Sign up for newsletter

January 1, 2002

Students Generating Web Pages: Implementation of Problem-Based Learning in the Classroom

By Lynn Dombrowski, Ed.D.

Rationale Behind the Research Study

Problem Statement

The purpose of this research was to determine if there were improvements in student skill acquisition and performance when students performed in a generative, collaborative environment. A team of students was required to research, write, and organize new material to create or "generate" a World Wide Web (WWW) document using HyperText Markup Language (HTML).

Rationale

The research focused on high school students enrolled in a Chemistry Technology class entitled "Chemistry in the Community." Student ownership was addressed by allowing the students to determine the specific environmental research topic. Among research topics chosen were recycling, the ozone layer, and nuclear energy. The process enabled student groups to analyze a problem statement, research a selected topic, develop course material and instructional lessons, and generate a Web document using HTML. Students used a variety of data resources, including the library, the WWW, subject matter experts (SMEs), and results from experiments.

Review of Literature

Generative Learning

Generative environments support individuals or groups of students in creating and representing meaning. The generative process of learning involves leading students to construct relations between prior knowledge and newly acquired information (Wittrock, 1992). These environments often provide a context within which students wrestle with relevant, authentic problems. The contexts allow students to identify problem areas, search for and analyze relevant data, weigh alternatives, and demonstrate understanding. Narayanan, Hmelo, Petrushin, Newsletter, Guzdial, and Kolodner (1995) further define generative problems as those that promote open-ended inquiry, provide for multiple solutions, and encourage the evaluation and combination of ideas during problem solving.

Generative learning is a multidisciplinary approach to structuring learning within the context of case-based instruction (Narayanan, et al., 1995). In this study students were given an open-ended problem and assigned the task of providing viable solutions. Student ownership through generation of the final product is essential to deeper learning.

Many studies submit that traditional classroom instruction provides students with bits of information that they are not able to apply productively outside classroom walls (Norman, et al. (1992), Harris (1995), and Narayanan, et al., 1995). Theories of constructivism suggest that in order for learning to be useful, students need to be actively involved in constructing new knowledge within meaningful contexts (CTGV, 1991). Research by Narayanan, et al. (1995) indicates that learning is more effective in generative problem solving where students identify and formulate problem statements, gather data, analyze alternatives, reflect, and articulate their understandings.

According to the authors, generative and problem-based learning strategies promote opportunity for critical thinking, metacognitive growth, recall of material, and transfer of information to long-term memory. The educational goal of problem-based learning environments is to motivate and engage students to explore open-ended ill-structured problems that they will face in the real world versus the traditional well-structured classroom problems.

Group Dynamics/Collaboration

Learners bring many different characteristics to the group that affect group performance and outcomes. As identified by Schein and Bennis (1965), learner characteristics include personality, age level, experience, knowledge, and preferences. Other more personal characteristics include how individuals present themselves, an individual's level of interaction with others, encouragement factors, motivation level, and learning model preference. These learner characteristics help establish and control group dynamics. "Dynamic factors highlight the changing and changeable nature of groups" (Schein, 1970, p. 89). In addition, groups are not static, rigid, and fixed upon limits. According to Schein (1970), the body of knowledge and skills that are brought to the group enables it to change, grow, and become more effective.

Group learning encourages students to inquire into the nature of experiences, to draw inferences, and to provide adequate solutions to "ill-structured" problems. In addition, role playing through assigned group titles, enables students to internalize information for the sake of learning. Cooperative learning increases learning because it causes motivational orientation to move from the external rewards to internal intrinsic satisfaction (Joyce & Weil, 1996). Research has determined that group interaction contributes to deeper learning and better solutions to problems than an individual could solve alone (Shaw, 1971). Thus, peer teaching may be a variable that influences student acquisition of knowledge and skills while working in a group.

Prior research by Carver, Leherer, Connell, and Erickson (1992) has shown that team members generally perform the responsibilities and tasks of more than one role, and that an individual is initially untrained to perform in other areas. The results of this research indicated that high school students interacted with each other by assisting and training other students in the group to perform complex unassigned tasks.

