My Thoughts on PBL

In the process of looking at and researching what Problem-Based Learning is about, I had the misconception that doing a PBL meant that I simply give the students a problem and they would learn all the required course content on their own through doing the problem.  My biggest worries about PBL were the following:

1. Will the students learn the required (often specific) course content?
2. Does doing a PBL mean the teacher shifts entirely to being a facilitator?  Is there no room for direct instruction?
3. Will doing a PBL take longer?  Will I have enough time to cover all the course material?

The answer to all three of my concerns would be addressed if I change my understanding of what a PBL should be (or is).  Teachers can’t just plop down a problem and expect students to learn exactly what is expected of them.  The PBL problem is supposed to drive the learning – it allows students to make better connections and make the learning more relevant to them.  This doesn’t necessarily mean they will figure out specific learning outcomes you have in mind.   Therefore, there needs to be structures placed around the PBL to provide more scaffolding/support for the students.

Throughout my journey studying PBL, I’ve stumbled upon two revelations:

There are degrees of inquiry!

Inquiry is a gradient, from a full-blown student centered inquiry a la Genius Hour to a teacher standing in front of class doing a simple science demonstration, letting the students ask questions.  To me inquiry is all about getting a student to wonder, motivating them to try to find out why something is the way it is.  It tests their ability to apply their learning, and demonstrate understanding.  It provides context and a reason as to why they are learning the things they are.  Is Project Based Learning or Problem Based Learning superior to a simple inquiry activity?  Is Genius hour the best?  I think whatever pedagogy teachers choose to use should depend on what the learning goal is.  Here is a rough diagram to demonstrate my thinking:

 (click on the image for a less blurry view)

I do want to note that adherence to prescribed learning outcomes means we’re “covering” the required material as set out by the ministry of education.

Direct instruction is OK!

There is nothing wrong with incorporating direct instruction throughout a PBL unit.  There may be specific tasks or skills that students need that they otherwise may not be able to learn.  I think the important thing is to make sure students are able to build the connection between what is taught by the teacher within the PBL and when the students actually go out and try to solve the problem.

 

When designing PBL units, I have kept these two things in mind and it has helped a ton.  I’ll probably go more into details on inquiry lesson designs that have and have not worked for me in the future.

Protected: PBL Progress 3

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Facilitating Group Collaboration – Seating Arrangements

Doing Problem-Based or Inquiry Learning in general requires students to be able to work freely with each other.  To this end, I have been experimenting over the last few years with different seating plan arrangements in my room:

Original Seating Arrangement

• This is what most high school labs look like.  Students are in pairs and the desks are aligned with the front of the classroom.  It’s convenient for direct instruction, but doesn’t promote group learning.

 

 

 

 

 

Seating Arrangement #2

• In this arrangement, I put the tables in groups of 4.  Students look directly at each other which would allow more collaboration.  The single biggest issue with this seating arrangement was that students had to really strain their necks to see the front of the class.  I had lots of complaints about this arrangement due to this from students.  I tried this arrangement for about a year and a half and then reverted back to the original plan for a year.

 

 

 

 

Seating Arrangement #3

• This is my current arrangement.  I am really liking this since students in groups are able to see the front of the classroom without having to strain themselves.  The “V” shape also allows me to go to each group and more easily address them.
• I first tried this arrangement the second half of last year.  This arrangement is also working really well with the chemical switch PBL.

 

 

 

 

Here is a picture of the current arrangement:

Protected: PBL Progress – Day 2

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

PBL Progress…

I introduced the PBL to my chemistry classes last Friday, as a quick intro on what is to come.  On Monday, I allowed the students to get into groups and we spent a little bit of time doing some brainstorming.  Since they probably didn’t have too much time (although they had the weekend but what 17 year old spends the weekend researching, right?) thinking about the PBL, I simply asked students the following questions:

• What do we need to know? [i.e. identify things that we may need to know or may be important in developing the switch]
• Are there any other wonderings or questions?

I was happy to see that students (both blocks) were able to identify the key ideas/course concepts that will be important in solving the PBL.  They realize that being able to measure and manipulate/control the reaction rate of a chemical reaction is going to be important.  They realize there is a need to understand what substances will and will not conduct electricity.

The biggest area students are struggling with is figuring out what chemical reactions will allow them to turn off the LED light.  This is anticipated.  My plan is to have a short brainstorming/sharing session at the beginning of each class, then move on to the unit/course material.  This could be a mini-lecture, activity or lab.  I will be making sure that students see a connection to their chemical switch as we go through the material.

Chemistry 12 PBL – Explained

I don’t think I explained what my last post on the chemical switch is all about, so let me clarify.

I am currently teaching chemistry 12 and I started working on developing a problem to drive the learning for the first unit of the course – reaction kinetics.  I am in the process of building a simple series circuit that lights up an LED light if it is connected.  The goal of the “problem” will be for students to connect/complete the circuit (by using chemicals to complete it via the alligator clips) and get the circuit to turn off by a specified time (the teacher tells the students the time it needs to turn off).

In order for students to accomplish this they need to think about the following:

• What chemicals might be able to complete the circuit?
• What chemical reactions might be able to break the circuit?
• How can the rate of a chemical reaction be measured?
• What factors affect the rate of a chemical reaction?

All these questions are related to the reaction kinetics unit and will drive the learning.  Students will need to research, brainstorm and experiment to be able to do the PBL.

To get ready for the PBL, I’ve been trying to make the circuit and the casing.  I bought the parts (resistor, 9v battery holder, LED light, switch, etc.) from an electronics store.  The plastic case was printed from a 3D printer.  The model for the case was designed by a former student. So far, I’ve been able to make two devices. I am looking to make 10-15, enough for my two chem 12 classes.  Pictures of the process is posted below!

3D printer making the plastic case!

The bare-bones circuit for the PBL – a switch, LED, 9v battery holder, a 300ohm resister and alligator clips.

The case connected turns on the LED.

The case and circuit put together, unconnected.

Chemical Switch PBL Part 1

So I am working on developing a PBL unit for my chemistry 12 class.  The problem involves students creating a “chemical switch” that turns off a circuit at a set time.  Students would learn about reaction rates, factors involved in them, how to measure them, etc. through the PBL.  I got the inspiration a while back from a chemical switch competition that the University of Tulsa hosts (I believe) annually.  I therefore decided to build the circuit the competition uses and bought a whole bunch of electronic parts; unfortunately, I realized a number of things:

• I really suck at soldering
• The Tulsa competition circuit is parallel. The only reason for this is to let the user know when it’s “on”.
• I REALLY suck at soldering.

Exhibit 1: I tried to use a circuit board to solder my parts on, but to no avail.

Not only was the circuit board difficult to work with, I had to line parts up with the casing that was made with the 3D printer.  Moreover, I had two different boards with slightly different sizes which meant only the smaller one was made for the casing.

Aside from the myriad of issues, I realized later that it also didn’t make sense (in terms of the amount of work involved) to create the parallel circuit as specified in the original circuit diagram.

Therefore I went back to the drawing board (after a few hours of struggle) and simplified the circuit, tested the circuit out with alligator clips (to make sure I had my positive and negative terminals lined up correctly) then began to create the circuit.

My proof of concept of the simplified circuit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Once again after a couple of hours of struggle (and realizing once again that my soldering skills are not up to snuff), I realized I didn’t actually NEED a circuit board.  I could simply solder the wires together and just house them in the case.

Final product after many hours of trial and error and labour. One down, 14 more to go…