PBL approach: Hmelo-Silver (2004) defined the PBL approach as “an instructional method in which students learn through facilitated problem-solving”. Here students learn by solving problems and reflecting on their experiences (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980). These problems are presented to the students as difficult (Spronke-Smith, 2005; Vardi & Ciccarelli, 2008). Students have to plan and learn by themselves, which is necessary to solve problems (Albanese & Mitchell, 1993; Hmelo-Silver, 2004;
Solomon & Finch, 1998). Thus, they learn both content and thinking strategies, and the role of the teacher is that of a guide in this process. Hmelo-Silver (2004) also noted that students work in collaborative groups to identify what they need to learn in order to solve a problem, engage in self- directed learning, apply their new knowledge to the problem, and reflect on what they learned and the effectiveness of the strategies employed (http://www.pbl.org/pbl/generic_pbl.htm).
Conventional or traditional approach: this refers to the standard lecture method of teaching mostly used at the higher education level (mostly universities & colleges), especially when the teacher- to-student ratio is high (Biggs, 2005). For instance a study developed in Spain showed that 60% of the professors almost always use the lecture method (Baena et al., 2004). The lecture method has received criticism (Azer, 2009): there are few opportunities to reflect on learning, it does not foster creativity or critical skills, it is not motivating and it does not ensure the application of learning in practice (Ruiz- Gallardo, Castano, Gomez-Alday & Valdes, 2011). The lecture method is also not a suitable
21
instructional method for teaching children at primary grades as these learn more by engaging in various pupils’ activities (Leach & Scott, 2000).
Higher order thinking skills (HOTS): these are creative and critical thinking skills. HOTS are built from the lower order thinking skills. According to Bloom’s taxonomy or hierarchy of the cognitive domain (1956), HOTS are placed in a higher position; they are presented in the following enhancing order: content knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. The higher they are placed on the taxonomy, the more difficult they are to learn and acquire, and as a result the higher they are the more they are worth. For example, synthesis means putting together content knowledge, its understanding, application and analysis, and then creating something new. Creativity is a mental ability to invent something novel from some existing knowledge, after comprehending and applying it (Tat, Preechaporn, Kin & Kheong, 2011). Creativity brings about innovations, which sustain and boost a society’s economy.
Constructivism: Savery & Duffy (2001) defined constructivism in PBL as a philosophical view on how we come to understand or know. Their philosophical views were based on the work of Rorty (1991) and Von Glaserfeld (1989). They characterised their views in terms of three primary propositions:
1.8.1 Understanding is in our interactions with the environment.
This is the core concept of constructivism. We cannot talk about what is learned separately from how it is learned, as if a variety of experiences all lead to the same understanding. Rather, what we understand is a function of the content, context, learner activity, and, perhaps most importantly, learner goals. Since understanding is an individual construction, we cannot share understandings but rather we can test the
22
degree to which our individual understandings are compatible with experiences. An implication of this proposition is that cognition is not just within the individual but rather is a part of the entire context, i.e.
cognition is distributed.
1.8.2 Cognitive conflict or puzzlement is the stimulus for learning and determines the organisation and nature of what is learned.
When we are in a learning environment, there is some stimulus or goal for learning – the learner has a purpose of being there. That goal is not only a stimulus or goal for learning, but it is a primary factor in determining what the learner attends to, what prior experiences the learner brings to bear in constructing an understanding, and, basically, what understanding is eventually constructed. In Dewey’s terms it is the “problematic” that leads to and is the organiser of the learning (Dewey, 1938; Rochelle, 1992). For Piaget it is the need for accommodation when current experience cannot be assimilated in existing schema (Piaget, 1977; Von Glaserfeld, 1989). Piaget (1977) and Von Glaserfeld (1989) prefer calling the learner’s “puzzlement” as the stimulus and organiser for learning since this more readily suggests both intellectual and pragmatic goals for learning. The important point, however, is that it is the learner’s goal that is central in considering what is learned.
1.8.3 Knowledge evolves through social negotiation and through the evaluation of the viability of individual understandings.
The social environment is critical to the development of our individual understanding as well as to that of the body of propositions we call knowledge. At the individual level, other individuals are a primary mechanism for testing our understanding. Collaborative groups are important because we can test our own understanding and examine the understanding of others as a mechanism for enriching,
23
interweaving, and expanding our understanding of particular issue or phenomena. As Von Glaserfeld (1989) noted, other people are the greatest source of alternative views to challenge our current views and hence to serve as the source of puzzlement that stimulates new learning.