Abstract
Young children can struggle to learn difficult disciplinary content and important skills for practicing science. Problem-based learning (PBL) may be useful for addressing such difficulties, yet evidence to support its usefulness in elementary school-aged children is limited. We considered the role of a PBL unit in improving students’ genetics content understanding and their skills specific to creating arguments with coordinated claims, evidence, and reasoning. First- through fifth-grade students participated in a 6-week PBL unit about evolution and genetics. Students worked in mixed-age groups and were charged with illustrating a fictitious alien species, called markles, based on a series of facts they collected about factors expected to impact markle adaptation. This work was particularly unique in its assessment of student groups’ illustrated design solutions as arguments. Although students demonstrated weaknesses in coordinating claims and evidence overall, they were able to demonstrate success in gaining difficult genetics content knowledge and in preparing arguments with, at minimum, two components of well-constructed arguments, in most cases, providing a claim supported by reasoning. This work is informative for understanding student abilities, the potential of PBL, and considerations for its use.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
We noted that second graders performed more poorly on the posttest for question 3 than did other grade levels (Fig. 2). However, when we omitted second graders’ data from the analysis, there were still no statistically significant gains between pretest and posttest for question 3. Figure 1 illustrates pretest and posttest scores for question 3 with second graders included.
References
Allen, D. E., Duch, B. J., & Groh, S. E. (1996). The power of problem-based learning in teaching introductory science courses. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996(68), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219966808.
Araz, G., & Sungur, S. (2007). Effectiveness of problem-based learning on academic performance in genetics. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 35(6), 448–451.
Baser, D., Ozden, M. Y., & Karaarslan, H. (2017). Collaborative project-based learning: an integrative science and technological education project. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35(2), 131–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2016.1274723.
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: skills for the future. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415.
Belland, B. R. (2010). Portraits of middle school students constructing evidence-based arguments during problem-based learning: the impact of computer-based scaffolds. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(3), 285–309.
Belland, B. R., Glazewski, K. D., & Richardson, J. C. (2011). Problem-based learning and argumentation: testing a scaffolding framework to support middle school students’ creation of evidence-based arguments. Instructional Science, 39(5), 667–694.
Berland, L. K. (2013). Designing for STEM integration. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 3(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1078.
Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26–55.
Berland, L. K., Schwarz, C. V., Krist, C., Kenyon, L., Lo, A. S., & Reiser, B. J. (2015). Epistemologies in practice: making scientific practices meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
Bowker, R. (2007). Children’s perceptions and learning about tropical rainforests: an analysis of their drawings. Environmental Education Research, 13(1), 75–96.
Brooks, M. (2009). Drawing, visualisation and young children's exploration of “big ideas”. International Journal of Science Education, 31(3), 319–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802595771.
Chang, N. (2012). What are the roles that children’s drawings play in inquiry of science concepts? Early Child Development and Care, 182(5), 621–637.
Dentzau, M. (2019). Students’ changing mental models of the longleaf pine ecosystem after involvement in an outdoor environmental education program. Southeastern Naturalist in press.
Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning: a meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13(5), 533–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00025-7.
Duncan, R. G., & Reiser, B. J. (2007). Reasoning across ontologically distinct levels: students’ understandings of molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 938–959. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20186.
Duncan, R. G., Rogat, A. D., & Yarden, A. (2009). A learning progression for deepening students’ understandings of modern genetics across the 5th-10th grades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 655–674. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20312.
Elmesky, R. (2013). Building capacity in understanding foundational biology concepts: a K-12 learning progression in genetics informed by research on children's thinking and learning. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 1155–1175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9286-1.
Felton, M. K. (2004). The development of discourse strategies in adolescent argumentation. Cognitive Development, 19(1), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2003.09.001.
Ferreira, M., & Trudel, A. R. (2012). The impact of problem-based learning (PBL) on student attitudes toward science, problem-solving skills, and sense of community in the classroom. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 47(1), 23–30.
Ford, M. (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92(3), 404–423.
Ford, M. (2015). Educational implications of choosing “practice” to describe science in the next generation science standards. Science Education, 99(6), 1041–1048.
Gallagher, S. A., Stepien, W. J., Sher, B. T., & Workman, D. (1995). Implementing problem-based learning in science classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 95(3), 136–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1995.tb15748.x.
Garcia-Mila, M., & Andersen, C. (2007). Cognitive foundations of learning argumentation. In Argumentation in science education (pp. 29-45). Springer, Dordrecht.
