Problem Based Learning in an Online Course on Technology Assessment M. Annette Rose Jim Flowers ITEA 64th Annual Conference 15 March, 2002 A research study was conducted that examined student communication during a PBL activity in an online course. This Web-based course was

ITEA 64th Annual Conference Results of a case study Web-based course Examined student communication Asynchronous Conference Two group structures Cooperative Collaborative Problem based instructional strategy March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

Problem Based Learning A curriculum organizer and an instructional strategy Authentic, ill-structured problem Match for adult learners Strategy usually includes: First , encountering the problem Self-directed learning Reflection Dialectic discourse with others| Savery, J.R., & Duffy, T.M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructvist framework. Educational Technology, September-October, 31-38. March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

Identifies learning needs Selects info Selects process PBL Problem-solving Student Identifies learning needs Selects info Selects process Generates solutions technological social economic environmental Attempts prescribed goals Applies info Applies process Create technological models or drawings Facilitator Helps identify & assess learning goals Helps identify & assess info Facilitates multiple processes Poses probing questions Challenges learner’s ideas Prescribes learning goals Selects information Prescribes process Create design brief Learning Goals More inference, synthesis, evaluation Authentic, ill-structured problem More application of design techniques Well formulated problem statement Student Roles and Responsibilities Facilitator Roles and Responsibilities Learning Goals

Small Group Strategies Cooperative Teacher-structured Roles assigned Process specified Close monitoring Cognitive Conflict Collaborative Student-structured Roles negotiated Process negotiated Sporadic monitoring Mutual Understandings March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

ITEA 64th Annual Conference Need & Opportunity Need Scrutinize peer-directed group learning strategies in order to identify the conditions which best promote higher order learning identify the competing forces for learning & producing Scrutinize PBL in order to Identify the cognitive skills elicited during PBL Identify where instructional interventions would be most beneficial in promoting cognitive skill use Opportunity of a Web-based Environment Permanent record Digital form is easily analyzed Potential equal participation Validate their use in asynchronous environments March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

ITEA 64th Annual Conference Research Questions What are the patterns of productive interactions during PBL in an a distributed asynchronous learning environment? What are the differences between cooperative and collaborative group structures during PBL? March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

ITEA 64th Annual Conference Research Design March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

ITEA 64th Annual Conference Research Context Online course from Ball State “Technology: Use and Assessment” Pilot course in a newly approved online Master of Arts in Technology Education. Instructor’s first online course Blackboard CourseInfo management software March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

ITEA 64th Annual Conference Standard 13: “Students will develop the abilities to assess the impact of products and systems.” ITEA, 2000, p.133 March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

Research Participants 20 of 26 online graduate students Off-campus & on-campus (all online) Wellness, education, and technology ed. Only 1 of 20 had previously taken an online class. March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

Six Heterogeneous Groups Three cooperative groups Roles assigned by the instructor: Schools Specialist Health & Wellness Specialist Economics Specialist Web Specialist (Lead Editor) Monitored every 2 to 3 days Three collaborative groups Group process is negotiated, no roles assigned Monitored every 4 to 6 days March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

ITEA 64th Annual Conference Problem Conduct a technology assessment of the health and wellness implications of computer use by children (as if for the U.S. Department of Education.) Deliver a formal online report that makes recommendations for school districts to promote lifelong wellness. March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

Blackboard’s Discussion Board Forum March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

ITEA 64th Annual Conference Methodology Student information survey Treatment Perceptions surveys Analysis of transcripts March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

Dependent Variables & Analyses March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

Patterns of Productive Interactions

Patterns of Productive Interactions

Patterns of Productive Interactions

Patterns of Productive Interactions

ITEA 64th Annual Conference Conclusions: PBL Regardless of group structure, the PBL activity: was student-driven students contributing 90% of messages an average of 5.2 messages per participant per week Functions and cognitive skills changed over time Cognitive dialogue was dominate during mid activity Organization dialogue was prominent during final week Cognitive skills were equally represented with the exception of in-depth clarification (9%) Surface level processing (64%) was more prevalent Messages were interconnected (86%) March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

Conclusions: Comparisons by Groups Overall differences in function and cognitive skill could NOT be attributed to group structure. Cooperative structure offered learning advantages during the initial weeks as evidenced by: Higher levels of deep processing Higher levels of interconnectedness of messages Higher perceptions of intersubjectivity March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

ITEA 64th Annual Conference Objectives Introduction Differentiate problem-based learning from problem solving Differentiate small group strategies Identify research question Describe the context Described the research study Identify findings Implications for PBL facilitators March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio

PBL vs. Problem-solving Student generated learning goals Student selects information Problem-solving March 16, 2002 ITEA 64th Annual Conference Columbus, Ohio