Integrating Content and PBL Skills: A Case Study of Teachers From Four Schools

Rosenfeld,S., Scherz, Z., Breiner, A. and Carmeli, M.
Department of Science Teaching
Weizmann Institute of Science
Rehovot, Israel

One of the major challenges associated with project-based learning (PBL) is how to integrate the development of student PBL skills while developing student understanding of related disciplinary (or interdisciplinary) content. To investigate this issue, we conducted an action research study within the context of a long-term teacher in-service. Based on this study, we were able to better understand the nature of the challenge as well as successful strategies to meet it.

Methodology

Our action research was based on work with 27 junior high teachers who participated in a long-term teacher in-service (about 180 hours/year for 3 years) at the Weizmann Institute of Science. The teachers (about 2/3 science teachers and 1/3 technology teachers) collectively taught about 1,000 students from 4 schools.

Each school taught a different content unit on science and technology (e.g., Senses and Sensors, The World of Water), which was the basis for student PBL work.

Each school staff was guided by two types of in-service teacher educators: those with expertise regarding the given content unit and those with expertise in PBL skills. The teachers met regularly at the in-service sessions and at staff sessions in their schools; they also were given assistance during PBL implementation in their schools. The methodology of our study was three-fold:

1. Guiding teachers to develop PBL skills. Teachers engaged in their own mini-projects around a common theme in science and technology (i.e., cell biology) under the guidance of teacher educators. In this context, they were taught to develop PBL skills such as question-asking, question-sorting, how to read scientific literature, how to write research proposals, etc.

2. Guiding teachers to integrate curricular content with PBL skills. After the teachers conducted their own mini-projects, they were guided to: (a) learn about PBL pedagogy, (b) learn the content of their chosen curricular units, (c) plan how to integrate PBL pedagogy with curriculum content, and (d) implement their plans in their classrooms (Table 1; a list of the relevant PBL skills is given in 2b of the table.).

3. Investigating what actually happened during PBL student work. Before, during and after the PBL student work, a wide variety of data was collected, e.g., in-depth student and teacher interviews, observations of classroom PBL work, content analysis of student portfolios and student projects, protocols of teacher staff meetings and protocols of teacher developer staff meetings, and content analysis of a video of a half-day summary conference on the teachers’ PBL work in their schools.

Outcomes

Project-based learning in each of the four schools resulted in many positive outcomes, both for students as well as for teachers: high student motivation and satisfaction, improved teacher-student relationships, increased school pride, improved staff teamwork (including increased cooperation between the science teachers and the technology teachers), and increased parent and community involvement with the students. The evidence for these benefits is very strong.

However, despite intensive efforts to the contrary, the teachers and the teacher educators were not satisfied with the balance of PBS skills and curriculum content. In practice, there was a tremendous amount of emphasis on developing student PBL skills, but relatively much less attention placed on subject-matter knowledge, which often resulted in superficial student projects.

We explain this lack of balance by the high “cognitive load” demanded from the teachers — and their students — both in the in-service and the classrooms, given inadequate time. For example, teachers experienced a high degree of challenge and uncertainty regarding (a) developing their own PBL skills, (b) teaching PBL skills to their students, (b) learning the specific content unit, (c) planning skills-content integration, and (d) implementing these plans in their classrooms. Given this pressure, the teachers preferred to focus more of their classroom time on the development of PBL skills and less on the development of content knowledge.

Educational Significance

In many educational contexts, the traditional role of teachers — as conveyers of knowledge (through lectures and textbook-based assignments) — is being transformed, i.e., to being guides and “coaches” for students as independent learners (through practices such as PBL). Our study highlights a major challenge in this transformation: balancing PBL skills with content knowledge.

Our conclusions are threefold. First, basic content knowledge should be taught before students engage in PBL in a given domain. Second, PBL skills should be developed during regular classroom lessons, even before students begin their projects. Finally, since the integration of PBL skills and content knowledge has such a high “cognitive load,” the learning process (for teachers and students alike) must be long-termed and sustained over time. (Evidence to support this conclusion comes from the fact that second-year PBL teachers are much more successful at integrating PBL skills and content knowledge than they were as first-year PBL teachers.) Essentially, project-based learning skills should be developed as an integrated part of every classroom content unit, even when these units are not followed by projects.

References

Klein, J. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory and Practice. Detroit: Wayne

State University Press.

Tretten, R. and Zachariou, P. (1998). “Assessing PBL: Results and Strategies.”

Paper presented at the Autodesk Foundation’s Sixth Annual Conference on

Project-Based Learning. San Francisco, California.

PBL Schedule for In-service and Implementation

Table 1. Project-Based Learning (PBL) Schedule for In-service and Implementation.

As part of a long-term teacher in-service, 27 teachers were guided in their PBL work through (1) regular in-service sessions, where they meet (a) separately, in four school staff teams and (b) together in plenary sessions. They also engaged in (2) school implementation, where they taught their students (a) specific content unit together with (b) PBL skills. Each school taught a different content unit, along with common PBL skills. The schedule does not include time teachers spent on their own PBL work nor time spent learning each respective content unit (before 16.2.98). See text for details.