Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Facilitation of authentic teaching and learning in a problem-based learning (PBL) environment
(USC Thesis Other)
Facilitation of authentic teaching and learning in a problem-based learning (PBL) environment
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running Head: AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 1
FACILITATION OF AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN A PROBLEM-BASED
LEARNING (PBL) ENVIRONMENT
by
Kay Beach
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2017
Copyright 2017 Kay Beach
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 2
Acknowledgements
The inspiration and completion of this study is first and foremost, owed to my students, past,
present and future. As a teacher, I have both the honor and the challenge of better understanding
our youth, our keiki, and the way they desire to learn about the world around them. Because of
them, this study is a true, authentic reflection of the power of a meaningful teaching practice.
Furthermore, I acknowledge my study participants, both teachers and students, for taking the
time to tell their narrative that lends to the literature and better understanding of what authentic
teaching and learning is. I have immense gratitude for my dissertation chair, Dr. Alan Green,
who has seen me eye to eye since our first encounter, and who’s expertise I will continue to
value and seek in the future. Thank you to Dr. Rob Filback, for taking the chance with this
dissertation topic, in which I hope can make connections to your valuable work in education.
Mahalo to Dr. Tammy Jones, not only a dissertation committee member, but a mentor teacher
and leader in my professional life. Thank you to Dr. Julie Slayton, whose precise and organized
teachings of the qualitative method of inquiry laid the backbone for this study. Finally, thank you
to my family, who has always valued learning as a lifelong journey, and my friends and
colleagues who inspired me and supported me every step of the way.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 3
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements 2
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 6
Abstract 7
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY 8
Background of the Problem 9
Educational Reform in the 21
st
Century 10
The Call for PBL 12
Statement of the Problem 14
Purpose of the Study 15
Significance of the Study 16
Limitations and Delimitations 17
Limitations 17
Delimitations 18
Organization of the Study 18
Definitions and Terms 19
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 21
Overview of Problem-Based Learning 21
The Challenges of Implementing and Understanding PBL 24
Constructivist Theory 26
Facilitator’s Role in a Problem-Based Learning Environment 28
Guided Instruction 29
Self-Directed Learning 31
Personalized Learning 32
Authenticity of the Facilitator and Learner in a PBL Environment 34
Authenticity and PBL 35
Authentic Facilitators 36
Authentic Learners 38
Conceptual Framework 39
Summary 40
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 42
Sample 42
Setting 42
Participants 43
Data Collection Protocols and Approach 44
Interviews 44
Observations 47
Data Analysis 49
Credibility and Trustworthiness 51
Ethics 52
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS 53
Background of Site 54
Background of Participants 54
Teacher Participants 54
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 4
Student Participants 55
Research Question #1: How Does the Teacher, as a Facilitator, Guide Students to Construct
Their Own Learning in a Problem-Based Learning Environment? 56
Theme 1- Build a Community of Learners 56
Theme 2- Set up a Student-Centered Learning Environment 58
Theme 3- Establish a Culture of Feedback 60
Theme 4- Provide Opportunities for Reflection 61
Theme 5- Foster Meaningful Connections to Learning 62
Research Question #2: How Does the Teacher, as a Facilitator, Promote Authentic Teaching
and Learning in a PBL Environment? 64
Promoting Authentic Learning 64
Promoting Authentic Teaching 72
Research Question #3: What Are the Best Practices for Teachers to Facilitate a Personalized
PBL Environment? 74
Theme 1- Set Up Purposeful Routines and Clear Targets 74
Theme 2- Provide Student Choice and Voice 77
Theme 3- Co-Construct Understanding and Be the Model 77
Theme 4- Ask Questions and Have Conversations 78
Theme 5- Allow for Multiple Opportunities and Modalities Before Assessing 79
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION 84
Setting Up the Learning Environment for Student Construction of Knowledge 85
Building a Community of Student-Centered Learning 86
Creating a Culture of Feedback and Reflection 88
Foster Meaningful Connections to Learning 91
Setting Up the Learning Context for Authentic Learning 92
Framing 93
Practice 97
Exhibit 98
Maintaining a Teaching Practice to Promote Authentic Teaching 99
Practice What You Preach 100
Setting Up Day-to-Day Routines for Personalization 102
Intentional Planning 103
Facilitating Consistent Routines to Promote Understanding 106
Personalization and Assessment 109
A New Conceptual Framework – “The PBL Mindset” 110
Implications for a PBL Mindset 114
Recommendations for Further Study 116
Conclusions 118
References 120
Appendix A: Teacher Participant Interview Guide 1 129
Appendix B: Teacher Participant Interview Guide 2 131
Appendix C: Student Participant Interview Guide 133
Appendix D: Classroom Observation Protocol 135
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 5
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Findings 82
Table 2: Summary of The Learning Environment & Construction of Knowledge (RQ #1) 86
Table 3: Summary of the Learning Context for Authentic Learning (RQ#2, Part 1) 93
Table 4: Summary of the Teaching Practice for Authentic Teaching (RQ#2, Part 2) 100
Table 5: Summary of Day-to-Day Routines and Personalization 103
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 6
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 40
Figure 2: The PBL facilitator’s role 85
Figure 3: Original Conceptual Framework 111
Figure 4: Framework Based on Findings 112
Figure 5: The new conceptual framework for a PBL mindset 113
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 7
Abstract
This qualitative study examined how the facilitation of students in a PBL environment may lead
to authentic teaching and authentic learning in K-12 educational settings. The rationale and
purpose of this study is to explore the PBL environment as a vehicle for reaching educational
goals, rather than PBL as a means to an end. This study seeks to understand the role of the
facilitator in guiding students to construct their own learning. Likewise, the study investigated
the best practices implemented by teachers when facilitating a personalized PBL environment,
and sought to understand whether these are best practices that are transferrable to other learning
environments. Using qualitative methodology, this case study focused on Central Institute in the
State of Hawaii, a private institution that specializes in high school PBL environments. The study
population consisted of three teacher participants and two student participants. Interviews and
classroom observations were conducted and collected as primary data points. Data were coded
using open coding, selective coding and thematic categories. Despite the growing literature in the
fields of PBL and personalized learning, as presented in Chapter Two, the findings of this
qualitative study highlight the discrepancies that exist between the literature and the practice.
The primary findings unearth an understanding that highlights the importance of bridging what is
written in the literature and what authentic teaching and learning looks like in practice.
Furthermore, the findings highlight the role of the facilitator in adopting a project-based practice
that focusing on fostering community, setting up authentic learning contexts, maintaining a
continuous personal investment in the growth of the teaching practice and setting up day-to-day
structures that reflect a meaningful learning environment where students can construct their own
learning.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 8
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Since 2002, the United States’ vision for learning focused on pursuing higher and more
equitable standards for children, regardless of their socioeconomic status, through No Child Left
Behind (NCLB) initiatives. Despite the challenges that the U.S. education system continues to
face as a result of NCLB, the concept of including all children in education initiatives was an
evolution of our thinking as a society (Darling-Hammond, Wilhoit, & Pittenger, 2014). Today,
the federal government’s vision for education focuses on the sustainability of the economy,
arguing that in order for America to succeed in the global economy, every student must be
provided with a complete and competitive education based on knowledge and innovation (White
House, 2016). The Obama Administration’s educational reforms focused on four key objectives:
(1) higher standards and better assessments that will prepare students to succeed in college and
the workplace, (2) ambitious efforts to recruit, prepare, develop and advance effective teachers
and principals, (3) smarter data systems to measure student growth and success, and (4) a
national effort to turn around lowest-achieving schools (White House, 2016). Shifting the
nation’s vision for learning from accountability based on test-scores and compliance to one of a
culture of inquiry and continuous improvement is a monumental, yet challenging, paradigm
(Darling-Hammond et al., 2014). Despite the call for change, the arrival of the digital world, and
growing international demands, educators are still uncertain when it comes to the best way to
organize and deliver instruction for our youth (Markham, 2011).
In the State of Hawaii, the Department of Education is following suit in the wake of
federal reform with three goals; (1) all students demonstrate they are on a path towards success
in college, career and citizenship; (2) the department has a high-performing culture where
employees have the training, support and professional development to contribute effectively to
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 9
student success; and (3) the system and culture of the department work to effectively organize
financial, human and community resources in support of student success (Hawaii Department of
Education Strategic Plan, 2016). Hawaii’s strategic plan aligns with the national objectives set by
President Obama. School reform on a local and national level is being driven is more and more
from the demand for authentic teaching and learning. Hawaii’s dynamic relationship between
indigenous culture, diverse multiculturalism, and the one-district model for the state creates an
environment where reform has an opportunity to take on an innovative approach. Although
limited and still a new phenomenon for many, examples of problem-based, project-based and
place-based models are becoming more and more popular among Hawaii’s education programs
in order to bring together the values of the islands with the educational needs of Hawaii’s keiki
(children). These programs allow for a space where teachers, or facilitators, can authentically
engage with their students in problems that are apart of both teachers’ and students’ realities at
school and at home.
This chapter sets the context of the study by presenting a brief overview of today’s
educational landscape in the United States, along with a brief overview of Problem-Based
Learning (PBL). Also presented in this chapter are the purpose, research questions, methods, and
significance of the study.
Background of the Problem
In setting the stage for understanding this problem, this section provides an in-depth
overview into the current educational issues and reforms in the United States that create a
platform for approaches like PBL. How PBL fits into this educational landscape can be answered
by looking at the evolution of reform throughout history.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 10
Educational Reform in the 21
st
Century
Reform and efforts to influence instructional practices in American schools on a large
scale have never been sustainable enough to have an impact on a large scale (Elmore, 2006).
There will always be the number of schools that willingly adopt innovative measures, but in
order to make fundamental changes at the core of the U.S. education system, reforms must focus
on the relationships and organizational practices of reform adopters versus the number of
adopters (2006). Additionally, reforms raise the questions of what the end goal is, and what
makes a “good” school that meets the expectations of our nation? (Cuban, 2000).
During the progressive era of the late 1800s and early 1900s, intellectuals such as John
Dewey developed ideas that altered the core of schooling from a teacher-centered pedagogy to a
pedagogy based on an understanding of children’s cognitive and learning processes. Although
the forms of innovation were limited to single schools that experimented with new pedagogical
approaches, the common aim was in “breaking the lock of teacher-centered instruction and
generating high levels of student engagement through student-initiated inquiry and group
activities” (Elmore, 2006, p. 16).
When looking at the curriculum reformers of the 1950s and 1960s, it is clear that their
aspirations were not fundamentally different from reformers in the progressive era. “The object
of study was not the assimilation of facts, but learning the methods and concepts of scientific
inquiry by doing science in the same way that practitioners of science would do it” (Elmore,
2006, p. 20). These reforms, however, failed to target the core of instructional practices, and
continue to have repercussions today.
In line with the innovative reforms of the progressive era, modernizing education to meet
the goals of the nation today may lie in finding a new balance between the teacher and the
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 11
student (Elmore, 2006; Trilling & Fadel, 2009). Reflecting on a particular school in Singapore,
known for its success in modernizing its education system and for the high levels of academic
performance students achieve, Tay Lai Ling, the deputy director for Curriculum Policy and
Pedagogy says, “We have come a long way in changing our teaching and learning methods, but
our teachers and students still have farther to go. We have a new slogan at the (Singapore)
Ministry (of Education) that will hopefully encourage further change. The slogan is “Teach Less,
Learn More” (2009, p. 37). The balance between teacher-directed and learner-centered education
is what will ultimately guide students for the knowledge economy of the 21
st
century that awaits
them at the end of the K-12 system.
More mainstream reforms today, such as the national reforms of the federal government,
emphasize the skills that students need when they graduate from the K-12 system. Skills such as
critical thinking, analytical thinking, problem-solving, and time management, taken from David
Conley’s (2005) “habits of mind” and adapted from Art Costa and Bena Kallick’s (2000) original
Habits of Mind, have been widely accepted as the skills needed by students in order to succeed in
entry-level college courses (Larmer, Mergendoller, & Boss, 2015). Furthermore, if students need
to be college and career ready, students need cognitive strategies (such as problem formulation,
research, interpretation, communication, precision and accuracy), content knowledge, learning
skills and techniques and transition knowledge and skills (Conley, 2013; Darling-Hammond et
al., 2014; Hart Research Associates, 2013). Darling-Hammond et al. (2014) argue that these
college and career ready skills are one of the methods to achieving meaningful learning in 21st
century classrooms.
However, research on the best practices for achieving these skills is varied and
inconsistent. Some, such as Darling-Hammond (2014), argue that these skills can be achieved
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 12
through the development and distribution of high-quality curriculum materials, assessment tools,
and curriculum-embedded assessments. The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative,
academic standards adopted in 42 states and the District of Columbia as of 2017, aim to help
classroom practitioners focus on student learning and ensure that all students are working
towards college and career readiness skills (CCSS, 2016). Pedagogies such as personalized
learning environments are also gaining momentum, as technology and differentiated,
individualized approaches to teaching and learning are becoming more accessible (Deed, Cox,
Dorman, Edwards, Farrelly, Keeffe & Yager, 2014).
Another method that encompasses these best practices for teaching is a PBL approach
that encompasses learning through mediums such as projects and place-based environments.