Method

Procedure

An inventory titled Project Teamwork Checklist was used to measure student knowledge/skill level. Students rated items on a Likert scale of 1 (Most like me) to 5 (Least like me). Gain scores in knowledge/skills were calculated and crossed with observed behaviors while students worked in a collaborative environment. Based on assigned task roles within the group, it was also beneficial to determine how students perceived knowledge/skills within their individual team responsibility compared to other team tasks. Descriptive measures were used to analyze gain scores from the team roles in assigned versus unassigned tasks.

Students began by accessing the NASA Exploring the Environment (ETE) Web site to learn about environmental issues. The ETE module was beneficial in educating students about earth science subject matter as well as introducing them to the Internet. Here they received instruction on problem-based learning (PBL) and became familiar with navigating on the Internet.

The classroom group activity took place over a six-week period. Six groups were assigned with six team members in each. Students met two to three times per week for 50 minutes each class. They had access to a computer lab, plus computers in the library where there was a direct connection by a T1 line to the Internet. Students took on the role of Project Manager, Instructional Designer, Graphic Designer, Computer Programmer, Content Writer, and Internet Specialist. To determine which role students would play; researchers administered the Project Teamwork Checklist (PTC), which functioned as a pretest to determine students' self-reported knowledge/skills/ability level of team responsibilities. A Likert scale of 1 to 5 was used, allowing students to rate their level of skills and knowledge of each item. Students were assigned team roles that best matched their self-perceived skill level.

The ETE PBL activity began after individual students were placed in the appropriate team positions. Students were instructed to work in groups while completing their daily activity guides and assignment sheets. Each student completed goal sheets that identified what each student believed he or she would contribute to the group's efforts. Students selected topics, wrote objectives, completed a needs and task analysis, and organized the scope and sequence of their on-line units.

The teacher encouraged students, assisted in group activities, and motivated them to actively participate. The teacher also purchased a 35mm camera for students to use to record actions and take photographs for their on-line units (such as recycling), purchased a flat-bed scanner to digitize photographs for Internet use, and helped students type and code their written units into HyperText Markup Language (HTML) using student's storyboards.

A guided approach to learning was used in the research study. Students worked together during the PBL process, and the teacher only intervened when students were off track or requested assistance. In accordance with research by Archer (1988), positive feedback was used when students were on task and working productively towards solutions to the identified problems. The teacher monitored group interaction throughout the PBL activity and encouraged students to work together to solve any problem.

Research Analysis

The analysis used to answer the question sought to determine the patterns of behaviors that students exhibited while they interacted in the Web-page development project. Ten observed behaviors were clustered into three categories:

• informative behaviors (Talking Within Group, Talking Outside Group, Reading, Writing)
• inquisitive behaviors (Agreeing, Asking Questions, Teacher Interaction)
• disruptive behavior (Nonverbal Response, Disagreeing, Interruptive Behavior)

Using a behavioral checklist that was created by the researcher, specific behaviors were observed in a time period of every five minutes while students were doing group work. A second observer assisted in collecting data on the same group that the researcher was observing. Inter-observer reliability was established during three days of group observation by comparing the two observers' behavior checklists. Three different groups were observed for 55 minutes each on three different days during the study to account for inter-observer reliability. This procedure helped to ensure that the method of collecting data was both accurate and reliable.

The dependent variables tested in the data analysis included gain scores from pretest to post-test on the Project Teamwork Checklist Inventory. The independent variables included group dynamics in the form of student behaviors. The following question was addressed in the research study.

Research Question: What are the relationships between assigned and unassigned team roles and perceived skill acquisition and knowledge level? The analysis used to answer this question sought to determine the relationships between group dynamics based on observed behaviors and gain scores in skill acquisition and knowledge level. By recording the means for these gain scores in the appropriate cells, the team roles associated with the greatest gains in particular knowledge/skills areas were determined. To answer the research question, Table 1 was constructed and descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data presented.

Analysis of Project Teamwork Checklist (Knowledge/Skills Inventory)

The Project Teamwork Checklist (PTC) was the inventory used to measure students' knowledge/skill level on competence and experience with team roles in the development group. Gain scores for each team role were calculated based on assigned task and unassigned task mean scores (see Table 1). The difference between student's pretest and post-test scores on the PTC inventory was calculated for each student based on the items that correlated with each team role. The first 62 items on the inventory were clustered into one of six categories, each representing knowledge/skills necessary for a team role within the group.