Georgia Department of Education. (2015). Georgia performance standards. Retrieved from https://www.georgiastandards.org.
Grooms, J., Enderle, P., & Sampson, V. (2015). Coordinating scientific argumentation and the next generation science standards through argument driven inquiry. Science Educator, 24(1), 45–50.
Henderson, B. J., & Maguire, B. T. (2000). Three lay mental models of disease inheritance. Social Science & Medicine, 50(2), 293–301.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3.
Householder, D. L., & Hailey, C. E. (2012). Incorporating engineering design challenges into STEM courses.
Kereluik, K., Mishra, P., Fahnoe, C., & Terry, L. (2013). What knowledge is of most worth. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29(4), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2013.10784716.
Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., et al. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: putting learning by design(tm) into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–547. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1204_2.
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Harvard University Press.
Kwon, K., Shin, S., Brush, T. A., Glazewski, K. D., Edelberg, T., Park, S. J., et al. (2018). Inquiry learning behaviors captured through screencasts in problem-based learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(6), 839–855. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.1419496.
Leonard, M. J. (2005). Examining tensions in a “design for science”activity system: science versus engineering goals and knowledge. Tidskrift for Lararutbildning och Forskning [Journal of Research in Teacher Education], 3, 132–146.
Lewis, D., & Greene, J. (1983). Your child’s drawings: Their hidden meaning. London: Hutchinson & Co. Ltd.
Manz, E. (2015). Representing student argumentation as functionally emergent from scientific activity. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 553–590. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314558490.
McNeill, K. L. (2009). Teachers’ use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena. Science Education, 93(2), 233–268. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20294.
McNeill, K. L. (2011). Elementary students’ views of explanation, argumentation, and evidence, and their abilities to construct arguments over the school year. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(7), 793–823.
McNeill, K. L., & Berland, L. (2017). What is (or should be) scientific evidence use in k-12 classrooms? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(5), 672–689.
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Supporting students’ construction of scientific explanation through generic versus context-specific written scaffolds. In Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11625.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994–1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035.
Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2012). Improvements to elementary children’s epistemic understanding from sustained argumentation. Science Education, 96(3), 488–526.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), 447–472. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20276.
Sampson, V., Enderle, P., & Grooms, J. (2013a). Argumentation in science education. The Science Teacher, 80(5), 30.
Sampson, V., Enderle, P., Grooms, J., & Witte, S. (2013b). Writing to learn by learning to write during the school science laboratory: helping middle and high school students develop argumentative writing skills as they learn core ideas. Science Education, 97(5), 643–670. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21069.
Savery, J. R. (2015). Overview of problem-based learning: definitions and distinctions. In A. Walker, H. Leary, C. Hmelo-Silver, & P. A. Ertmer (Eds.), Essential readings in problem-based learning: exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows (pp. 5–15). West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.
Shaw, K. R. M., Van Horne, K., Zhang, H., & Boughman, J. (2008). Essay contest reveals misconceptions of high school students in genetics content. Genetics, 178(3), 1157–1168.
Smith, L. A., & Williams, J. M. (2007). “It’s the X and Y thing”: cross-sectional and longitudinal changes in children’s understanding of genes. Research in Science Education, 37(4), 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9033-6.
Springer, K., & Keil, F. C. (1989). On the development of biologically specific beliefs: the case of inheritance. Child Development, 60(3), 637–648.
Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York: Guilford.
Thomas, G. V., & Silk, A. M. (1990). An introduction to the psychology of children’s drawings. New York University Press.
Venville, G., & Dawson, V. (2012). The art of teaching science: For middle and secondary school. Allen & Unwin.
Venville, G., Gribble, S. J., & Donovan, J. (2005). An exploration of young children’s understandings of genetics concepts from ontological and epistemological perspectives. Science Education, 89(4), 614–633. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20061.
Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.668938.
Walker, A., Leary, H., Hmelo-Silver, C., & Ertmer, P. A. (Eds.). (2015). Essential readings in problem-based learning: exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.
White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Prediction-observation-explanation. In Probing understanding (pp. 44–64). London: Falmer.
Wirkala, C., & Kuhn, D. (2011). Problem-based learning in K-12 education: is it effective and how does it achieve its effects? American Educational Research Journal, 48(5), 1157–1186.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Peffer, M.E., Renken, M., Enderle, P. et al. Mission to Planet Markle: Problem-Based Learning for Teaching Elementary Students Difficult Content and Practices. Res Sci Educ 51, 1365–1389 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09875-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09875-z