Hi Bob and team,
What is important in a practical/short PBL approach is to get down to simulated 'doing' (i.e. solving a problem) instead of 'talking about' as fast as possible. So instead of providing students with readings/resources upfront, they are presented with a real-life problem in which the learning outcomes are practiced/simulated.
The 'talking about' (i.e. reflecting) isn't eliminated, it's just being moved to a little later in the process (reflecting on how we solved that problem, why we choose to do it this way, and what that means in wider contexts or for other similar problems). This can be done collaboratively or individually (there are some great ways to set this up in order to avoid having to assess groups, which is always tricky - but that's for another post).
The resources/readings aren't eliminated either - they are provided (or selected by learners depending on context/time etc.) just-in-time when they are solving a problem.
Let me give an example out of one of the courses in the Kiribati programme, in which student teachers need to learn the Teachers’ Code of Ethics.
Initially the approach was to make students read the Code of Ethics and answer (quiz) questions. Instead the lecturers are now working on a series of mini PBL modules that include the most pertinent ethics challenges that teachers might encounter in class.
What does this look like?
Each problem is a story of a teacher (and other characters if needed – all given a local name to make it sound real) who is/are in the middle of an ethical dilemma. Some of the stories ask for student teachers to ‘step into the shoes’ of the fictional teacher, others mention that the teacher asks for advice to the principal and student teachers are asked to prepare the principal’s advice (an email for example), others involve some higher body (another piece of writing very similar to how this would be done in real life), as appropriate, etc.
While they are solving these ethical problems, they use the Code of Ethics. However, it’s a ‘pull’ model’ rather than a ‘push’ model, though – the resource is pulled into the learning process by the learner (because they feel/know they really need it), rather than pushed by the lecturer upfront (which is often the case in more passive teaching approaches).
In this particular course, this is all done collaboratively, because it’s important that students are aware that often ethical problems don’t present themselves clearly and other people’s perspectives are important to consider. One of the learning outcomes talks about the ‘spirit’ of the Code and that needs to be reflected in the learning process too i.e. in the problems.
So unlike the academic PBL, this approach is much less time consuming and much less focused on research and a fixed process. The focus is on continually bringing real life into the classroom, not just by ‘talking about’ stuff that happens out there (including the sometimes endless reflections and ‘sharing thoughts’), but ask students to make decisions (stepping into the shoes of a fictional professional who applies these skills).
As I said earlier, it is important to include digital literacy components in PBL – often as simple as ‘Can you find out how this is done in another country?’. No lengthy research requirements, just a basic ‘have a peek online’. This is about creating the habit of doing quick Google searches when we’re stuck.
Another powerful addition is inviting a professional from the community into PBL components. PBL is a much better framework to do this than guests just giving a ‘talk’.
I’ll stop here – this is just a quick overview and example of what PBL looks like in the Kiribati programme. Bob, I’ll attempt to answer your questions in a separate post.
Hope this helps,
Anouk