Items 1-13 represented skills needed or required by a Project Manager. Items 14-29 were items required by an Instructional Designer. Graphic Design skills were categorized into items 30-38, and Computer Programmer skills were grouped into items 39-45. Finally, items 46-53 represented Content Writer responsibilities and items 54-62 correlated with Internet Specialists. The remaining items, 63-75, dealt with whether students preferred working in groups or with individually assigned tasks.

Table 1

Mean Gain Scores on Knowledge/Skills Inventory for Assigned Versus Unassigned Task and Totals for Team Roles Versus Sample Group Mean Scores

*Note: Assigned task gain scores are based on six students' mean scores in designated area. Not assigned gain score is based on the remaining five team role gain scores averaged for each student, added together and divided by 6. The Role Totals includes all six students' (in each team role) gain scores on all items on the inventory. The Total column includes all 36 subjects' gain scores for each team role added together and divided by 36.

Items on the inventory were rated on a Likert scale from 1 (Most like me) to 5 (Least like me). By subtracting post-test scores from pretest scores, a higher gain would yield the largest difference, thus indicating an improvement in knowledge and skill rating. For example, one Project Manager rated items for project managers' skills on the pretest with 41 points, and the post-test score for these same items was 28. The difference of the two tests for these items is 13, showing a large gain.

Assigned Tasks Versus Unassigned Tasks

In reference to Table 1, the Content Writers rated themselves the highest from pretest to post-test items within their team role at a score of 16.5. In addition, Content Writers rated all unassigned tasks the highest at a score of 17.37. These scores reflect very high confidence and perceived increase in knowledge/skills from pretest to post-test for all Content Writers. All 36 students in the sample rated items in the Content Writer team role category fairly high with a mean score of 15.21. Internet Specialists rated assigned task items with a score of 12.7 and unassigned task items with a score of 15.54. By the end of the Web-page development project, these individuals felt more comfortable with knowledge and skill level both within the designated role and with the other team roles in the group.

Both Computer Programmers and Project Managers had similar results with rating items fairly consistent within the assigned team role at scores of 11.71 and 6.67, respectively, compared to unassigned tasks at scores of 12.03 and 7.3. However, the sample of 36 students rated Computer Programmer items very high at a score of 15.32, which indicates that many students felt they had acquired a large amount of knowledge within this content area. This is an important finding because the focus of the study was on Web-page development and learning how to use the computer and the Internet to develop on-line courses.

Assigned task areas that were rated "Least like me" with low or negative scores were Instructional Designers and Graphic Designers. Instructional Designers rated themselves as decreasing in knowledge and skill level from pretest to post-test. Many students were unfamiliar with Instructional Design task assignments, such as developing storyboards and flowcharts, and team responsibilities. However, these individuals rated themselves fairly high in the unassigned tasks with Instructional Designers scoring 8.9 and Graphic Designers scoring 12.95. In addition, the sample of 36 students rated items in Instructional Design with a score of 4.93 and Graphic Design with a score of 6.55, which suggests that overall students perceived some knowledge of these team roles.

Behavior Observation Form

The Behavior Observation Form was a systematic observation guide to monitor and calculate student interaction and behavior while working in a group. The observation checklist for this research study was derived from Fitzgerald's (1979) Classroom Behavior Record (CBR) Form. The task of coding student behaviors was simplified by utilizing code sheets that the researcher created. The modified CBR Form allowed the researcher to observe a group of student interactions rather than only one student at a time.

The following behaviors were utilized to define group dynamics: Nonverbal Response (NR), Talking Within Group (TW), Talking Outside Group (TO), Reading (RD), Writing (WT), Agreeing (AG), Disagreeing (DG), Interruptive Behavior (IB), Asking Questions (AQ), and Teacher Interaction (TI). Focusing on group dynamics, it was valuable to the research to determine how students interacted and communicated with each other, rather than on an individual basis. Therefore, the CBR Form was revised and adapted to meet the requirements for this study.