Fostering an inquiry-based learning environment by adopting PBL as a method for carrying out
meaningful learning and accountable instructional practices is one method that encompasses all
of the goals of the aforementioned reforms. PBL motivates and prepares students for college,
careers and citizenship, helps students meet standards and do well on tests that ask them to
demonstrate in-depth knowledge and thinking skills, allow teachers to teach in a more satisfying
way, and provide schools and districts with new ways to communicate and connect with
communities (Larmer et al, 2015).
The Call for PBL
Despite an increase in educators and schools that are adopting the PBL approach, PBL is
often misconceived as “doing projects” as a means of assessment or enrichment to other
learning, versus an evolved method of instruction that encapsulates all aspects of the learning
(Markham, 2011). In traditional education, knowing and doing were viewed as separate domains.
During more recent reforms such as NCLB, projects usually played the role of end-of-unit
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 13
assessment (2011). If students today are expected to graduate from the K-12 system as problem
solvers, responsible, confident and collaborative individuals, independent workers, critical
thinkers, effective workers and strong communicators, researchers argue that PBL is an effective
solution to the changing educational landscape (Larmer et al., 2015).
In developing the Gold Standard for PBL, extensive research conducted by education
practitioners and researchers at the Buck Institute for Education (BIE) shows that PBL increases
student motivation. In the High School Survey of Student Engagement, 275,925 students were
surveyed from 2006-2009. The study found that 49% of students in grades 9-12 reported being
bored in at least one class every day; another 17% were bored in every class, every day (Yazzie-
Mintz, 2010). The breakdown of the data shows that 81% thought the material wasn’t interesting,
42% thought the material wasn’t relevant to them, and 35% felt that there was no interaction
with the teacher. Students expressed that they preferred activities such as discussion and debate
(61%), group projects (55%) and student presentations (46%) (Yazzie-Mintz, 2010; Larmer et
al., 2015).
Additionally, BIE researchers argue that PBL contributes to the knowledge economy by
teaching the highly acclaimed college and career readiness skills, but also leadership skills,
collaboration skills and adaptability and transfer of knowledge skills (Larmer et al., 2015). PBL
gives students opportunities to become informed, active citizens, and teaches students to set
goals, undertake large-scale projects, obtain resources, and complete a performance-based
assessment that could be analogous to a real-life deadline (Larmer et al., 2015).
Despite criticisms about the openness of inquiry, PBL methods can be aligned with
CCSS. Instructional practices in PBL allow teachers to focus on multiple standards at one time,
but dive deeper into more critical thinking of these standards, emphasize reading of informative
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 14
texts (ELA CCSS) and promote inquiry and evidence based reasoning, as well as real-world
applications of knowledge (Mathematics CCSS) (CCSS, 2016; Lamer et al., 2015).
School reform will continue to be influenced and marked with political oppositions, in
the ideological labels of “traditional” and “conservative” schools versus “progressive” or
“nontraditional” schools. However, Cuban (2000) argues that “good” schools of varying
approaches can exist, with a clear and shared purpose; a belief that all children can learn, a staff
that has developed a working culture that embodies the common beliefs and enjoys collective
action, and parents that are deeply involved with the school. Above all, a change in the balance
and relationship between the teacher and student, and a change in the student’s day-to-day
classroom experience are what will ultimately change the core of instructional practices in the
U.S. education system (Elmore, 2006; Lenz, Wells, & Kingston, 2015; Trilling & Fadel, 2009).
PBL as an approach to a learner-centered environment, where the facilitator’s role is to create an
environment where authentic teaching, authentic learning and student-constructed knowledge is
occurring, is a solution to these needs.
Statement of the Problem
The focus of this study is to examine how teachers can engage learners more
authentically. The problem addressed in this study is the lack of understanding of the role of the
facilitator in guiding students to construct their own learning in a PBL environment in a K-12
setting. The study will explore the facilitator’s role, the authentic nature of this and best practices
in guiding students to construct their learning in a PBL environment. This study attempts to
address the misconceptions of a PBL environment in today’s educational landscape. PBL is often
misconceived as a curriculum design, but should be viewed as a mindset and an approach to best
practices for teaching (Lenz et al., 2015; Boud & Feletti, 1997; Savery, 2006). It is important to
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 15
address these misconceptions by better understanding the role of the facilitator, which is
considered to be a fundamental component of understanding PBL in action (1997; 2006).
Additionally, this study will focus on bridging the gap between PBL and personalized
PBL. Personalized learning is a concept that gained popularity because of the need for flexible
teaching, student choice, richness of learning materials, interdisciplinary curriculum and a shift
away from large group instruction (Deed, Lesko & Lovejoy, 2014). By this definition, the need
for open learning construction and a personalized approach to learning aligns with the goals of
PBL. However, a demand to be able to track data, align to standards and adapt learning has led
the understanding of personalized learning to be more about intervention approach and the use of
technology (for example, game based learning) (Deed et al., 2014; Reddy et al., 2015).
Therefore, this study will view PBL as a type of personalized learning, but personalized learning
as a broader definition for learning.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to explore the PBL environment as a vehicle for reaching
educational goals, rather than PBL as a means to an end. This study seeks to understand the role
of the facilitator in guiding students to construct their own learning. Likewise, the study will
investigate the best practices implemented by teachers when facilitating a personalized PBL
environment, and seek to understand whether these are best practices that are transferrable to
other learning environments. This study seeks to answer the following research questions:
1) How does the teacher, as a facilitator, guide students to construct their own learning in a
Problem-Based Learning environment?
2) How does the teacher, as a facilitator, promote authentic teaching and learning in a PBL
environment?
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 16
3) What are the best practices for teachers to facilitate a personalized PBL environment?
Significance of the Study
The common interpretation of PBL often focuses on PBL as a single standing method of
teaching, an “all or nothing” approach that views PBL as the goal. If a school decides to focus on
PBL, then they are a “PBL school”, or if a teacher chooses to create a PBL environment in the
classroom, then it might be assumed as the only form of teaching that is happening. On the
contrary, PBL experts argue that PBL is not the goal, but a tool for guiding learners to reach their
goals, and that PBL coexists among other types of learning as well (Lenz et al., 2015). PBL,
therefore, should be viewed as a mindset for good teaching versus a prescribed method.
Personalized learning is also gaining popularity among educators as a way to involve
flexibility of space, student choice of activity, richness of learning materials, and integration of
curriculum areas (Horwitz, 1979; Deed, Lesko & Lovejoy, 2014). PBL and personalized learning
are often not considered to have the same goals, but by definition, appear to align. Personalized
learning spaces are fostered through social negotiations and interactions between teacher and
student, in order to democratize the learning process with the means of virtual, physical and
social space, similar to the goals of PBL (2014). Many personalized learning initiatives drive
through digital and virtual learning contexts, such as adaptable reading programs and
technological tools that allow for easier data tracking and differentiation (Balunaini, 2015).
Personalized learning environments that rely on technology require resources, where PBL
environment rely on the best practices of the teachers in the role of facilitators of learning.
This study is especially significant because personalized learning and PBL can be viewed
through the lens of personalized PBL, where students, with authentic facilitation, are able to
construct their own learning at their individualized place. Personalized PBL allows for students
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 17
to construct their own learning, not through a computer game that adapts to their reading and
math level, but through experiential learning that is driven with the rigor and high expectations
that ensure that students can meet their educational goals and ultimately contribute to the
national demands for education.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations
One limitation of this study is that the findings can be generalized to other situations. The
findings are limited to increased understanding of the role of the facilitator in PBL environments
in Hawaii, and the selected schools only provide a glimpse of the experience of PBL facilitators.
Furthermore, the nature of the schools, their demographics, and their legacy of working with
PBL, should be considered when reading the findings.
Another limitation is the perception of the participants. The teacher participants were
selected purposively, but ultimately, at the decision of the school’s administration. Furthermore,
the interview responses were based on the teachers’ personal perception of their own teaching,
and the extent to which the researcher was able to cross reference these experiences with the
classroom observations.
The final limitation is the position of the researcher. It is important to note that the
researcher is herself, a PBL facilitator, and therefore may present a certain positional bias.
Through critical self-reflection regarding assumptions, biases, theoretical orientation, and
relationship to the study, the researcher attempted to be as objective as possible throughout the
study (Merriam, 2009).
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 18
Delimitations
The purpose of this study is to better understand the role of the PBL facilitator in guiding
students to construct their own learning. The researcher deliberately chose to focus on Problem-
Based Learning as an umbrella category to Project-Based Learning, Place-Based Learning, and
other forms of learning that are often categorized as “PBL” and are rooted from constructivist
theories. The literature reviewed for this study and the research questions developed were used to
construct the conceptual framework. Qualitative methods through interviews and classroom
observations were chosen for the methodology of the study.
Organization of the Study
The first chapter provided an overview, background, statement of the problem and
research questions. It presented a brief introduction to the landscape of U.S. educational reform
and overview of PBL in this context. Then, it presented the purpose and significance of the study
by outlining the gaps in the literature and providing justification for further bridging the gap
between personalized learning and PBL. Next, it presented the research questions for the study.
The chapter ended with the significance, limitations and delimitations and the organization of the
study
Chapter Two provides a literature review and conceptual framework. First, an overview
or PBL is presented, followed by a review of the literature on constructivist theory. Then, it
presents the literature on the role of the facilitator in the PBL environment, including guided
learning, self-directed learning and personalized learning. The literature review will conclude
with the literature on authenticity. Finally, it presents the conceptual framework for the study.
Chapter Three provides an outline of the methodology chosen for the study. First, it
presents an overview of the research questions and justification for data collection. Next, it
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 19
provides an in-depth description of the sample (setting and participants). Then, it presents the
data collection protocols and approaches. Finally, it presents the method for data analysis, and
explanation of credibility, trustworthiness and ethics.
Chapter Four presents an analysis of the findings of the study.
Chapter Five concludes the study, summarizing main findings, implications and
recommendations for future study.
Definitions and Terms
The following are operational definitions of terms as decided by the researcher:
Problem-Based Learning (PBL): An experiential learning process around the investigation,
explanation and resolution of meaningful problems. PBL is a learner-centered, instructional
model that originates in medical school education. In this study, PBL is presented through the
lens of K-12 education, and encompasses problem-based, project-based, and other experiential
learning platforms that derive from the constructivist approach to education.
Project-Based Learning (PjBL:)Similar to PBL, PjBL centers the learning around a project or
product. Many PjBL models center the final project or product around a problem. Therefore,
PjBL will be discussed under the context of PBL for the purpose of this study.
Authenticity: Authenticity refers to authentic teaching and authentic learning. Authentic teaching,
on account of the facilitator, refers to teaching of meaningful problems that connect to the reality
of both the teacher and the study. Authentic teaching engages in the best practices of teaching
while providing a space where students can engage in authentic learning. Authentic learning
refers to learning that is meaningful, in a space where learning is learner-centered and learners
can connect to their own realities and the reality in which they live in.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 20
Learner-Centered: A learner-centered environment refers to the learning environment where
learners are empowered to research, apply theory, and apply knowledge and skills to construct
their own learning under guidance of a facilitator.
Facilitator: The facilitator refers to the teacher, mentor, tutor or coach that facilitates the
learning environment in a PBL setting.
Personalized Learning: A pedagogy that emphasizes differentiation and individualization of
curriculum to address diverse needs, values and capabilities of learners.
Scaffolding: Instructional strategies that guide students towards greater independence in the
learning process.
Guided Instruction: With the use of instructional strategies, guided instruction refers to the
facilitator’s role in guiding students towards greater independence in the learning process.
Self-Directed Learning (SDL): Through guided instruction, students gain autonomy and
ownership over their learning process and practice the skills of an independent learner.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 21
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter provides a comprehensive literature review on the following bodies of
literature: (1) PBL, (2) constructivist theory, (3) the facilitator’s role in a PBL environment, and
(4) authentic teaching and learning. This literature provides the context and background
necessary to answer the research questions of this study;
1) How does the teacher, as a facilitator, guide students to construct their own learning in a
Problem-Based Learning environment?
2) How does the teacher, as a facilitator, promote authentic teaching and learning in a PBL
environment?
3) What are the best practices for teachers to facilitate a personalized PBL environment?
This section begins with an overview of PBL, including the challenges of implementing and
understanding PBL. Next, the literature on constructivist theory is presented. Then, the literature
on the facilitator’s role in creating a PBL environment, including guided instruction, self-directed
learning (SDL) and personalized learning in the context of PBL is reviewed. Finally, the
literature on authenticity in the context of the facilitator and the learner in a PBL environment is
presented. This chapter concludes with the conceptual framework that provides the lens of the
study, and will determine the course of the methodology to be used.
Overview of Problem-Based Learning
PBL, an experiential learning process around the investigation, explanation and
resolution of meaningful problems, is a learner-centered, instructional model that originates in
medical school education (Barrows, 2000; Torp and Sage, 2002; Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Pioneered
by Howard Barrows and Robyn Tamblyn (1980), the PBL model continues to gain momentum
over the course of 30 years, in multiple disciplines, from higher education to K-12 classrooms
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 22
(Savery, 2006). According to David Boud and Grahame Feletti (1997), a need for an
instructional model such as PBL arose in health sciences, as traditional lecture and clinical
teaching became an ineffective method for keeping up with rapidly changing demands of
medical practices. This parallels the rapidly changing demands of U.S. education, such as the
goals of the 21
st
century learner presented in Chapter One.
