The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of problem-based learning (PBL) on student achievement and students’ perceptions of classroom quality. A group of students taught using PBL and a comparison group of students taught using traditional instruction were studied. A total of 457 students participated in the study. Pre- and post-student achievement data were collected using a 25-item multiple-choice test that aligned with state and local objectives. Data analysis indicated statistically significant gain scores in both the groups with a higher gain score in the PBL group. Data analysis also revealed statistically significant differences in the total score on the Student Perceptions of Classroom Quality (SPOCQ) in favor of the PBL group. This study found positive effects for well-implemented PBL instruction with these students. Future research should include longitudinal studies expanded to different subjects, grade levels, and populations of students.
AbramsL. M.PedullaJ. J.MadausG. F. (2003). Views from the classroom: Teachers’ opinions of statewide testing programs. Theory Into Practice, 42, 18-32. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4201_4
2.
AuW. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, 36, 258-267. doi:10.3102/0013189X07306523
3.
BarrowsH. S. (1988). The tutorial process. Springfield: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.
4.
BarrowsH. S. (1994). Practice-based learning. Springfield: Southern Illinois University School of Medicine.
5.
BarrowsH. S.TamblynR. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York, NY: Springer.
6.
BellandB. R.GlazewskiK. D.ErtmerP. A. (2009). Inclusion and problem-based learning: Roles of students in a mixed-ability group. RMLE Online: Research in Middle Level Education, 32, 1-19. doi:10.1080/19404476.2009.11462062
7.
BrownE.AveryL.VanTassel-BaskaJ.WorleyB. B.StambaughT. (2006). A five-state analysis of gifted education policies. Roeper Review, 29, 11-23. doi:10.1080/02783190609554379
8.
BrunerJ. (1962). The act of discovery. In BrunerJ. S. (Ed.), On knowing: Essays for the left hand (pp. 81-96). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9.
BrushT.SayeJ. (2000). Design, implementation, and evaluation of student-centered learning: A case study. Educational Technology Research & Development, 48, 79-100. doi:10.1007/BF02319859
10.
CerezoN. (2004). Problem-based learning in the middle school: A research case study of the perceptions of at-risk females. RMLE Online: Research in Middle Level Education, 27, 1-13.
11.
ChinC.ChiaL. (2004). Problem-based learning: Using students’ questions to drive knowledge construction. Science Education, 88, 707-727. doi:10.1002/sce.10144
12.
ChinC.ChiaL. (2006). Problem-based learning: Using ill-structured problems in biology project work. Science Education, 90, 44-67. doi:10.1002/sce.20097
13.
DiggsL. L. (1997). Student attitude toward and achievement in science in a Problem-Based Learning educational experience (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses. (Publication No. AAT 9842589)
14.
DodsR. F. (1997). An action research study of the effectiveness of problem-based learning in promoting the acquisition and retention of knowledge. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 423-437. doi:10.1177/016235329702000406
15.
ErtmerP.SimonsK. (2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the efforts of K-12 teachers. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1, 40-54. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1005
16.
FullanM. (2001). Leading in culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
17.
GableR. K.WolfM. B. (1993). Instrument development in the affective domain. Boston, MA: Kluwer.
18.
GallagherS. A. (n.d.). Meta-cognitive Coach Checklist [Measurement Instrument]. Unpublished instrument.
19.
GallagherS. A. (2001). But does it work? Testing the efficacy of problem-based learning: A review of the literature and research agenda for educators of the gifted. In ColangeloN.WallaceS. G. (Eds.), Talent development: Proceedings from the 1998 Henry B. and Jocelyn Wallace National Research Symposium (pp. 179-204). Scottsdale, AZ: Great Potential Press.
20.
GallagherS. A. (2009). Designed to fit: Educational implications of gifted adolescents’ cognitive development. In DixonF. (Ed.), Programs and services for gifted secondary students (pp. 3-20). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
21.
GallagherS. A. (2012). Building bridges: Using research from the Big Five, MBTI, overexcitabilites and Perry to explore personality differences of gifted youth. In NevilleC. S.PiechowskiM. M.TolanS. S. (Eds.), Off the charts: Asynchrony and the gifted child (pp. 56-118). Unionville, NY: Royal Fireworks Press.
22.
GallagherS. A.GallagherJ. J. (2013). Using problem-based learning to explore unseen academic potential. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7, 111-131. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1322
23.
GallagherS. A.StepienW. J. (1996). Depth versus breadth in problem-based learning: Content acquisition in American studies. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19, 257-275. doi:10.1177/016235329601900302
24.
GallagherS. A.StepienW. J.RosenthalH. (1992). The effects of problem-based learning on problem solving. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 195-200. doi:10.1177/001698629203600405.
25.
GentryM.OwenS. V. (2004). Secondary student perceptions of classroom quality: Instrumentation and differences between advanced/honors and nonhonors classes. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 20-29. doi:10.4219/jsge-2004-464
26.
GoodnoughK.CashionM. (2006). Exploring problem-based learning in the context of high school science: Design and implementation Issues. School Science and Mathematics, 106, 280-300. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb17919.x.
27.
GordonP. R.RogersA. M.ComfortM.GavulaN.McGeeB. P. (2001). A taste of problem-based learning increases achievement of urban minority middle-school students. Educational Horizons, 79, 171-175. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/42927061
28.
HaladynaT.ThomasG. (1979). The attitudes of elementary school children toward school and subject matters. Journal of Experimental Education, 48, 18-23. doi:10.1080/00220973.1979.11011707
29.
HitchcockM. A.MylonaZ. E. (2000). Teaching faculty to conduct problem-based learning. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 12, 52-57. doi:10.1207/S15328015TLM1201_8
30.
HmeloC. E.HoltonD. L.AllenJ. K.KolodnerJ. L. (1997). Designing for understanding: Children’s models of lungs. In ShaftoM. G.LangleyP. (Eds.), Proceedings of the nineteenth annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 313-318). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31.
HockettJ. A. (2009). Curriculum for highly able learners that conforms to general education and gifted education quality indicators. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 32, 394-440.
32.
JonasH.EtzelS.BarzanskyB. (1989). Undergraduate medical education. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 262, 1011-1019. doi:10.1001/jama.1989.03430080031005
33.
KangN. H.DeChenneS. E.SmithG. (2012). Inquiry learning of high school students through a problem-based environmental health science curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 112, 147-158. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00128.x
34.
LancasterC.BradleyE.SmithI. K.ChessmanA.Stroup-BenhamC. A.CampM. (1997). The effect of PBL on students’ perceptions of learning environment. Academic Medicine, 72, S10-S12. doi:10.1097/00001888-199710001-00004
35.
LehmanJ. D.GeorgeM.BuchananP.RushM. (2006). Preparing teachers to use problem-centered, inquiry-based science: Lessons from a four-year professional development project. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1, 76-99. doi:10.1097/00001888-199710001-00005
36.
MakerC. J.NielsonA. B. (1995). Teaching models in education of the gifted (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
37.
MakerC. J.SchieverS. (1991). Enrichment and acceleration: An overview and new directions. In DavisG.ColangeloN. (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 99-110). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
38.
MoonT. R.BrightonC. B.CallahanC. M. (2003). State standardized testing programs: Friend or foe of gifted education?Roeper Review, 25, 49-60. doi:10.1080/02783190309554199
39.
NowakJ. A. (2001). The implications and outcomes of using problem-based learning to teach middle school science (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Dissertations & Theses. (Publication No. AAT 3024268)
40.
PedersenS.LiuM. (2003). The transfer of problem-solving skills from a problem-based learning environment: The effect of modeling an expert’s cognitive processes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35, 303-320. doi:10.1080/15391523.2002.10782388
41.
PophamW. J. (2001). The truth about testing: An educator’s call to action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
42.
PrettymanS. S.WardC. L.JaukD.AwadG. (2012). 21st century learners: Voices of students in a One-to-One STEM Environment. Journal of Applied Learning Technology, 2, 6-15.
43.
ReisS. M.WestbergK. L.KulikowichJ.CaillardF.HébertT.PluckerJ.. . . SmistJ. M. (1993). Why not let high ability students start school in January? The Curriculum Compacting Study (Research Monograph 93106). Storrs, CT: NRC/GT.
44.
RenzulliJ. S.LeppeinJ.HaysT. (2000). The multiple menu model: A practical guide for developing differentiated curriculum. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
SaveryJ. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1, 9-20. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1002
47.
SaveryJ. R.DuffyT. M. (1995). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35, 31-38.
48.
SiegleD.WilsonH.LittleC. (2013). A sample of gifted and talented educators’ attitudes about academic acceleration. Journal of Advanced Academics, 24, 27-51. doi:10.1177/1932202x12472491
49.
StepienW. J.PykeS. (1997). Designing problem-based learning units. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20, 380-400. doi:10.1177/016235329702000404
50.
StrobelJ.van BarneveldA. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A Meta-synthesis of Meta-analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. The Interdisciplinary Jouarnal of Problem-Based Learning, 3 (1) 44-58. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1046
51.
SungurS.TekkayaC.GebanO. (2006). Improving achievement through problem-based learning. Journal of Biological Education, 40, 155-160. doi:10.1080/00219266.2006.9656037
52.
SwanK.VaheyP.van‘tHooftM.KratcoskiA.RafananK.StanfordT.. . . CookD. (2013). Problem-based learning across the curriculum: Exploring the efficacy of a cross-curricular application of preparation for future learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7, 91-110. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1307
53.
TarhanL.Ayar-KayaliH.UrekR.AcarB. (2008). Problem-based learning in 9th grade chemistry class: “Intermolecular forces.”Research in Science Education, 38, 285-300. doi:10.1007/s11165-007-9050-0
54.
TomlinsonC. A. (1999). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
VanTassel-BaskaJ.BrownE. (2007). Towards best practice: An analysis of the efficacy of curriculum models in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 342-358. doi:10.1177/0016986207306323
57.
VanTassel-BaskaJ.StambaughT. (2006). Project Athena: A pathway to advanced literacy development for children of poverty. Gifted Child Today, 29, 58-63. doi:10.1177/0016986207306323
58.
WetzelM. S. (1996). Techniques in medical education: Problem-based learning. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 72, 474-477. doi:10.1136/pgmj.72.850.474
59.
WirkalaC.KuhnD. (2011). Problem-based learning in K-12 education: Is it effective and how does it achieve its effects?American Educational Research Journal, 48, 1157-1186. doi:10.3102/0002831211419491
60.
ZhangM.ParkerJ.EberhardtJ.PassalacquaS. (2011). “What’s so terrible about swallowing an apple seed?” Problem-based learning in kindergarten. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20, 468-481. doi:10.1007/s10956-011-9309-0
61.
ZsigaP. L.WebsterM. (2007). Why should secondary educators be interested in self-directed learning?International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 4, 58-68.