As students worked in groups, it was evident from these findings that verbal communication within the team was a priority. Students were more inclined to talk within their immediate group. Due to the nature of the tasks students were performing, Reading occurred at a high frequency followed by Writing. Reading occurred most often when students were researching in the library and on-line using Internet search tools. Writing was observed more as students were designing their storyboards and organizing the gathered material.

The results of this research indicated that high school students interacted with each other by assisting and training other students in the group to perform complex unassigned tasks. In agreement with Whitman (1988), group dynamics extended across team roles, as well as across groups within the classroom. For example, Graphic Designers were observed teaching other team members how to create computer graphics. In addition, outside teams hired a talented Graphic Designer from one group to assist their teams in developing a logo and artwork. Teams created invoices to bill teams, or companies as they were referred to, for their contracting services. This group activity was beneficial in teaching students how to deal with "real-world" issues that they may one day experience in the work place. The sharing of knowledge and skills, referred to as cross training, was a key element in the research study. Students did share ideas and skills with each other, which enhanced their perceived acquisition of knowledge across team roles.

Positive teacher interaction consisted of enthusiasm, caring, encouragement, and excitement that affected students by motivating them to succeed. The teacher also had extensive knowledge of the technology, which was instrumental in teaching students how to use the computer, software, and Internet. Students took pride in their work and participated in the group activity with the support and guidance from the teacher. This was apparent in the quality of every group's final on-line units. At the completion of the PBL activity the student Web page documents were displayed on the high school's home page.

It was important that the teacher encouraged all students to get involved and feel needed within the team. All team players had an important role to carry out to complete the task on time while working together. Thus, students walked away from the project with a sense of self-worth and confidence in doing the best job that they could perform. Valuable teacher interaction and the reoccurrence of productive behaviors helped to make this group activity a valuable learning experience.

Discussion and Conclusions

The application of the results of this study should provide educators and administrators with valuable ideas and alternatives for teaching students how to work in a group. Students will benefit from learning important communication and interpersonal skills, as well as knowledge about a selected topic and design/development/production skills. The results of this study support and extend prior research by 1) recording group dynamics in terms of observed behavior from a team of students; 2) determining gain scores in knowledge/skill level in relation to group dynamics; 3) identifying if there was an improvement of knowledge/skills in assigned versus unassigned team roles.

The benefit of this research is to develop a practical program for teaching students how to work in a group, while at the same time building valuable process and development skills. Educators can observe group behaviors and individual behaviors such as the ones presented in this research to shed light on an important aspect of group instruction in high school classrooms. It is important for students to learn how to interact in a group environment before entering the work force. Many high school students are entering college or the work force without the proper training and skills of working in a group environment. Educators, administrators, and employers frown on the lack of experience that students possess in areas of group-work, oral and written communication, and ability to meet deadlines, math skills, and computer skills. Many students lack the previous mentioned skills that will help them succeed in life. It is up to us as educators to teach them these valuable skills before sending them into the real world.

The structured format for teaching students how to develop a Web page and the individual/team assignments used in this research can be adapted for other courses. Educators can adopt a similar approach to incorporating problem-based learning activities into their classroom by following the sequence of events, time line, student assignments, and behavior checklists that have been written for this research study.

The results of this study should be beneficial for educators and administrators as they focus on implementing a problem-based learning strategy into the classroom. Gartner (1971) revealed that children learn better when they teach each other. The notion of peer teaching/cross training was evident in this research. Students learn valuable skills and knowledge from each other while working on solving complex problems. These skills may be transferable to other course assignments as well as to real-world problems outside of the classroom.

Additional research by Savery and Duffy (1995) has shown that students learn more when they generate or construct the end result rather than memorizing one right answer. The researchers recommend that teachers implement more open-ended inquiry from a constructivist's approach to learning in which students take pride and responsibility for their own learning. The current research provided students with the opportunity to work in groups while solving complex, ill-structured problems that have more than one solution. The students used their own reasoning skills and creativity to develop on-line modules that provided possible solutions to their environmental problems. When students asked for assistance or were observed as being off task, then the teacher intervened as suggested by Archer (1988). It was important that the teacher guide learners during the learning process.