However, Barrows and Tamblyn introduced the PBL process as more than an
instructional method, but as a philosophy for structuring medical education (1980). It is
important to note the similar emphasis on PBL as a “mindset”, not a curriculum, by current PBL
experts today (Lenz et al., 2015). This philosophy is rooted in social-constructivist theory that
continues to drive users of PBL today, increasingly in K-12 classrooms.
Prior to the PBL model that is referred to today, William Heard Kilpatrick (1921)
introduced the “Project Method”, the foundation of what is known today as Project-Based
Learning (PjBL), which encouraged society to consider the gradual release of a child’s
education. In the Project Method, the goal of projects was to increase student motivation by
allowing students to choose their “purposes” of what they wanted to pursue (Kilpatrick, 1921;
Larmer et al., 2015).
Kilpatrick was John Dewey’s student, and his thinking was heavily influenced by
Dewey’s philosophy and contemporary thought. However, Kilpatrick’s Project Method, a
“romantic” vision where student choice became absolute, did not resonate well with Dewey.
Dewey believed that student choice should be restricted, and it was the teacher’s job to place
obstacles for learning in front of the student (Larmer et al., 2015). Dewey believed that the
teacher was an important part of the learning process, and that students had many things to learn
from the teacher:
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 23
The danger that children undertaking too complex projects will simply muddle and mess,
and produce not mere crude results (which is a minor matter) but acquire crude standards
(which is an important matter) is great” (Dewey, 1916, p. 205).
Similar to the original Project Method, Project-Based Learning tends to be organized
around a final product, which can alter the role of the teacher or facilitator, as well as the
curricula laid forth (Savery, 2006). For the purpose of this literature review, the essential
components of PjBL will be referred to as PBL.
PBL has since been introduced in multiple disciplines, including K-12 education.
According to the Buck Institute of Education (2015), the Gold Standard PBL has eight elements:
a challenging problem or question; sustained inquiry, authenticity; student voice and choice;
reflection; critique and revision; and a public product (Larmer et al., 2015). Although the
research in K-12 PBL is limited to case study, pre-post-tests, or quasi-experimental designs,
rather than controlled experiments, the literature lends to an understanding of knowledge
construction, problem-solving, and SDL (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Further research is needed in the
areas of motivation and collaboration in K-12 PBL implementation (2004). Generally, PBL
curricula provides students with guided experience in solving problems in real-life situations.
PBL was designed to help students; 1) construct an extensive and flexible knowledge base, 2)
develop effective problem-solving skills, 3) develop self-directed, lifelong learning skills, 4)
become effective collaborators, and 5) become intrinsically motivated to learn (Hmelo-Silver,
2004; Barrows & Kelson, 1995). Studies show that PBL can increase student performance in
areas such as reasoning critically and creatively, collaborating productively, practicing empathy,
identifying one’s own strengths and weaknesses, and becoming a self-directed learner (Savery,
2006).
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 24
The Challenges of Implementing and Understanding PBL
Despite widespread adoption and growing popularity for PBL instructional models,
common misapplications and misconceptions of PBL can create systemic issues (Boud & Feletti,
1997). Confusing PBL as an approach to curriculum design, adopting PBL without staff
commitment at all levels, insufficient investment in PBL design, lack of preparation and ongoing
renewal of learning resources, inappropriate assessment methods, and use of evaluation
strategies that don’t focus on the key learning goals, are some of the many issues that may arise
(1997). Additionally, the literature surrounding the philosophical and theoretical foundations of
PBL is consistent, yet the results of empirical studies available show gaps in our understanding
of PBL. For example, research is still limited in understanding PBL’s long-term effects in K-12
environments (Hmelo-Silver, 2004).
In a meta-analyses study of medical students, students who engaged in PBL scored
slightly lower on multiple choice measures but slightly higher on clinical measures than students
who engaged in traditional learning methods (Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Albanese & Mitchell, 1993;
Vernon & Blake, 1993). In another study where traditional and PBL medical students were asked
to provide diagnostic explanations of a clinical problem, PBL students’ responses were more
elaborated on than those of the traditional track, but also more error-prone (Hmelo-Silver, 2004;
Patel et al., 1991, 1993). This may be an indicator that PBL students are better able to articulate
their knowledge, even if it may be incorrect. However, the research is also limited to medical
students, which does not lend to an understanding within K-12 student development levels.
A study conducted in a middle school, with the specific intention of investigating PBL’s
ability to identify students with “unseen academic potential” found that the benefits of a PBL
environment could extend beyond the expected goals of PBL, to the way that teachers viewed
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 25
their students, as well as a change in performance on academic tasks (Gallagher & Gallagher,
2013). The scope of this study limited the impact of the results.
The results of research (Hmelo et al., 2000) on a group of sixth graders emphasized the
need for adaptations to be made in a developmentally appropriate manner, in the form of
scaffolding and direct instruction. This differs from the less structured approach of PBL that may
be taken with older students (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Another critical component of successful
PBL is learner reflection. With younger learners, reflection may need to be scaffolded, such as
through the use of “structured diaries” (Puntambekar & Kolodner, 1998). However, specific
strategies such as these still require further evidence of their effectiveness (Hmelo-Silver, 2004).
The role of these strategies ultimately relies on the understanding of the role of the facilitator of
the environment.
PBL is meant to be a learner-centered approach that empowers learners to research, apply
theory, and apply knowledge and skills to develop a solution to a problem (Savery, 2006).
However, critical selection of the “problems” and a facilitator who has the necessary tools to
guide the learner through the experience are crucial to the success of PBL (2006). Continued
research is necessary to determine the most effective way to implement PBL in the K-12
environment, as well as its effectiveness in contrast to traditional delivery of education
(Mergendoller, Maxwell, & Bellisimo, 2006; Savery, 2006; Sanson-Fisher and Lynagh, 2005;
Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Because PBL is a learner-centered approach to teaching, the role of the
teacher, as a facilitator, in constructing this environment is crucial. The effectiveness of this type
of learning, in contrast to traditional delivery of education, can help to speak to the problems that
drive school reform.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 26
Constructivist Theory
The philosophical underpinnings of PBL are based in the socio-constructivist theory’s
approach to education (Savery & Duffy, 1995; Terwel, 1999; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Savery,
2006). The literature supports a clear lineage between the theory of constructivism and the
instructional model of PBL (Savery & Duffy, 1995). One of the main priorities of the
constructivist approach is that the learning environment provides the learning goal and that the
learner has a purpose for being in that environment. Additionally, constructivists believe that
what is understood is a function of the content, the context and the activity, and that knowledge
evolves through interaction with a social environment within collaborative groups (1995). Lebow
(1993) explains that “traditional…values of replicability, reliability, communication and control”
contrast from the constructivist values of “collaboration, personal autonomy, generatively,
reflectivity, active engagement, personal relevance and pluralism” (p.5).
The relationship between the facilitator (as a teacher, mentor, tutor or coach) and the
student, is based in constructivist philosophy where the facilitator sets the stage for students to be
able to constructively process and gain knowledge through questioning, scaffolding, and
anchoring the learner’s process through the PBL model. The types of questions that the
facilitator asks a student can support a construction of knowledge that allows learners to identify
gaps in their own understanding, one of the goals of PBL (Hmelo-Silver & Barrows, 2008).
Whether or not the facilitator is able to ask the types of questions that would allow the learner to
construct their own knowledge is an area of research that could still be explored.
Recent cognitive psychology emphasized cognitive theory as the “active role students play
in acquiring knowledge” as well as “the social construction of knowledge” (Vygotsky, 1978;
Wertsch,1985; Terwel, 1999). Savery & Duffy (1995) outline the instructional principles that can
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 27
be derived from this theory, and outline the facilitator’s role in guiding a student through the
process. They include; anchoring all learning activities to a larger problem, supporting the
learner in developing ownership of the problem, designing an authentic task, giving the learner
ownership of the process used to develop a solution, designing a learning environment that
challenges and supports the learner’s thinking, promoting collaborative and social learning, and
providing opportunity for reflection (1995).
Furthermore, in true constructivist fashion, the teacher acts as a consultant and coach, and
the most important role of the teacher is asking the right questions to guide the learner’s thinking
(Savery & Duffy, 1995; Hmelo-Silver, 2004). This contrasts from the popular Socrative method,
where the student’s task is to ask logical questions to get to the “right” answer that only the
teacher knows. In the PBL method, there is no one “right” answer, but the facilitator’s role is to
ask the student questions to guide them to the best solution of the problem or task at hand (1995).
The literature on knowledge-building discourse ties to the goals of PBL instructional
models as well. According to Hmelo-Silver and Barrows (2008), within a constructivist learning
environment such as PBL, knowledge-building opportunities should be created by the teacher so
that students can learn through collaborative problem-solving and reflection on experience. An
important aspect of PBL is the collaborative learning process. According to Palincsar (1998),
postmodern constructivist perspectives differ from traditional perspectives, such as that of Jean
Piaget, because it rejects the view that knowledge is individually attained, but rather argues that
learning and understanding are socially gained. For collaborative knowledge-building to be
successful, the activity needs to be structured so that learning is shared, expertise is distributed
and building on each other’s ideas is the norm (Palincsar & Herrenkohl, 1999). This may become
a challenging skill in K-12 settings where students approach collaborative learning at various
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 28
levels of comfort and accessibility. The way in which the facilitator sets up this collaborative
environment in a PBL space could be further studied.
Some researchers argue against the constructivist model of PBL, saying that within the
constructivist approach students are minimally guided and therefore, learn little. This results in
teachers having to provide students with considerable guidance that is not part of the original
framework (Kirschner & Clark, 2006). The literature that argues against PBL considers the
cognitive processes of working and long-term memory, and states that learning a discipline is not
the same as practicing a discipline, in terms of its effect on long-term memory (2006). Literature
in response to these arguments states that PBL is not an example of minimally guided
instruction, and that the constructivist theory supports the learning of content through facilitator
guided strategies, SDL skills, collaborative problem-solving, reflection, and self-directed inquiry
(Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007). The teacher plays a crucial role in facilitating this learning process.
This supports the need for further inquiry into the level of guidance from the facilitator for
students to construct their own learning.
Facilitator’s Role in a Problem-Based Learning Environment
The facilitator, in the role of a teacher, coach, mentor, or tutor plays a crucial role in the
PBL process (Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Hmelo-Silver & Barrows, 2008). Although the overall goal
for the student is that the PBL process requires students to become responsible for their own
learning, and therefore the facilitator’s guidance diminishes over the course of this process, the
scaffolding, modeling, and guidance of the facilitator is key in allowing this to successfully occur
(Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Understanding the role of the facilitator is a fundamental component of
adopting PBL. Many cases of misapplication and misconceptions are rooted in the adoption of
PBL without staff commitment, and confusing PBL as an approach to curriculum design
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 29
(Savery, 2006). Rather than viewing the teacher as the main source of knowledge, as the
individual with the right answer, the literature explains the sensitive, yet necessary role of the
facilitator in promoting collaborative learning, problem-solving, and SDL (2004).
Guided Instruction
In Barrows’ original model for PBL within the medical school setting (1985), the
facilitator’s key role in guiding instruction is clear. Barrow (1992) states,
The ability of the tutor to use facilitory teaching skills during the small group learning
process is the major determinant of the quality and the success of any educational method
aimed at 1) developing students’ thinking or reasoning skills…as they learn, and 2)
helping them to become independent self-directed learners…Tutoring is a teaching skill
central to problem-based, self-directed learning. (1992, p.12)
Barrow stressed that the facilitator’s questioning aimed at developing the learner’s
metacognitive, problem-solving and critical thinking skills, and that the facilitator avoid
expressing an opinion or providing information outright to a student (Savery & Duffy, 1995).
Additionally, the facilitator’s role is to challenge the learner’s thinking, asking specific and
challenging questions, until the student is able to do this on their own (1995).
However, the process Barrow’s describes can be misinterpreted and misconducted by
facilitators. Savery & Duffy (1995) discuss the use of Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal
Development (ZPD) as a representation of the exchange occurring between the facilitator and the
learner. The facilitator’s role is to scaffold the learning by changing complex tasks to accessible,
manageable tasks within the ZPD (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007). Given guidance from mentors who
scaffold through coaching, task-structuring, and hints, students become increasingly better at
problem-solving (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007; Quintana et al., 2004). According to Hmelo-Silver et
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 30
al, PBL routines also provide a layer of scaffolding that reduces cognitive load. For example, the
white boarding technique utilized in Barrows’ approach is a strategy that in itself provides
guidance for students throughout the ongoing process (2007). In addition to metacognitive
questioning and scaffolding to a student’s ZPD, facilitators can also promote a social and
collaborative learning environment, as well as the fading off of supports over time (2007).
In a study conducted by Hmelo-Silver and Barrows (2008), an expert facilitator’s
strategies in implementing PBL were analyzed using video data and stimulated recall. In addition
to creating student learning goals, the facilitator outlined the personal goals of the facilitator. For
example, one performance goal for the facilitator was “to keep all students active in the lesson”.
Hmelo-Silver and Barrows found that it is critical for the facilitator to keep the learning goals in
mind at all times in order to go beyond the specific problem that the student(s) are addressing
(2008). Other facilitation strategies included: use of open-ended and metacognitive questioning,
pushing for explanation, revoicing, summarizing, generating and evaluating hypotheses,
mapping between symptoms and hypotheses (in a medical setting), checking consensus that
whiteboard reflects discussion, cleaning up the board (evaluating ideas, maintaining focus,
keeping process moving), creating learning issues and encouraging construction of visual
representation (2006, p. 28). The whiteboard strategy mentioned previously is a component of
Barrows’ PBL routine, which is meant to keep the process focused and reduce cognitive load.
Hmelo-Silver and Barrows (2008) found that the expert facilitator was always looking for
moments to “keep the process going with all students involved, moving in productive directions,
help(ing) make students’ understanding and thinking transparent and guide(ing) them towards
the curriculum’s educational goals” (p. 34). The facilitator engages in these actions while
moving the student towards self-directed learning (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Further understanding
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 31
of how facilitators can create guided learning experiences that are student-centered will
strengthen the implementation of PBL.
Self-Directed Learning
A challenging, yet essential component of PBL is that students achieve the ability to
engage in SDL throughout the learning process (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Ideally, the teacher’s
interventions decrease as students progressively take on personal responsibility (Hmelo-Silver et
al., 2006). In addition to the aforementioned guided instruction strategies, the facilitator also
plays a role in modeling problem-solving and SDL skills needed to engage in the PBL process
independently and for self-assessing one’s reasoning and understanding (2004). The facilitator
also supports the learner in practicing self-reflection by externalizing self-reflective practices and
questioning the learner. English and Kitsantas (2013) refer to the SDL process as self-regulated
learning. By structuring activities that stimulate motivation and encourage reflection, provide
feedback, and give prompts for thinking, teachers can move the learner towards a self-regulated
learning process (2013). Students can develop skills of self-regulation by engaging in reflection
of both the content and the learning process that takes place in PBL (Savery & Duffy, 1995).
Therefore, the facilitator plays an active role as an expert learner, a modeler, and a guide
for students engaging in the PBL process. Research outlines their essential role in the process,
and the subtle skill that is required to engage in PBL as an expert facilitator (Hmelo-Silver,
2004). Practicing and developing this role to ensure student success is the challenge that many
educators are faced with (Savery, 2006). Additionally, studies have demonstrated that expert and
novice teachers have different goals and beliefs, and these goals and beliefs determine the role
that they play in facilitating PBL. Understanding how student-centered learning can be facilitated
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 32
is important in being able to implement constructivist approaches such as PBL (Hmelo-Silver et
al., 2006).
Personalized Learning
Although literature on personalized learning is generally not associated with PBL, for the
purpose of understanding the two bodies of literature together, the facilitator’s role in fostering a
personalized learning environment will be reviewed as a component of the facilitator’s role in a
PBL environment. Personalized learning as a pedagogy is broadly defined as “differentiation of
the curriculum to address diverse learning approaches, preferences and needs” (Deed et al., 2014,
p. 66). In a personalized learning environment, the teacher needs to address student engagement
and learning by addressing each student’s individual needs, values and capabilities, and the
student is expected to maintain a certain autonomy as they work towards self-reliance (2014;
Prain et al., 2013). Students may also form deeper connections to each other, their teachers and
other adults, and motivate them based on personal interests, which in turn prepares them to
become lifelong learners (Childress & Benson, 2014).
In Silicon Valley, personalized learning is playing out in method that is typically
associated with the pedagogy: through technology. Teachers were paired with Khan Academy, a
nonprofit that offers online science and math video and practice lessons, and teachers became
“curators” of a blended model that attempts to personalize learning for all students. As curators,
teachers still teach concepts to the whole class, but with the use of technology, students are able
to access a portal that features an individualized list of exercises and lessons that they should
complete. The shortcomings of this case study are the lack of a formal study conducted to
analyze significant results (2014).
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 33
Although this form of personalized learning does not align with the goals of a PBL
environment, by better understanding the strategies that teachers in a personalized learning can
implement, the possibilities of the two pedagogies merging becomes more apparent. Suggested
strategies for teachers in creating a personalized learning environment include: flexible use of
space and time, social reform of the classroom as a community space, interactions between
teacher and student where choices are made together and the consequences of decisions are
experienced, use of technology to shape personal learning pathways, and use of collective
intelligence to guide in problem-solving. Additionally, teachers and students have interdependent
responsibilities, in contrast to traditional environments where teachers guide the class
independently (Deed et al., 2014; Halpin, 2007; Leiringer & Cardellino, 2011; Cusher, 2002;
Brannen & Nilsen, 2005; Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2012; Selwyn, 2009; Deed & Edwards, 2013;
Campbell, Robinson, Neelands, Hewstont, & Mazzoli, 2010).
In a case study where a class engaged in personalized learning through a Game-Design
project, researchers studied the teacher’s reasoning for practice. The study found that the
teacher’s initial goals for the project were to see an increase in student ownership and
responsibility for their learning, and to develop collaborative learning and problem-solving skills
(2014). Both of these goals align with goals for PBL (Hmelo-Silver & Barrows, 2008). From the
teacher’s perspective, students needed the skills of collaboration, communication, problem-
solving, researching, and independent learning skills prior to beginning the project in order to
complete the project successfully. Throughout the case study and game design project, the
teacher continued to lead whole group lessons to explain and model components of the project.
This was considered an anchoring point of the project. It was recommended that the teacher
should provide cognitive and metacognitive prompts to assist students in planning, monitoring
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 34
and reflecting on their projects. There was also a need for student exemplars, including how to
solve problems, to be modelled to the class (2014). This case study provides insight on the
parallels of the goals of a teacher facilitating in a PBL environment, and those of a teacher
facilitating a personalized learning environment. Better understanding personalized learning at
its root is essential in understanding how teachers can foster a learner-centered environment, one
of the main priorities of a PBL environment.
Authenticity of the Facilitator and Learner in a PBL Environment
In a traditional learning environment, the teacher, or the provider of knowledge, may be
imagined standing in the front of a classroom, and students, the receivers of knowledge, are
sitting in rows or in small groups, interspersed throughout the classroom. In this environment,
the teacher, referred to by Paulo Freire as the “bank-clerk educator”, deposits knowledge into the
student. In Freire’s banking concept, the teacher often talks about reality as “if it were
motionless, static, compartmentalized, and predictable” (Freire, p. 52). Freire (1993) presents the
problem-posing method as an alternative presentation of reality, arguing that posing a problem
allows the problem to become the main focus of one’s perception, and allows individuals to be
critically objective about the reality that they are living in.
Teachers and facilitators who aim to foster a PBL environment are faced with the
challenge of fostering an authentic environment. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire focuses
on the oppressed as those who would benefit most from the process of humanization, or
authentic liberation. Those who engage in the process of humanization reject the banking
concept, and instead accept a consciousness that allows them to look at the world through a lens
of “problem-posing” education (1993). Although Freire’s arguments would most benefit the
oppressed populations, his description of the banking concept of education depicts the national
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 35
phenomena that is occurring across classrooms in the United States, regardless of the
socioeconomic status or diversity of the students. Therefore, if students that are subject to
repercussions of education reforms in the U.S. face the challenge of learning authentically,
perhaps they can be referred to as a population that could benefit from a need for “authentic
liberation” as well.
Authenticity and PBL
Behizadeh (2014) makes connections between Freire’s problem-posing education and
PBL through the lens of authentic learning. Authentic learning refers to students connecting to
the learning in a way that they view school as more than a means to earn a grade, and are able to
connect and transfer their learning to experiences in other aspects of their lives (2014).
Behizadeh argues that PBL, if done effectively and with strong pedagogy, aligns with Freire’s
model of inquiry. Freire wrote, “Knowledge emerges only through invention and re-invention,
through the restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry human beings pursue in the world,
with the world, and with each other” (Behizadeh, 2014; Freire, 1993, p. 72). Freire’s notions of
“teacher-student” and “students-teachers” demonstrate that the role of the facilitator and the role
of the learner in a PBL environment are grounded in the relationship that they have with the
learning. Further, in PBL, the learning needs to be grounded in an authentic problem that
accurately depicts the reality that both the facilitator and the student are living in, both in and
outside of the classroom experience (2014; 1993).
Authenticity is considered an essential project design element, and one of the eight gold
standards of PBL (Larmer et al., 2015). PBL teachers generally agree that authenticity is an
anchoring point for that “frames and enhances students’ engagement in projects” (2015, p. 40).
They argue that authenticity should be considered a best practice for implementing PBL: first,
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 36
the context of the project should be authentic; second, the tasks that students complete should be
authentic; third, the projects should have an authentic impact on the world; and fourth, the
projects should have a personal authenticity that speaks to students’ personal concerns interests
or issues in their lives (2015). The nature of authenticity, regardless of the instructional setting,
highlights the importance of ideas that matter. When the context of the project or topic is
significant to the teacher and learner, it allows one to take responsibility for one’s own teaching
and for one’s own learning (Kreber, Klampfleitner, McCune, Bayne, & Knottenbelt, 2007;
Larmer et al., 2015).
Authentic Facilitators
If the role of the facilitator in creating a PBL environment is to promote collaborative
learning, problem-solving and SDL, the literature also directs us to think of the facilitator as the
individual who can create an authentic environment that allows these skills to be fostered in way
that they will transfer to other aspects of students’ lives (Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Larmer et al.,
2015). PBL facilitators are faced with the challenge of fostering an environment that is authentic,
or as real as possible. As one of the eight gold standards of PBL, authenticity stands out as a best
practice necessary for facilitators to embrace when implementing this type of learning
environment. The result of this implementation being that students are able to authentically
engage in their learning. However, if learners are expected to engage in learning authentically,
teachers need to create an environment that reflects their authentic pedagogy of teaching. The
literature supports that the facilitator needs to embrace authentic teaching in order for PBL to be
implemented authentically (Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Larmer et al., 2015).
van Lier (1996) defines three types of authenticity in the classroom: curricular
authenticity (creator, finder, user), pragmatic authenticity (context, purpose, interaction) and
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 37
personal authenticity (existential, intrinsic, autotelic). The facilitator is faced with the challenge
of fostering an environment that engages in all three types of authenticity. Larmer et al.’s (2015)
lens of authenticity in PBL reflects a need for curricular authenticity as the facilitator provides
the student with the structure of PBL, pragmatic authenticity, in the problem that the facilitator
guides the student to focus on, and personal authenticity, in the need for the facilitator to have a
personal investment in how the student engages with PBL.
Laursen (2004) identifies the following competences related to authentic teachers:
personal commitment, embodiment of the task, realistic intentions concerning teaching, working
in contexts where these intentions can be realized, respect for students, intense co-operation with
colleagues and a continual striving towards personal and professional development. These
psychological, philosophical and pedagogical competences can be used to deepen a facilitator’s
understanding of themselves, acting as a reminder that teaching and learning is not just a job or a
task (2004; van Lier, 1996).
Furthermore, in order for teachers to authentically change or develop their practice, they
must have an awareness of how they emotionally connect and interact with their environment.
Emotional connectedness to self and others is key to developing teachers that actively create and
reconstruct the collaborative culture needed for authentic teaching, view their own teaching
practice with a growth mindset, and view themselves as lifelong learners (Dinan-Thompson,
2001). In a PBL environment, the facilitator needs to be emotionally connected to the material
(the problem or project), but even more important, needs to be emotionally connected to the
environment that they are teaching in. This includes other teachers that they collaborate with, the
students, the administrators, and the school itself (2001).
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 38
Based on Dewey’s (1933) original work on reflection, Rodgers (2002) developed the four
phases of teacher reflection through the Teacher Knowledge Project. The four phases
complement the values of authentic teaching. They are; (1) the most productive starting place for
professional development is a teacher’s classroom experience; (2) reflection slows down the
teaching/learning process; (3) formation of a community of respect is a critical environment for
successful reflection; and (4) value student feedback as critical understanding of students’
learning. Authentic reflection will support teachers in becoming authentic teachers.
Therefore, multi-faceted authenticity is necessary when a facilitator engages in a PBL
environment. An authentic teacher is key for student success in PBL.
Authentic Learners
“The more open or authentic I am, the more able I am to care for myself and others. The
stronger my care becomes, the more open I am to myself and others” said Zimmerman,
summarizing Heidegger, when discussing authentic existence (1986, p. 65). The significance of
authentic teaching is clear, a process that requires teachers of be conscious and critical about
themselves, others, and the context they are teaching in (Cranton & Carusetta, 2004). Through
authentic teaching in PBL, students should be able to engage in a more authentic process
themselves. An authentic PBL environment is about making a learning experience as “real” as
possible (Larmer et al., 2015). Fostering a project environment where the context, tasks, and
impact are authentic is in the hands of facilitator, but the students also need to be able to engage
with the project on a level of personal authenticity (2015). van Leir describes existential
authenticity as one’s interest and personal commitment to learning (1996). It may be challenging
to imagine middle school aged adolescents authentically engaging in their own learning, but PBL
experts underline the importance of projects where students can personally connect to concerns,
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 39
interests or issues in their lives, for example, by engaging needs, values, language and culture of
their community (Larmer et al, 2015). Also, having a strong school culture where rituals and
expectations of schooling are widespread and valued can help students to authentically engage in
their learning (2015).
Conceptual Framework
This section presents the conceptual framework for the study. This conceptual framework
will inform the research and the methodology of the study. The conceptual framework is
grounded in the literature reviewed above (Maxwell, 2013).
This conceptual framework (Figure 1) aims to demonstrate the crucial role that
authenticity plays in using PBL as a means of creating an environment where students can
construct their own learning. This framework assumes that with authentic teaching comes
authentic learning. PBL facilitators must engage in their roles of establishing an environment
where guided, self-directed and personalized learning take place, and when this authentic
environment occurs, students are able to construct their own learning. The theory behind the role
of facilitators and how they go about fostering this environment is based in the constructivist
theory. The literature on authenticity provides depth to the goals of constructivist educators
working in a PBL environment.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 40
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
Summary
This chapter reviewed the literature on PBL, constructivist theory and authenticity).
Specifically, it examined what PBL is, how PBL is rooted in the constructivist theory, the role of
the PBL facilitator in developing a guided, self-directed and personalized learning environment,
and how authentic learners and facilitators contribute to a PBL environment. Finally, it presented
the conceptual framework that aims to provide a lens for the study, and will determine the
methodological direction of the study.
Research is still limited in understanding long-term effects of PBL in K-12 environments,
and studies that have been conducted often generated limited results due to its scope (Hmelo-
Silver, 2004; Gallagher & Gallagher, 2013). Specific strategies that facilitators could implement,
Authentic
Teaching
Authentic
Learning
Student
Constructed
Learning
PBL facilitator’s role:
*Guided
*Self-Directed
*Personalized
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 41
for example, require further evidence of their effectiveness, making it difficult for facilitators to
understand their true role in fostering a PBL environment. It is clear that continued research is
necessary to determine the most effective way to roll out PBL in the K-12 environment, as well
as its effectiveness in comparison to traditional ways of teaching (Mergendoller et al., 2006;
Savery, 2006; Sanson-Fisher and Lynagh, 2005; Hmelo-Silver, 2004). And finally, gaps remain
in the literature that supports that authentic facilitators and authentic learners are the key to
establishing an effective PBL environment. This study hopes to contribute to the gaps in the
literature.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 42
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the methodology that is used in this study. Interviews and
observations were conducted and qualitative data methods were used to answer the following
research questions:
1) How does the teacher, as a facilitator, guide students to construct their own learning in a
Problem-Based Learning environment?
2) How does the teacher, as a facilitator, promote authentic teaching and learning in a PBL
environment?
3) What are the best practices for teachers to facilitate a personalized PBL environment?
In order to examine the role of the teacher, as a facilitator, it is necessary to select a
methodology that lends to understanding the environment that teachers work in, their
relationships and interactions with their students, and the nature of the environment that they aim
to create (Creswell, 2007). Furthermore, the study aims to investigate the meaning that teachers
have constructed around inquiry-based learning (Merriam, 2009). This study attempts to improve
the quality of practice in the PBL environment through applied research (2009). The study uses
qualitative methodology to ensure the following; a) capture of quality, versus quantity b) reach
deeper understanding versus testing of a specific hypothesis, b) use of the researcher as the
instrument for data collection through observations and interviews c) and reach findings that are
holistic and evolving (Merriam, 2009).
Sample
Setting
Central Institute. Central Institute is an independent, college-preparatory school for
Preschool-12
th
grade located in an urban setting in Hawaii. Founded in 1908, the school has a
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 43
variety of programs, such as Baccalaureate Diploma Program, the School of the Arts, and the
focus of this study, the Exploratory Program (a project-based approach to learning) (2016).
Central Institute’s vision is to “prepare students to make a difference in the world by embracing
changes with creativity, collaboration, critical thought, and global awareness, guided by moral
and ethical values” (2016). The school employs 290 people, and enrolls 1,553 students (268
elementary, 430 middle school and 855 high school). In order to attend the school, students pay
$21,050 of tuition annually, and 25% of students receive some type of financial aid. The school
operates on 43 acres in 33 buildings and is fully accredited by Western Association of Schools
and Colleges. This site was chosen because of the longevity of its PBL program. Additionally, as
an independent school, it is not necessary to go through the IRB proposal review process of the
state’s public schools. In order to gain access, permission was requested and granted from the
head of the PBL Exploratory Program at the school.
Sampling. The site was chosen for purposive sampling and convenience sampling. The
site was deliberately selected as a site that has an established PBL environment (Maxwell, p. 98,
2013). Additionally, PBL schools, the target environment necessary for the study to be aligned
with its research questions and goals, is a small community in Hawaii. Convenience sampling
based on the contacts the researcher had through her current work was necessary in order to gain
access to this group (Weiss, 1994). The site was chosen based on its location and availability
(Merriam, 2009).
Participants
Maxwell (2013) emphasizes that research relationships can either facilitate or hinder the
research design of a study. The participants were selected with care at each of the sites. They
were chosen for purposive reasons, based on the fact that they facilitate/teach in a PBL
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 44
environment. For this study, three teacher participants were selected from each site. All three
teacher participants teach/facilitate a PBL environment, and were selected with guidance from
the Exploratory Programs administration and leader at the site. Additionally, two student
participants were selected. Criteria for their selection included students that are currently
enrolled in a PBL environment or have undergone education in a PBL environment in the last
four years. Students that are not involved or have not been involved in a PBL environment were
excluded from this selection. Participants will be deliberately selected based on the information
that they will be able to provide, relevant to the research question and study goals (Maxwell,
2013).
Data Collection Protocols and Approach
The purpose of this study is to seek a better understanding of the role of the facilitator in
guiding students to construct their own learning, explore the impact of resources on these
facilitators, and to investigate the best practices implemented by teachers when facilitating a
personalized PBL environment. As mentioned previously, the research questions and conceptual
framework for the study guided the development of the instruments and data collection protocols.
The role of the researcher in this qualitative study was to act as the primary instrument
for data collection and analysis (Merriam, 2009). Thus, the researcher conducted interviews and
observations as the basis of data collection. The following sections will outline this study’s
protocol and approach for interviews and observations.
Interviews
Interviewing is a necessary form of data collection when the researcher cannot observe
certain behaviors, feelings or how the participant interacts with their environment (Merriam,
2009; Patton, 2002). Interviews were conducted as an important data point for a variety of
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 45
reasons; (1) teacher perceptions of their own practice, and the process that they go through when
facilitating an environment, are not directly observable in a classroom environment and (2)
student voice is a necessary component of understanding how students construct their own
learning with the guidance of a PBL facilitator.
According to Patton (2002), the purpose of qualitative interviewing is to capture what
cannot be observed, to allow the researcher to enter into one’s perspective, and to assume that
this perspective is “meaningful, knowable and able to be made explicit” (pg. 341). Qualitative
interviews were chosen as a data collection tool for this study because they serve the role of
understanding the PBL facilitator’s perceived role in allowing students to construct their own
learning. The prepared interview guides for teacher participants (Appendix A & B) and student
participants (Appendix C) were prepared with the intent of ensuring consistency across
respondents, with the freedom of the researcher to act as the tool for data collection by probing,
exploring and expanding on the original guide (Merriam, 2009). The interviews are an essential
part of this study as an equally meaningful data collection tool to observations (Patton, 2007).
Weiss (1994) highlights that interviews are purposeful because of their insight into the
observations (and perceptions) of others, often providing information that was overlooked in an
observation, or cross-checking the accuracy of an observation.
Interview protocol. The interview participants in this study are the three teacher
participants and two student participants selected from Central Institute. An interview guide
(Appendix A, B & C) was set up in order to ensure that the same, basic lines of inquiry are
pursued in each interview (Patton, 2002). As suggested by Merriam (2009), the interview guide
is set up in order to enable analysis. At the top of the interview guide(s) is a space to identify the
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 46
name of the respondent, the site of the interview, the interviewer, the date of the interview, and
the start and end times of the interview.
The questions were created by grounding them in the literature on PBL, the role of the
facilitator, authentic teaching and learning and personalized learning.
Interview approach. Merriam’s (2009) semi-structured interview approach and Patton’s
(2002) combined approach were utilized in this study. The interview guide allowed for similar
lines of inquiry across interviews, but a semi-structured approach allowed for flexibility in
asking open-ended questions as they arose, and limited the restraints on the order of the
questions. The researcher was also able to utilize probes when certain subject areas required
deeper exploration, or if new areas of inquiry arose. Because the interviews were collected as a
data point for better understanding the participants’ experience, probes allowed for increased
richness and depth in responses as was necessary (2002).
Teacher participants were formally interviewed two times each, once prior to the
classroom observation and once after. Student participants were interviewed one time each. The
interview guide(s) described in the interview protocol were used as a guide during the formal
interview. The interviews took place in a quiet setting at the study site, such as the teacher’s
office or empty classroom. The date, time and setting of the interviews were pre-determined with
the participant.
During the interview, notes were taken by hand on a pre-printed copy of the interview
guide and in a notebook, and tape recorded using a voice recorder. At least one day prior to the
interview, the researcher provided the participants with a copy of the informed consent form.
Parental permission and youth assent were required for student participants to take part in the
study. Prior to beginning the interview, the researcher asked the participant whether they give
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 47
verbal consent to recording the interview. All participants gave consent. Weiss (1994) suggests
tape recording as a method of capturing direct quotes and reactions, and a way to attend directly
to the respondent when taking notes instead of trying to transcribe every word.
Observations
Observations were conducted to gain a better understanding of the context of the study
and to record behaviors and incidents as they occurred (Merriam, 2009). Observations are a
crucial data point for this study because they allow the research to analyze the role that the PBL
facilitators engage in and what resources they use in practice.
In this study, observations are equally important to interviews (Patton, 2007). Teachers
participating in the study were observed in the PBL environment that they teach in. Teachers
were observed for their actions of how they facilitate a PBL environment to allow for
personalized and self-constructed learning, how they utilize resources and what best practices
they engage in. The observations conducted provided the researcher with a firsthand account.
According to Maxwell (2013), although interviewing is often an efficient and valid way of
understanding someone’s perspective, observation can enable you to draw inferences about this
perspective that you could not obtain by relying exclusively on interview data (p. 103).
Observations in this study will be conducted in order to inform findings (Merriam, 2009).
Interviews act as a secondhand account or perception of the respondent. Although useful,
interviews can be further validated by triangulating with observations, further substantiating the
data (2009).
Observation protocol. An observation protocol was created to ensure that the data
captured is comprehensive for easier analysis (Merriam, 2009). The protocol for observation was
structured to capture the participant(s), the physical setting, the interaction between the teacher
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 48
and student, the activities and interactions, the conversation, other factors important to the
observation (such as nonverbal communications) and the behavior of the researcher (p. 121,
2009) (Appendix D).
The protocol begins with a space to capture the setting of the observation. Next, a space
is provided to check specific criteria that is observed, such as the teacher’s role, student learning,
questioning strategies, and classroom climate. The criteria were developed using the literature on
the role of the facilitator in a PBL environment (Barrows, 2000; Boud & Feletti, 1997; Hmelo-
Silver, 2004; Larmer et al., 2015; Lenz et al., 2015; Savery, 2006; Torp & Sage, 2002), the role
of the facilitator in a constructivist approach to learning (Kirschner & Clark, 2006; Hmelo-
Silver, 2004; Lebow, 1993; Palincsar, 1998; Savery, 2006; Savery & Duffy, 1995; Terwel, 1999)
and authentic teaching and learning (Behizadeh, 2014; Freire, 1993; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Larmer
et al., 2015; Laursen, 2004; van Lier, 1996). A space is provided on the right to note specific
observations and interpretations based on the criteria.
Next, a space is provided to sketch and detail the physical space, followed by a space to
describe the activity and materials utilized during the observation. This is followed by a space to
document a narrative of what is happening during the observation, with a column for facilitator
actions, students’ actions and notes/interpretations. The protocol ends with a space to record any
documents and materials that might need to be collected from the teacher after the observation,
such as handouts provided to students during the observation, and a space for the researcher to
reflect immediately following the observation.
Observation approach. For this study, the observer acted as a participant (Merriam,
2009). In this role, the researcher as the observer was known to the group but was primarily
present to gather information. The researcher did not engage in active participation, but rather
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 49
obtained a “peripheral membership role” as a data collector (Adler & Adler, 1998; Merriam,
2009).
Observations took place in the PBL setting where the teacher participant acted as the PBL
facilitator. The location and time of the observation was predetermined with the site and the
participant. Each teacher participant was conducted one time each, totaling three observations
over the course of the study. The length of the observation was dependent on the daily schedule
of the site, and was approximately 60 minutes each time.
Observations were transcribed by hand on the aforementioned observation protocol.
Highly descriptive notes were taken and the observation was followed by a reflective component
by the researcher, in her field notebook, where she commented on initial feelings, reactions, and
a working hypothesis immediately following the observation (Merriam, 2009).
Through the observations, the researcher looked for indications of the facilitator’s role,
and whether the facilitator is able to guide students to construct their own learning through PBL.
Furthermore, the researcher looked for teaching practices that proved to be effective for the
facilitator.
Data Analysis
The data analysis process began with the first interview conducted, as the literature shows
that qualitative research is not a linear process, but a process where collection and analysis are a
simultaneous activity (Merriam, 2009). According to Bogdan and Biklen (2007), data
interpretation refers to the development of ideas about the findings, and making connections to
the literature and conceptual framework and data analysis refers to the organization of the data.
Through an informed process of data analysis, the researcher attempted to make meaning from
the data by consolidating, reducing and interpreting interviews and observations (2009). The
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 50
approach to data analysis is case study reporting. The report of the data was richly descriptive, so
that the study provided enough evidence of the setting for the analysis to be based in. The goal of
the study is to provide an analysis that allows readers to experience the PBL environment that the
study takes place in (Donmoyer, 1990; Merriam, 2009; Patton, 2002).
Harding (2013) emphasizes the importance for the research to engage with each detail of
the data. Merriam (2009) and Bogdan and Biklen (2007) suggest that coding, or assigning
shorthand designation to data allows for categorizing and is a necessary way to manage data.
After each interview or observation, the researcher went through the process of open coding,
where each interview transcript and observation was read. The researcher color-coded key
phrases or words, made notations in the margins and made researcher comments in a separate
margin. This process allowed the researcher to start constructing categories. Then the process of
axial coding began, or grouping of open codes, where the researcher interpreted and reflected on
the meaning of the codes (Corbin & Strauss, 2007; Merriam, 2009). Finally, categories, or
themes, were constructed from the codes. As the researcher continued to process interview
transcripts, observations and field notes throughout the data collection process, the categories
were revisited, revised, added to, and consolidated as necessary (2009). Once the data collection
process was completed and a list of categories created, each unit of data was organized into a
category. Harding (2013) explains that in order to make better sense of the data, the researcher
can add codes to the initial list of categories that were not there when coding first took place,
create sub categories as needed, group categories, and identify codes that should be discarded.
Therefore, the categories were subject to change throughout the data collection process.
In addition to the process of analysis, it was equally important to set up a system to
manage the data. Researcher field notes, comments, and musings were stored in a notebook,
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 51
hereby referred to as “field journal”. The coding processes was managed through a color coding
process and the creation of a code book. An inventory was made of all interview transcripts,
observations, field notes and memos in the researcher’s field journal. Original interview notes,
transcribed interview transcripts and observation notes were stored hard copy in a binder and
scanned and saved in an electronic file.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
According to Merriam (2009), in order for qualitative researchers to best capture “reality”
and “truth” as it is, it is necessary to triangulate data findings by analyzing multiple data points.
Additionally, approaching collection, analysis and interpretation of data through the conceptual
framework of the study provides a clear, trustworthy conclusion (Merriam, 2009). The three
main data points that were analyzed and triangulated are the classroom observations, teacher
participant interview transcripts and student interview transcripts.
Internal credibility was ensured through respondent validation by following up about
emerging findings with certain interview participants to avoid misinterpretation of data. The
participants will hopefully be able to recognize their experience within the researcher’s
interpretation (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam, 2009). Another step taken to ensure credibility and
trustworthiness was to account for the researcher’s own biases as a teacher and PBL facilitator
(2009). Corbin and Strauss (2008) suggest that researchers keep a journal during the data
collection process that records thoughts, actions, and questions and feelings that may arise during
this time. The process of journaling in the researcher field journal allowed the researcher to
better understand her personal experience in comparison to the participants, and also to better
regard her own assumptions and biases (Miles, Huberman, & Saldana, 2014).
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 52
Ethics
Patton (2002) describes a credible researcher as having intellectual rigor, professional
integrity and methodological competence. In order to meet the ethical expectations of a
researcher, it is necessary to take the perspective of a researcher that needs to collect data as
objectively as possible, while at the same time protecting the participants who agree to be a part
of the study. Using Patton’s (2002) “Ethical Issues Checklist”, the researcher is able to ensure
that the highest ethical standard of qualitative research is taken into consideration.
Prior to the study, all IRB guidelines for all participating institutions were abided by.
Upon beginning the data collection process, first, the researcher explained the purpose of the
study and the methods to each participant. Next, the researcher walked the participant through
the information sheet, outlining confidentiality and asking for their verbal, informed consent
(2002).
Access to the transcripts from the study were made available to the participants upon
request. The audio recordings will be kept until after the study and then destroyed. The
information will be kept confidential to the extent that the researcher would not share that they
were participating in the study (Merriam, 2009).
Throughout the study, pseudonyms were used instead of the participants’ actual names.
Anonymity of the site will also be ensured by refraining from using the school’s name and the
exact location of the school.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 53
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
The purpose of this study was to explore the PBL environment as a vehicle for reaching
educational goals, rather than PBL as a means to an end. This study seeks to understand the role
of the facilitator in guiding students to construct their own learning. Likewise, the study
investigated the best practices implemented by teachers when facilitating a personalized PBL
environment, and sought to understand whether these are best practices that are transferrable to
other learning environments.
The first three chapters of this dissertation presented the significance of the study and the
problem that exists for facilitators guiding students to construct their own learning in a PBL
setting. Existing literature was presented and the role of qualitative methods for this study was
established. This chapter will present the findings of the data collected, and attempt to make
connections to the research questions and conceptual framework presented.
This qualitative study was conducted by collecting data through interviews and
observations. Three teachers and two students participated in the study. The three teachers were
interviewed twice and observed once. The two students were interviewed one time each. To
ensure anonymity, data are presented with the use of pseudonyms.
This study seeks to answer the following research questions:
1) How does the teacher, as a facilitator, guide students to construct their own learning in a
Problem-Based Learning environment?
2) How does the teacher, as a facilitator, promote authentic teaching and learning in a PBL
environment?
3) What are the best practices for teachers to facilitate a personalized PBL environment?
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 54
The findings in this chapter are organized by research question, and presented in themes
connecting to the conceptual framework. The findings reveal that the learning environment is
linked to students constructing their own knowledge, and that facilitator’s choices in intentional
project planning can result in authentic teaching and learning. Also, the findings on the link
between PBL and personalization are presented.
Background of Site
Data were collected at Central Institute, an independent, K-12 college-preparatory school
in Hawaii. The main focus of the school was the Exploratory Program, a PBL pathway for 9
th
and 10
th
grade students developed in 2010. The high school has a total of 855 students.
There are 76 students enrolled in the Exploratory PBL Program. The rest of the high
school operates on a traditional approach to education. The program works alongside of the rest
of the school, operating on the same schedule, standards, and expectations. Teachers in the
Exploratory PBL Program are required to follow the academic standards and the general pace of
their department colleagues, with some flexibility for how the content and learning is achieved.
Central Institute’s learner profile prioritizes the need for its students to be
“knowledgeable, articulate and culturally competent,” achieved through “authentic, relevant and
intentional experiences, in and out of the school.” Central Institute aims to foster an environment
where students will graduate with the characteristics of students who collaborate, communicate
effectively, and self-assess, among other characteristics.
Background of Participants
Teacher Participants
The three teacher participants are all teachers in School A’s 9th and 10th grade
Exploratory PBL Pathway. The three participants teach interdisciplinary PBL courses. Dr. Hess
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 55
is an integrated science and math (STEM) teacher, and Ms. Bren and Ms. Lynn are both
integrated English Language Arts (ELA) and history teachers.
The researcher conducted data collection by first, interviewing each teacher participant.
Next, the researcher observed the teacher participants in their classroom setting as a participant
observer, known to the individuals in the space but primarily present to gather data (Adler &
Adler, 1998; Merriam, 2009). Finally, the researcher conducted a follow-up interview with each
teacher participant.
Dr. Hess, a 10th grade STEM teacher, has been teaching at Central Institute for 32 years.
He was also involved in the proposal-writing committee for the approval of the Exploratory PBL
Program, and is a lead teacher in continuing to develop the pathway. Ms. Bren, a 9th grade
integrated ELA and history teacher, is in her first year as a teacher in the Exploratory PBL
Program, but has been teaching for 21 years, and for 17 years at Central Institute. Prior to her
current role, she taught 8th grade ELA in a traditional environment. Ms. Lynn, a 10th grade
integrated ELA and history teacher, is also in her first year as a teacher in the Exploratory PBL
Program. She has been teaching for 5 years, with prior experience at a public city charter school
and an exclusively PBL focused charter school.
There are a total of four teachers in the Exploratory PBL Program, therefore, the three
teacher participants represent a majority of the teachers that exclusively teach in the PBL
environment at Central Institute.
Student Participants
The two student participants represent students currently in the Exploratory PBL
Program, or past students reflecting on their experience in the program. Each student participant
was interviewed one time.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 56
Cara is a senior at Central Institute, and was a student in the Exploratory PBL Program
for her 9th and 10th grade years. Joseph is a 10th grader, currently in his 2nd year of the
Exploratory PBL Program. Joseph has attended Central Institute since kindergarten.
There are a total of 76 students enrolled in the Exploratory PBL Program, spanning two
grade levels (9th and 10th grade). Therefore, the two current students represent only a small
perspective of the student experiences in PBL. However, all three student participants are able to
shed light on the experience of students that experience education through the PBL environment.
Research Question #1: How Does the Teacher, as a Facilitator, Guide Students to
Construct Their Own Learning in a Problem-Based Learning Environment?
The focus of research question (RQ) #1 is on the facilitator’s role in guiding students to
construct their own learning. The data collected shows significant evidence to suggest that the
culture and environment that the facilitator sets up is an essential factor in students being able to
construct their own learning. This section discusses the findings under the following themes: (1)
Begin with community; (2) Set up a student-centered learning environment; (3) Establish a
culture of feedback; (4) Provide opportunities for reflection; (5) Foster meaningful connections
to learning.
Theme 1- Build a Community of Learners
The first theme that emerged under RQ #1 was the common focus on the need to build
community within a class when setting up a PBL environment. All three teachers spoke on the
topic of community, not in the traditional sense of classroom practices, but in the need to
prioritize the building of a community of learners.
“Trying to build a community of learners is really the goal. Everything stems from
community,” shares Ms. Bren. “You can only really be successful if you have a strong
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 57
relationship with students.” Ms. Bren brings up community in more than one way, first sharing
that community building is important because it allows students to accept feedback, knowing it
comes from a place of caring, and also adding that, “in PBL, we are always in groups but that
doesn’t mean we are a community, that we all feel comfortable and in a safe place, that working
in a group doesn’t automatically make this place safe.” Therefore, she says it is important to
embed community building and approach learning in a way that increases social safety and
happiness.
Similarly, Ms. Lynn expressed that “Culture and community are really important. Having
real conversations, learning what they’re interested in, their true feelings about school…if they
feel like I’m on their team, that really helps.” Reflecting on her prior experience in a PBL driven
school, Ms. Lynn adds, “…everyone was bought in, excited, shared ideas, and culture was
probably the most important thing we built, culture was so strong between teachers and students,
so the PBL just flowed with everybody.” Her past experience in a school that was specifically
designed for PBL appeared to influence her opinion that culture was an integral part of making
PBL work.
Dr. Hess shares his perspective on what it feels like when there is a true community of
learners in action. He shared that teachers need to have a “leap of faith” and that there is an
“organizational imperative on the part of a PBL teacher to have accountability so built into the
students that I can have a 5-minute conversation with you about your work and not think the
world is going to burn down behind your back because they don’t have ownership around their
time.” This concept of being okay with what is happening in the moment was shared amongst the
teachers. Ms. Lynn shared that she enjoys “being comfortable to the changes, and the ebbing and
flowing” of her class community.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 58
The emphasis on building a community of learners from all three teachers demonstrates
its importance in order for students to be able to construct their own learning in a PBL
environment.
Theme 2- Set up a Student-Centered Learning Environment
With the community of learners established, the findings next show that it is essential for
facilitators to set up a student-centered learning environment to engage in PBL.
All three teacher participants defined PBL as a student-centered approach to learning. Dr.
Hess defined PBL as “real world based, student-centered, authentic, deep vs. narrow.” When Dr.
Hess speaks with his students about their classes, he says they say “we spend about 80% of the
time with us doing work, and 20% of the time with the teacher telling us things.” This illustrates
that Dr. Hess believes his students would describe their learning experience as more student-
centered.
Ms. Lynn defined it as “rooted in student choice, student guided exploration of what they
want to learn, and teaching them how to do that. Delivering curriculum that is centered around
student exploration and discovery.” For example, her students often engage in a lot of rigorous
reading outside of class, but rather than allowing students to come to her with
misunderstandings, she relies on whole class discussions so that students end up learning from
one another. Another example she gave was showing students how she also engages in discovery
of information when she doesn’t know something. Even if the student assumes that the teacher
“knows everything”, she will model how to find the information out through research and asking
questions. She sets up a student-centered learning environment by showing students “how adults
learn” so that they will learn to do it on their own. Ms. Lynn also shared how her actions as a
facilitator influence whether students are given the space to construct their own knowledge. The
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 59
way she approaches her students in class makes a big difference. Rather than walking around for
the entire class period, she thinks of herself as a student and allows them to figure out tasks on
their own. “That’s how they learn. I try to be a little hands-off”, she shares.
Cara’s definition of PBL also aligned with that of her former teachers, and in the belief of
student-centered learning. She said, “PBL is letting the student take over their learning, not
putting a student in a room like okay, learn all this stuff, instead it is like the teacher is guiding
them but it’s really more about the student.” Cara attributed her time in the Exploratory PBL
environment to allowing her to become a leader and owner of her own learning.
Classroom observation data also revealed a connection between the student-centered
environment and students constructing their own learning. In Ms. Bren’s classroom observation,
it was noted that her student-centered environment led to student’s constructing their own
learning. When engaging in the task of brainstorming as a group for their allegory project,
students were observed starting the task in a variety of ways, such as making a web, discussing
ideas first, and doing research. The lack of parameters on the project target seemed to allow for
students to “engage in relevant conversations”. Ms. Bren reflected later that she felt that they
were constructing their own understanding about the project by coming up with their own system
for brainstorming.
Ms. Lynn’s students were observed facilitating their own inquiry discussion, while the
teacher sat on the outside of the circle taking notes and listening in. Students were witnessed
building off of each other’s ideas and opinions, and making connections between their lives, the
reading and the issue of immigration. “I just want them to learn something that is going to ignite
something in them, going to invoke passion or determine their future studies,” reflected Ms.
Lynn later. “I really like sitting on the outside while they facilitate discussions. I like giving them
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 60
the power to run the class. I like giving them the power to think big on projects and outcomes,
and not putting too many parameters on it. I really think those things are fundamental to it
(PBL).”
Dr. Hess reflected that in a PBL environment that is student-centered, “work is happening
from the student, from their questions, their needs, from their own perspectives,” and facilitators
spend “so much more time talking to students and not at them” Hence, setting up a student-
centered learning environment is essential to students constructing their own learning.
Theme 3- Establish a Culture of Feedback
All three of the participants stressed the importance of establishing a culture of feedback
so that students can construct their own learning. Dr. Hess believes that when students learn how
to give meaningful feedback to each other, versus just receiving feedback from the teacher, they
tend to have more agency over their work. He believes that “the whole point of structured
education where students come to us for their schooling is not just doing work but getting
feedback on that.”
Similarly, Ms. Bren spoke repeatedly of the presence of feedback in her class.
Observation data showed a clear culture of feedback established in Ms. Bren’s class. Students
began the class period by watching each other’s speech recordings and providing verbal
feedback. They used a single-point rubric to guide the specificity of their feedback. Ms. Bren
reflected on the persistence necessary to establish this culture of feedback. Despite the challenges
of getting students to give and receive meaningful feedback, by practicing the process over and
over, and by co-constructing the expectations of what the feedback should look like, the culture
can be built around its importance.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 61
Theme 4- Provide Opportunities for Reflection
Findings indicated that students are provided a variety of opportunities to reflect in the
PBL environment at Central Institute. Cara recalled reflection as a personal and powerful
experience, remembering the presentations of learning (POLs) at the end of every semester as a
final, not for the teacher but for herself. It was “basically a final based on how well we could
reflect,” she said.
Ms. Bren shared that a lot of reflection happens, both throughout a project and at the end,
and that reflection helps with “ownership. POLs at the end of the semester is an opportunity to
own their learning.” Joseph shared his experience with POLs in 10
th
grade, where he was tasked
with reflecting in a future-facing creative medium:
We had to present as the you in 2050. I was a solar engineer in 2050, because I predicted
that sustainable energy was going to be more available than fossil fuels, and I reflected on
my time management and how collaborating with other people contributed to my success.
In his POL reflection, Joseph had to not only reflect on tasks he had completed throughout a
semester, but also apply his work and the skills practiced to his future. Both Cara and Joseph’s
experiences with POLs shows the value that students were able to place in the reflection process
when it was high stakes.
Reflection, however, occurs not only at the end of a project, but throughout. Dr. Hess
described his strategies for incorporating reflection as a daily “thinking routine,” where he uses
language such as “think, question and explore” to “illicit from them reflection.” He also
described the notebook structure where students take notes on their readings, explaining that the
2-column note process allowed for metacognitive and reflective thoughts as the student read for
information.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 62
In Ms. Bren’s class, she was observed introducing a new project, the “Allegory Puppet
Show” and alongside this, the “daily log”, a digital document that students would update daily to
reflect on their progress. She described the daily log as a method of reflection where students
could collect data on their own learning process. She could then help them to analyze their data,
and therefore draw conclusions about their learning process.
Ms. Lynn also shared how reflection was incorporated into her class, and the direct link
between feedback and reflection. “Revision is a reflection of your work. Whenever you are
getting or giving kind, specific and helpful feedback, you should look at your work from a
critical perspective, and use the feedback.” All three teachers highlighted the importance of using
the feedback, and not just the practice of receiving it. When students began to use the feedback,
they were inherently engaging in a process of reflection and therefore, were constructing their
own learning.
Theme 5- Foster Meaningful Connections to Learning
The final theme that emerged under RQ #1 is that students need to be able to foster
meaningful connections to their learning in order to construct their own knowledge in a PBL
environment. Cara shared that PBL gave her a “reason to learn” that was relevant and
purposeful. She gave an example of forming a deeper connection to her learning:
PBL made a difference in my education because now, even though I’m in class having to
study for different subjects, its helped me make connections about my relationship with
the content. Even if it feels really boring, it helped me to adapt to certain learning
environments. I try to force myself to see… I’m not studying math now to get a good
grade on a test, but so I can go to university, and do well in my math courses, which will
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 63
lead to my computer science courses, and then I’ll be able to develop programs that are
beneficial to the world.
In support of Cara’s student narrative, Dr. Hess believes that when students believe that
the learning is personalized, and they believe that they have agency over the outcomes, they will
more likely stay connected to the learning.
Cara’s experience of working on a project where she felt she was doing something
meaningful and authentic demonstrates that meaningful learning must come from the student
constructing their own understanding and connection around the learning. While working on a
year-long hydroponics project, the system stopped working. She and her team were guided to go
through the process of investigating the problem and doing research to find a solution. Cara
described a moment where she realized she wanted the system to work more than she “wanted a
grade.” Her emotional connection to the project and her team drove her to be more connected
with the learning.
When asked whether the PBL environment has influenced his education, Joseph
compared himself to his peers in traditional environments. He described his own learning
experience by noting that “we really dive deep into learning and apply it. In PBL, we take the
time to fully understand what we’re going to be learning about, and then we apply it.” Many of
the skills that he learned in one project, such as building wood structures, he is able to apply in
other projects without need for review. However, he observes his peers in the traditional
environment as “standard students” that “are used to cramming the things they need to know, and
then dumping it.” He highlighted that they appear to be more dependent on a teacher telling them
what to do, rather than being independent enough to “figure it out.”
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 64
In conversations with students and teachers, there appeared to be an overall “enjoyment”
towards learning. If meaning can be found through enjoyment, than students and teachers shared
many examples of an environment that fosters both.
Research Question #2: How Does the Teacher, as a Facilitator, Promote Authentic
Teaching and Learning in a PBL Environment?
RQ #2 aims to better understand the facilitator’s specific actions in promoting authentic
teaching and authentic learning. More specifically, the data point to a link between authentic
teaching and authentic learning, and to what the facilitator chooses to base the learning on, and
how the facilitator chooses to roll out the learning experience. The findings suggest that clear
facilitator actions can influence and promote authenticity.
This section discusses the findings with a distinction made between promotion of
authentic learning and promotion of authentic teaching. The themes for promotion of authentic
learning include: (1) start with an essential question, and don’t forget it; (2) connect to the real
world; (3) make team work the accountability for understanding; (4) build the feedback loop; (5)
exhibit learning to an authentic audience. The themes for promotion of authentic teaching
include: (1) keep learning; (2) collaborate and share; (3) ask for feedback.
Promoting Authentic Learning
Theme 1- Start with an essential question. The first theme of RQ #2 for promoting
authentic learning is the emphasis on starting with an essential question to drive learning, and the
need to address the essential question consistently throughout a learning unit.
Ms. Bren defined PBL as a learning practice where “students are engaged in an essential
question that allows them to construct their own meaning and use a project to communicate their
findings or their thoughts or answer to that question.” When she poses this question, she does so
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 65
to remind students of the purpose of the what they are doing. Likewise, Dr. Hess shared the need
for an essential question and an end point, so that students know what is driving the learning and
where they are going.
Both the humanities teachers, Ms. Lynn and Ms. Bren, shared the challenges of posing an
essential question that truly drives the learning in a “problem” oriented manner. Both teachers
expressed the need for more support in formulating essential questions. Ms. Lynn noted that
teachers need more support so that they can support students in creating their own essential
questions under the overarching one. This will help teachers to craft problems, or targets, that are
“meaningful and exciting” for students. However, not all essential questions are clearly rooted to
“problems”. Ms. Bren says “I rarely think of it as a problem…but an overarching question” so
that they know the purpose and can self-reflect on their learning throughout a task. Ms. Bren asks
her students to reflect daily by answering three questions: “what are you learning? How are you
contributing? What problems / challenges are you facing?” Although these three questions may
not be connected to the deeper problem or project content, they are essential questions that can
drive learning to be purposeful.
Dr. Hess shared his experience early in his teaching career, where he encountered a
science curriculum with a simple, straightforward essential question: “What is matter?” “The
whole year was the unpacking of a science experience of discovery” to answer this essential
question through exploratory assignments and projects, and heavily influenced his view on
curriculum. In his classroom observation, students were investigating the science content of the
laws of thermodynamics through the framework of cooking. A clear essential question guided
the learning.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 66
All three teachers shared their belief that developing strong problem-posing or purposeful
essential questions, and grounding the learning in those questions, was an important component
of the PBL environment, but some support is still needed in this practice.
Theme 2- Connect to the real world. In guiding students to construct their own,
meaningful learning in a PBL environment, the findings reveal that facilitators help students to
make authentic connections to the real world. All of the teacher and student participants made
references to the connection between learning and the real world. For the students, connection to
the real world seemed, first and foremost, to be about the connection to themselves personally.
Cara shared that “authentic learning is real learning. Having a love for what you’re learning, or
knowing why you’re learning. Learning with the intent to improve the world around you, and for
pleasure, and because you’re curious about something.” Her example of this was when she had
to do a project where she had to figure out how to lower the CO2 levels in the atmosphere by
using a personal skill or hobby, a project she was able to make personal connections with.
Similarly, Joseph shared that students in his PBL class are “passionate about their work.”
By working hard, he sees a lasting impact of his work, and feels that he gets a lot of rewards
from the work he does. For example, he and his classmates recently made a video addressed to
the President, and ended up on the news. “It’s nice to see our work in the real world, making an
effect on other people,” he shared. Joseph also shared that one of the reasons he would
recommend PBL to other students his age is because of the impact it has had on him. “Before,
learning was such an arduous task, not fun, but in PBL, we are applying everything to what
happens in the real world, and learning became related to all of us personally.” Knowing how
learning applies in life has helped him to have a deeper appreciation for learning itself.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 67
The data collected show that the facilitator has control in making learning connect to the
real world. In Ms. Bren’s class, the students were observed brainstorming the topic for their
allegory project. As an interdisciplinary ELA and history course, Ms. Bren had the option of
incorporating historical context into the requirements for the project. Instead she left it open for
interpretation so that more students would buy in and find a personal connection to the project.
Ms. Bren explicitly allowed students to choose their topics so that their personal connection to
the challenging project would be present.
Dr. Hess believes that the real-world connection begins with day one of the project.
When introducing a new project, he begins with a “hook,” the opening event that gets the kids to
ask the question, why do I need this? “When teachers provide students with a place to hook onto
their learning, the learning becomes authentic,” he shares. On the day of his first interview, Dr.
Hess had just returned from a field experience with his students where they visited the Board of
Water supply and conducted water quality test in a nearby stream. This experience was the
“hook” experience that introduced the forthcoming water quality project. Dr. Hess reflected:
A good PBL teacher asks themselves in what ways can my student show what they know
that aligns with what I asked them to do. So, like today with the water quality tour, I
would ask what would that exhibit look like that a professional would show, and not just
answer some low level questions about definitions and terms.
Another common finding was that technology should be used when making learning
connect to the real world, and to make learning meaningful. On the same field experience, the
students used a tool that allowed them to collect data, measure force, motion, and pH. Dr. Hess
described the use of this technology as “real world tech” that allows them to use the technology
in the field, such as on their field trip, and immediately go home and analyze their real-world
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 68
experience. Dr. Bren also shared her experiences of using technology to make learning connect
to the real world. However, she shared her apprehension in using technology because of her
desire to make sure that it is used in a “meaningful” and “thoughtful” way.
Ms. Lynn shared her experiences of making learning connect to the real world through
topical choice and intentional planning. Everything that she does is “deeply connected to what is
happening now,” she shared:
We practice a lot of empathy with real-world examples…we do a lot of current events,
debates, hot topic issues, about how this feels for you is different from how someone else
sees it, and we practice how we talk to people. Naturally, they become more
investigative.
