Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Enthusiasm for problem-based learning (PBL) is widespread, yet there exists little rigorous experimental evidence of its effectiveness, especially in K–12 populations. Reported here is a highly controlled experimental study of PBL in a middle school population. Between- and within-subject comparisons are made of students learning the same material under three instructional conditions: lecture/discussion, characteristic small-group PBL, and solitary PBL. Assessments of comprehension and application of concepts in a new context 9 weeks after instruction showed superior mastery in both PBL conditions, relative to the lecture condition, and equivalent performance in the two PBL conditions, the latter indicating that the social component of PBL is not a critical feature of its effectiveness.

Keywords

instruction problem-based learning collaboration learning skills retention knowledge

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Albanese

Mitchell

(1993). Problem-based learning: A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68, 52–81.

Berkson

(1993). Problem-based learning: Have the expectations been met? Academic Medicine, 68(Suppl. 10), S79–S88.

Bransford

J. D.

Brown

A. L.

Cocking

R. R.

(Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Capon

Kuhn

(2004). What’s so good about problem-based learning? Cognition and Instruction, 22(1), 61–79.

Colliver

(2000). Effectiveness of problem-based learning curricula: Research and theory. Academic Medicine, 75, 259–266.

Davies

(2000). Approaches to evidence-based teaching. Medical Teacher, 22(1), 14–21.

Dochy

Segers

Van den Bossche

Gijbels

(2003). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13, 533–568.

Gijbels

Dochy

Van den Bossche

Segers

(2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 27–61.

Higbee

K. L.

(2001). Your memory: How it works and how to improve it (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Marlowe & Company.

10.

Hmelo-Silver

(2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.

11.

Hmelo-Silver

Duncan

R. G.

Chinn

C. A.

(2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107.

12.

Kirschner

Sweller

Clark

(2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.

13.

Kuhn

(2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

14.

Kuhn

Pease

(2006). Do children and adults learn differently? Journal of Cognition and Development, 7, 279–293.

15.

Kuhn

Pease

(2008). What needs to develop in the development of inquiry skills? Cognition and Instruction, 26, 512–559.

16.

Kuhn

Pease

(2009). The dual components of developing strategy use: Production and inhibition. In Waters

H. S.

Schneider

(Eds.), Metacognition, strategy use, and instruction (pp. 135–159). New York, NY: Guilford.

17.

Kuhn

Pease

Wirkala

(2009). Coordinating effects of multiple variables: A skill fundamental to causal and scientific reasoning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 103, 268–284.

18.

Lahey

B. B.

(2008). Psychology: An introduction (10th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

19.

Lorayne

Lucas

(1974). The memory book: The classic guide to improving your memory at work, at school, and at play. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.

20.

Mayer

R. E.

(2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59, 14–19.

21.

Mitchell

Shkolnik

Song

Uekawa

Murphy

Garet

Means

(2005). Rigor, relevance, and results: The quality of teacher assignments and student work in new and conventional high schools. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research and SRI International.

22.

Norman

Schmidt

(1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of evidence. Academic Medicine, 67, 557–565.

23.

Pease

Kuhn

(2011). Experimental analysis of the effective components of problem-based learning. Science Education, 95, 57–86.

24.

Schmidt

H. G.

(1993). Foundations of problem-based learning: Some explanatory notes. Medical Education, 27, 422–432.

25.

Schmidt

H. G.

De Grave

W. S.

De Volder

M. L.

Moust

J. H. C.

Patel

V. L.

(1989). Explanatory models in the processing of science text: The role of prior knowledge activation through small-group discussion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 610–619.

26.

Schmidt

H. G.

Loyens

S. M. M.

van Gog

Paas

(2007). Problem-based learning is compatible with human cognitive architecture: Commentary on Kirschner, Sweller and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 91–97.

27.

Schwartz

Bransford

(1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 475–522.

28.

Schwartz

Martin

(2004). Inventing to prepare for future learning: The hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistics instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 129–184.

29.

Strobel

van Barneveld

(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.

30.

Surowiecki

(2005). The wisdom of crowds. New York, NY: Anchor Books.

31.

Van Merrienboer

J. J. G.

Sweller

(2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147–177.

32.

Vernon

D. T. A.

Blake

R. L.

(1993). Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine, 68, 550–563.

33.

Walker

Leary

(2009). A problem based learning meta analysis: Differences across problem types, implementation types, disciplines, and assessment levels. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(1), 12–43.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.05 MB

Problem-Based Learning in K–12 Education

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material