the same: Cathy Swift. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 261–280.
  40. Polly, D., & Hannafin, M.J. (2011). Examining how learner-centered professional development influences teachers’ espoused and enacted practices. Journal of Educational Research, 104(2), 120–130.
  41. Reigeluth, C.M. (1994). Envisioning a new system of education. In C.M. Reigeluth& R.J. Garfinkle (Eds.), Systemic change in education (pp. 59–70). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
  42. Savery, J.R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1, 9-20.
  43. Savery, J.R., & Duffy, T.M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31-38.
  44. Saye, J.W., & Brush, T. (2002). Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 77-96.
  45. Schmidt, H.G. (1983). Problem-based learning: Rationale and description. Medical Education, 17, 11-16.
  46. Stake, R.E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  47. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  48. Strobel, J., & Van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of meta-analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(1), 44-58.
  49. Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R.E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  50. Torp, L., & Sage, S. (2002). Problems as possibilities: Problem-based learning for K-16 education (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  51. Walker, A., Recker, M., Robertshaw, M.B., Osen, J., & Leary, H. (2011). Integrating technology and problem-based learning: A mixed methods study of two teacher professional development designs. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 5(2), 70-94.
  52. Weiss, R.E. (2003). Designing problems to promote higher-order thinking. In D.S. Knowlton& D.C. Sharp (Eds.), Problem-based learning in the information age (pp. 2531).
  53. Wilson, S.M. (1990). A conflict of interests: The case of Mark Black. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12(3), 309–326.
  54. Yin, R.K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Author Notes Yun-Jo An University of West Georgia Email: yunjoan912@gmail.com Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education is an online journal. All text, tables, and figures in the print version of this article are exact representations of the original. However, the original article may also include video and audio files, which can be accessed on the WorldWide Web at http://www.citejournal.org

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read

Related Collections

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts