This paper describes a high school-university partnership that experiments with problem-based instruction in high school classrooms. The paper presents the project rationale, describes the organization of the collaboration, outlines our problem-based model, and proposes several hypotheses emerging from the responses of project participants. Our experiences suggest that an authentic context for experimentation and dialogue about reform may lead to innovation models that hold some legitimacy for all parties. Novices may gain a deeper, more grounded understanding of reform ideas. Testing and tinkering with reform models in actual classrooms may encourage more authentic dialogue that facilitates workable change. Finally, such collaborations may help address the professional needs of veteran teachers for interaction, recognition, and reflection.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrooksJ.G. & BrooksM.B. (1993). The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
2.
BrownJ.S.CollinsA. & DuguidP. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
3.
ClarkC.P.MossP.A.GoeringS.HerterR.J.LeonardD.RobbinsS.RussellM.TemplinM. & WaschaK. (1996). Collaboration as dialogue: Teachers and researchers engaged in conversation and professional development. American Educational Research Journal, 33(1), 193-231.
4.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19(6), 2-10.
5.
CubanL. (1984). How teachers taught. New York: Longmans.
6.
DeweyJ. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
7.
DoyleW. & PonderG. (1977-78). The practicality ethic in teacher decisionmaking. Interchange, 8(3), 1-12.
8.
EngleS. (1960). Decision making: The heart of social studies instruction. Social Education, 24 (6), 301-304, 306.
9.
EricksonF. (1989). Learning and collaboration in teaching (research currents).
10.
EvansR.W. & SaxeD.W. (1996). Handbook on teaching social issues. Washington: National Council for the Social Studies.
11.
GoodladJ. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future. New York: McGraw-Hill.
12.
GoughN. (1989). From epistemology to ecopolitics: Renewing a paradigm for curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21, 225-241.
13.
HertzburgH.W. (1981). Social studies reform: 1890-1980. Boulder, CO: SSEC Publications.
14.
HuntM.P. & MetcalfL.E. (1968). Teaching high school social studies: Problems in reflective thinking and understanding. (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
15.
JennessD. (1990). Making sense of the social studies. New York: Macmillian.
16.
KaganD.M. (1993). Laura and Jim and what they taught me about the gap between educational theory and practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.'
17.
LortieD. (1975). School-teacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18.
McKeeS.J. (1988). Impediments of implementing critical thinking. Social Education, 52 (6), 444-446.
19.
National Council for the Social Studies (1994). Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for social studies. Washington: National Council for the Social Studies.
20.
NewmannF.M. (1991). Higher order thinking in the teaching of social studies: Connections between theory and practice. In VossJ., PerkinsD. & SegalJ. (eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 381-400). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21.
NewmannF.M. & OliverD. (1970). Clarifying public controversy: An approach to social studies. Boston: Little, Brown.
22.
OliverD. & ShaverJ.P. (1966). Teaching public issues in the high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
23.
OnoskoJ. (1991). Barriers to the promotion of higher order thinking in social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education, 19(4), 341-366.
24.
OnoskoJ. & SwensonL. (1996). Designing issue-based unit plans. In EvansR.. & SaxeD.W. (Ed.), Handbook on teaching social issues (pp. 89-98). Washington: National Council for the Social Studies.
25.
ParkerW.C.MuellerM.WendlingL. (1980). Critical reasoning on civic issues. Theory and Research in Social Education, 19 (4), 7-32.
26.
ResnickL. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16(9), 13-20. .
27.
RossiJ.A. (1995). In-depth study in an issues- centered social studies classroom. Theory and Research in Social Education, 23 (2), 87-120.
28.
RuggH.O. (1936). American life and the school curriculum: Next steps toward schools of the living. Boston: Ginn.
29.
SarasonS. (1982). The culture of the school and the problem of change. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
30.
SayeJ.W. (1994). Reasoning with democratic values: The paradox of the issues-centered curriculum. Journal of Social Studies Research, 18 (1), 48-54.
31.
ShaverJ.P. & LarkinsA.G. (1973). Decisionmaking in a democracy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
32.
ShaverJ.P.DavisO.L. & HelburnS.W. (1980). An interpretive report on the status of precollege social studies education based on three NSF-funded studies. What are the needs in precollege science, mathematics, and social science education? Views from the field. Washington: National Science Foundation (Publication SE80).
33.
SizerT.R. (1984). Horace's compromise: The dilemma of the American high school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
34.
StevensonR.B. (1990). Engagement and cognitive challenge in thoughtful social studies classes: A study of student perspectives. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22 (4), 329-341.
35.
ThorntonS.J. (1991). Teacher as curricular- instructional gatekeeper in social studies. In ShaverJ. (Ed.), Handbook of research on social studies teaching and learning (pp. 237-284). New York: Macmillan.
36.
WallerW. (1961). The sociology of teaching. New York: Russell and Russell.