This research helps bridge the gap between teacher-centered and student-directed learning. According to Grabinger (1996), teachers need to start incorporating more active learning projects into the classroom. Research has shown that students learn best by doing and by teaching other students. Getting students excited and involved in the learning process is a first step (Carver, et al., 1992). One way to implement this teaching strategy into the classroom is by using the tools and technology that are available. The Web-based project provided students with a generative environment that motivated students to research, write, organize, design, and develop their own on-line modules.

The experience and information acquired from this research identifies teaching strategies and techniques for educators to pursue in the classroom. Some of the recommendations for replicating this study include further investigation of learner characteristics and demographics of the students, task assignment and team responsibilities, a case study approach observing students over a longer period of time, knowledge and skill acquisition inventories, time of treatment and testing, group dynamics, and problem-based learning. If communication proficiency and group interaction are as crucial to success in school experiences as they appear to be, then building group skills is very important to students' occupational success later in life.

Email: Lynn Dombrowski

References

Archer, A. J. (1988). Feedback effects on achievement, attitude, and group dynamics of adolescents in interdependent cooperative groups for beginning second language and culture study. University of Minnesota, Dissertation Abstracts International, 49-12A, 3658.

Bergman, R. E. & Moore, T. V. (1990). Managing interactive video/multimedia projects. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.

Carver, S. M., Leherer, R., Connell, T., & Erickson, J. (1992). Learning by hypermedia design: Issues of assessment and implementation. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 385-404.

Chambers, J. A., & Sprecher, J. W. (1983). Computer-assisted instruction: Its use in the classroom. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1991). Technology and the design of generative learning environments. Educational Technology, 31(5), 34-40.

Dewey, J. (1916). How we think. Boston: Health.

Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. New York: Holt and Company.

Dombrowski, L. (1997). Implementation of collaborative PBL in the classroom. Unpublished Dissertation. West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.

Fitzgerald, G. (1979). Structured observation system: Code adaptations and data recording forms. Prepared for inservice presentation. (SOS Manual available through AEA 15, Ottumwa, IA).

Fosnot, C. T. (1989). Inquiring teachers, inquiring learners: A constructivist approach for teaching. New York: Teacher's College Press.

Gagný, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

Gartner, A., Kohler, M., & Riessmann, F. (1971). Children teach children: Learning by teaching. New York: Harper and Row.

Gokhale, A. A. (1996, Summer). Effectiveness of computer simulation for enhancing higher order thinking. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 33, 36-46.

Grabinger, R. S. (1996). Rich environments for active learning. Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

Harris, J. (1995, May). Educational telecomputing activities: Problem-solving projects, "Mining the Internet" Column. The Computing Teacher, (now Learning and Leading with Technology). Reproduced with permission.

Joyce, B. & Weil, M. (1996). Models of teaching. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Kilby, T. (1996). Web-Based Training Information Center. [On-line serial].

Lynch, W. W. (1977). Guidelines to the use of classroom behavior instruments by school psychologists. School Psychology Monograph, 3, 1-22.

Narayanan, N. H., Hmelo, C. E., Petrushin, V., Newsletter, W. C., Guzdial, M., & Kolodner, J. L. (1995). Computational support for collaborative learning through generative problem solving. Atlanta, GA: EduTech Institute.

Norman, G. R. & Schmidt, H. G. (1992, September). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 67(9), 557-565.

Savery, J. R. & Duffy, T. M. (1995, September-October). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 31-38.

Schein, E. H. (1970). Organizational psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Schein, E. H. & Bennis, W. G. (1965). Personal and organizational change through group methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Shaw, M. E. (1971). Group dynamics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Smith, C. W. (1992). Identification of knowledge factors and skill factors for the preproduction stage of developing interactive videodisc courseware. Unpublished Dissertation. West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.

Tobin, K., Tippins, D. J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Wager, W. W., & Gagný, R. M. (1988). Designing computer-aided instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (ed.). Instructional Designs for Microcomputer Courseware. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Whitman, N. (1988). Peer teaching. College Station, TX: Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE).

Wittrock, M. C. (1992). Generative learning processes of the brain. Educational Psychologist, 27(4), 531-541.