Reflections on the Problem-based Learning (PBL) Curriculum
On Designing the Problem-based
Learning Curriculum
Teaching with this method is quite challenging. You have to be a thought rebel. Who would have thought that education from now on will need to emphasize a different set of skills? The world is transforming completely. Next year, there will be a million first grade students in Thailand who must use tablet computers according to government policy. They will have tablet computers as their personal learning equipment. Teachers cannot change this. The trend of ICT equipment is ever more powerful. It is teachers, not students, who are not equipped with the skills to facilitate learning from these small tools. With such new challenges, problem-based learning is the most important part of school. It is the way that learning will develop to include new skills necessary for the future. It will enable us to become thought rebels, demolishing old frameworks and transforming our methods of teaching. Many teachers say that it is unbelievable, that they don’t’ want to believe it, or that they still believe in the old way of teaching, but at this minute, we must begin to accept. Otherwise, teachers will not be preparing children for the realities of a changing world.
Q: “How did you develop the PBL innovation?”
Q: “How did you develop the PBL innovation?”
We, meaning all of the teachers at Lamplaimat Pattana School, developed this innovation. It is an innovation based on real practices, then exchanged to create joint learning and joint results. Together, we molded it into shape. The process of innovation is a process of human development. We created what we call Professional Learning Communities (PLC). As many may already know, Lamplaimat Pattana School began over a decade ago when the new Education Act was enforced. We make a point of designing our curriculum in line with the brain’s natural learning and with educational approaches outlined in the new Education Act – such as integrated learning, evaluation by actual conditions, and student-centered learning.
In the beginning, we didn’t know what we were supposed to do. Even the term “integrated learning” was new to us. We didn’t know how we were supposed to link the subjects. Interpreting these educational principles for people to understand was not an easy task. Take integrated learning. For example, the difference between going to pick flowers, putting them in a basket and bringing the basket to students, as opposed to sending students out to pick flowers to make a garland. The latter is integrated education. Some people have the slight misunderstanding that integrated education is bringing many different forms of knowledge and putting them in front of students, like flowers in a basket. This is not integrated education because it has no connections with or among the different subjects. In an attempt to design an integrated curriculum, we initially used a storyline to connect different lessons. The first year we failed miserably. Children were very engaged and enjoyed the stories, but we found that they did not understand the heart of the lesson.
I’d like to raise one recent example of children becoming very engaged but not reaching the heart of the lesson. One of our new teachers wanted to create interesting activities. She used characters from the Angry Birds game as an introduction to the material. After an hour of children having fun with Angry Birds, she couldn’t get to the heart of the material. We tried to resolve this shortcoming in the second year by introducing a project-based approach in PBL, as a way to integrate different material into the curriculum. I think we did better in getting the children to have more hands-on activities, to learn by doing, which is at the heart of project-based learning at Lamplaimat Pattana.
Still, we were not completely satisfied. In the third year, we added a component of thought process, which we categorized into four groups: rational thought, creative thought, predictive thought, and perceptive thought or directive thought. For each type of thought, we designed a loose rubric as a working framework. Then, we brainstormed tools that stimulated each type of thought and integrated them into every learning unit and every lesson plan, enabling teachers to put them into concrete practice. The results were quite evident in student assignments and projects in the third year.
In our fourth year, we encountered an important problem common to all teaching: the teaching was only able to get students to know, but not able to get students to understand. Back in 2006, the Backward Design approach to curriculum design had never been used in Thailand. We worked very hard in this fourth year to change teachers’ methods toward teaching for understanding. We designed our curriculum around this principle. Before integrating the curriculum, every teacher had to first understand the heart of each curriculum and the ways toward this understanding. We found that using the project-based approach can lead to understanding, but it cannot be in the form of fixed lessons. Problems that children encounter change constantly. Using last year’s lesson plans is not fun for teachers, and not interesting to the new group of students. When students are not interested, there is no in-depth learning and branching out. So we modify the lessons constantly according to learners’ interests, which has developed into the problem-based learning approach.
Since 2006, we have used problem-based learning in our curriculum, and we find that children become truly engaged in the problems. Children feel that the problems are relevant and that they must solve those problems. In solving these problems, children have to create innovations, which requires the integration of diverse skills, knowledge and people. Many other skills are also developed as a result of this process. This is how PBL came to be at Lamplaimat Pattana, as a result of our joint creative efforts. We work together. When someone comes upon something, whether a challenge or a possible solution, we interpret together and come to a common understanding.
Q: “How do you know that your curriculum will
achieve results according to standards?”
This is where teachers have to work even harder. No matter what children want to learn, teachers must examine each topic and identify which are the relevant lessons and how many. Then, teachers must review how these bodies of knowledge match the various standards and indicators. Upon close examination, teachers will find that every lesson has relevance to standard subjects. When they discover these connections, teachers must design the process for children to innovate, through which tasks and projects. Teachers must know beforehand how these tasks and projects are relevant to each standard and indicator.
Q: “Is it possible that PBL
teaching may cause children to be deficient in some standards?”
It’s
certainly possible, but we create so many curricula in each year that they most
certainly cover every standard. Some standards are even evaluated on a
duplicate basis through various projects. In designing the curriculum, having a
team of teachers is very important. Teacher development is most crucial. That’s
why we at Lamplaimat Pattana have designed a process for teacher development,
to make sure that teachers are equipped in knowledge and understanding, skills,
as well as spiritual capacity.
Q: “What is your role as administrator?”
I facilitate through administration. The school administrator is a leader who must point in the right direction. You don’t have to be a great administrator, but you have to point in the right direction. If your aim is off even by just one degree, the end result may be off by hundreds of kilometers.
2012
Comments
Post a Comment