Evidence of this was visible in her class observation as her students worked towards developing
their Putt-Putt Immigration Course, applying prior knowledge on historical and current
immigration issues to make a working course to be featured in a school event. Ms. Lynn also
showed evidence of providing a variety of learning activities to deepen learning around the real-
world issues. In the same class period, her students led an inquiry discussion on an immigration
reading, and were witnessed using language that made connections between self and the real
world, and building off each other’s ideas.
Theme 3- Make team work the accountability for understanding. A prevalent theme
related to authentic learning was that team work is heavily integrated in PBL. The data pointed to
team work as a means for accountability for student understanding and authentic learning.
In all three classroom observations, students were actively working in teams. In Dr. Hess’
class, students were assigned groups that they would be working in for the remainder of the
project unit. Together they were to conduct their first cooking experiment in the science lab. In
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 69
Ms. Bren’s class, students were given the choice of who they wanted to work with, also choosing
teams that they would be working in for the entirety of a project. Tasked with brainstorming their
allegory topic, teams were observed working towards the goal in a variety of different ways.
Reflecting on this in a later interview, Ms. Bren said, “they all came up with their own system”
to approach the task. The diverse approach in the way that students tackled the task allowed for
Ms. Bren to reflect on their understanding of the task. In Ms. Lynn’s class, students picked up on
work they had started in a previous class, and jumped right into conversations with their team
members on the designs of their putt-putt systems. Some students were observed collaborating
through conversation, and others were observed divvying up the work and coming back together
to discuss independent revelations.
Joseph shared that “we do a lot of group work. We learn to trust each other, which makes
it easier to figure out leadership roles. When we work with new people that you don’t know, it
helps you to learn to trust and then in turn, they trust you more.” Joseph also felt that the
intensity and frequency that students work together allows for teachers and students to have
stronger bonds, and there is more friendship among peers. Similarly, Cara shared that her
experience of working with and talking to people helped her to develop stronger communication
skills, and openness to multiple perspectives.
On the facilitator’s side, Dr. Hess spoke of intentional grouping that supports student
learning and allows students to work on their personal strengths and needs. Furthermore, because
most of the work is centered around a team, student accountability and support of one another is
inevitable.
Theme 4- Build the feedback loop. Another theme that emerged under RQ #2 in
prompting authentic learning is the importance of building a feedback loop in a PBL
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 70
environment. The findings on the culture of feedback under RQ #1 seem to be directly connected
to the ability for the teachers to be able to build the feedback loop as described in this theme.
Ms. Bren spoke often of the feedback loop in her two interviews, and it was prevalent in
her classroom observation that feedback is a common occurrence in her classroom, whether it be
through multiple iterations of writing or products. In her class, she shares with students when
they will be engaging in feedback by highlighting the times on the student-facing “project design
sheet.” Ms. Bren shares that “feedback is the routine in everything we do. It is a huge piece of
students feeling ownership and going back and trying to demonstrate learning and meaning.”
Ms. Lynn views feedback as a means of taking learning “to the next level.” Students in
her class work within a culture where they know that nothing is done without multiple rounds of
critiques. Dr. Hess describes facilitating a PBL environment as “situational”, and that “not all of
the kids need the same feedback or questions.” As a facilitator, he has to make daily decisions of
how to best spend his time. He asks himself “in a course of an 85-minute class period, have I
used my time in conversations with students most powerfully?”
Regardless of when the teachers choose to incorporate opportunities for the feedback
loop, whether it be planned out from the beginning or situationally, all three teachers emphasized
the importance of the feedback loop as a component of an authentic learning environment.
Theme 5- Exhibit learning to an authentic audience. The final theme that emerged
under promoting authentic learning in RQ #2 is facilitating projects so that students exhibit their
learning to an authentic audience. An authentic audience is described as an audience that
provides an element of authentic, real-world experience to the student presenting their work. The
authentic audience also can attribute to the purpose and feedback throughout a project process.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 71
In Ms. Bren’s class, students were observed learning about their new project unit. As
students learned that the audience of their project was to be a 5th grade puppet show, they began
to ask questions about the needs of the audience. For example, students asked, “what would a 5th
grader get out of this?” and “should we try to find out what the 5th graders are learning?” Ms.
Bren explained how the audience is not merely going to see the end product. Because the
students will be sharing their stories multiple times with the 5
th
graders, prior to the end product
presentation, the students saw their audience as the authentic reason for completing the project.
Dr. Hess also determines the authenticity of learning by asking, “who is it for?” For
example, in the water quality project, kicked off with a field experience to the stream, the
students will do investigative work with chemistry in the community, and “this time our
audience is going to be the City Council.” The authentic community partnership would allow the
students to feel connected to their learning as well as to the community that they live in.
Ms. Lynn’s class is building a putt-putt course to teach immigration issues, with the
public audience, or end user, being the school community at the upcoming fair. In addition to
content knowledge and creativity application, Ms. Lynn’s students also need to focus on
craftsmanship and usability of their project.
Joseph shared an experience where the authentic audience provided deeper meaning to
his learning experience. He shared that he and his classmates made videos addressed to Donald
Trump before he took office. The authentic audience, being the President, provided a platform
for empathy, passion, and logical reasoning, but more-so, Joseph connected to this project
because their videos ended up on the nightly news. “Seeing that our work could actually make a
difference out in the world is a really great feeling,” he said.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 72
One clear factor highlighted in the findings was that teachers intentionally planned all of
the experiences for students to exhibit their work to an authentic audience.
Promoting Authentic Teaching
Teacher mindset and actions. As authentic teachers, the common mindset and actions
obtained through teacher reflection was based in a strong, grounded philosophy for their personal
“PBL tenants.” When asked to define PBL, all three teachers provided personalized definitions
that were aligned with their personal values for teaching. For example, Dr. Hess described the
hallmarks of PBL as “you do something deeply that allows you to iterate, explore options, get to
second level questions, and lets you get to the things you don’t know instead of the things you
do…(and) the end should be some opportunity for students to show what they know in an
authentic manner.” Ms. Bren described her tenants as students engaged in a way that allows them
to “construct their own meaning” and Ms. Lynn as “guided exploration” of what students want to
learn about. The strong, values-based understanding of PBL drives these teachers to promote
authentic teaching.
All three teachers self-reflected throughout the interview process and three common
components were noted in the data that related to teacher mindset and actions in promoting
authentic teaching: continuous learning; collaboration and sharing; and asking for feedback.
First, the findings that emerged from conversations with teacher participants point to a
common desire to keep learning as a teacher. Dr. Hess said,
I’m not done. Teaching is like that, never perfect, and always working towards a more
perfect way, engaging students in experiences…keep practicing, watch other people, read
about it, non-stop learning, not just going through the motions. Continually work on it. If
you take seriously it is never easy.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 73
Ms. Bren said that when she wants to know something, she seeks out the books and
information to learn it. More so, Dr. Hess continues to learn by showing his work to a public
audience, just as his students do. He presents at conferences that support deeper learning, and
engages in the broader community that is available outside of his school. He also reads as much
as he can, which was noted in his constant “quotes” of deeper learning legacies.
Second, in order to promote authentic teaching, facilitators much collaborate and share.
In the Exploratory PBL Program, the teachers are a small, close-knit group, bound to other
departments and groups throughout the school, but given an opportunity to work with the same
students and collaborate and share ideas in their weekly meeting. “As a group, we’ll share and
talk about ideas and we’re always trying to hone our raft and figure out what best practices…we
are building the bridge as we walk on it and we are all comfortable with that model. It is so
valuable that we are learning from each other,” shares Ms. Bren. By collaborating and sharing,
the teachers are able to build off of each other’s work instead of constantly reinventing the
wheel.
Ms. Lynn shares a perspective as someone who is new to the community. She expressed
the need as a school to “be competitive” with the rest of the nation, and shared of her past
experiences at a school where the teachers and students built a strong culture of learning, and in
turn there was a lot of growth in teaching practices as well. She expressed the need for there to
be a schoolwide push towards learning, by engaging in articles and discussions on professional
development days, and relying on each other for feedback on the teaching practice.
Finally, all three teachers practiced the feedback loop that they ingrain in students for
their own teaching practices. “Trying to get feedback on what could I have done that is trying to
make this stronger... takes humility,” said Dr. Hess. He reflected that in the Exploratory PBL
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 74
department, all of the teachers had this in common. Dr. Hess described his colleagues as people
who would initiate the conversations of how they could get better, rather than waiting for
someone to point it out.
Ms. Bren also shared multiple examples of incorporating her students into this feedback
loop, by asking for their feedback on how routines and structures are implemented in their
classes. Ms. Lynn highlighted that as a school, there is a lot of room for improvement. All three
teachers seemed to believe that they view their own teaching practice as just that, a practice,
from a growth mindset lens.
Research Question #3: What Are the Best Practices for Teachers to Facilitate a
Personalized PBL Environment?
RQ #3 focuses on the best practices that facilitators implement to personalize the learning
environment for students in PBL. The data collected show significant evidence to suggest that
there are specific practices that PBL facilitators implement on a day-to-day basis that align with
the overall goals of RQ #1 and RQ #2. The findings that emerge from RQ #3 provide a clear
pathway for facilitators to support students in PBL environments. The findings also point to a
varied perspective of personalization than the literature currently offers. This section discusses
the findings under the following themes: (1) Set up purposeful routines and clear targets; (2)
Provide student choice and voice; (3) Co-construct understanding and be the model; (4) Ask
questions and have conversations; (5) Allow for multiple opportunities and modalities before
assessing.
Theme 1- Set Up Purposeful Routines and Clear Targets
The first theme that addresses personalized PBL environments is the facilitator’s role in
setting up purposeful routines and clear targets. All three teachers agreed that clear targets were
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 75
necessary for a personalized environment. “Reasonable points along the way that we can assess
and give feedback. What I’d hope you see is (a) a clear ending and (b) what we need to work on
today to get there. In good project design, there is a sense of urgency every day, and agreement
upon what that end looks like,” Dr. Hess shared.
All three teachers set up their learning targets in various ways. Dr. Hess shared that he
anchors the project in project standards, displayed at the front of the room, as “a visible practice
to point us towards where we are going, and as a reminder of our learning goals.” Ms. Bren
grounds the learning in an essential question, and launches projects with a detailed project design
sheet, as witnessed in the observation. Ms. Lynn sets up each project with a project sheet that
outlines the overall project, the outcomes and reasoning for the learning, and the activities
anchored to it. The diversity in how teachers outline the clear targets demonstrates the flexibility
and creativity that is allowed for when facilitating PBL.
Purposeful routines are also set up by these teachers. The data showed that the routines
were set up in order to allow students to take control of their own learning construction and
environment. Dr. Hess shared that he focuses less on “behavioral routines” and instead
implements many “thinking routines.” He emphasizes dialogue and conversation as a way of
assessing student understanding.” He does implement a routine where students build and
maintain a composition notebook, which takes place of a traditional textbook. “It’s a knowledge
text book, of what they’ve constructed in their composition book,” and acts as a space for
reflection and metacognitive practices where students think about what they are learning as they
are learning.
In Ms. Bren’s class, concrete routines such as a posted daily agenda and use of an
education app for posting and accessing digital assignments and resources, are widely practiced.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 76
She also stresses the importance of chunking class time. Less explicit routines incorporated in
her class such as Socratic circles and consistent feedback loops, and the overall overlap of many
learning activities happening at once, appear to be a consistent occurrence in Ms. Bren’s
classroom.
“It’s a common misconception that PBL classrooms are chaotic. An outsider might come
in and think it’s very chaotic, but I think organized chaos is required,” shared Ms. Lynn.
However, she described herself as “type A, super organized” and has a daily “warm up, to-do
list, tasks, and timers” that allow her class to flow. She, like Ms. Bren, prefers to chunk her class
time. Other more implicit routines are also present in her class. For example, students can expect
that every piece of work has “several iterations, drafts and critiques.” She describes her approach
as keeping her class “procedurally organized” so that productive chaos can ensue with purpose
In all three classes, purposeful routines and learning targets set the pathway for students
to construct their own learning. Joseph attributes this to comfort in the class environment, and
the “community” and closeness of peers and teachers.
We come to class, get settled in, and usually do a warm up thing…We are all really
comfortable so some classes, we get right into work. Once we’re settled in, the teacher
will set out all of the things we should be accomplishing, and then we have time to get
our work done… We are forced to be independent, but it’s not the teacher is abandoning
us. We are figuring it on our own, and when we need help we can ask. They are guiding
us, rather than telling us what to do.
Joseph’s reflection of his time spent in class aligns with the three teachers’ set up of purposeful
routines and learning targets, and seems to have allowed for Joseph and his peers to personalize
their learning.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 77
Theme 2- Provide Student Choice and Voice
The findings also point to the common theme of teachers providing student choice and
student voice in order to set up a personalized environment where students are constructing their
own knowledge. Ms. Lynn shares that she likes “giving them the power to run a class” and
allowing for the natural “changes, ebbs and flows” of a class. Similarly, Ms. Bren said, “there is
an element of choice in almost everything they do” and that “the element of choice addresses the
specific needs of the student.” Dr. Hess shares this view, and sees student choice as a path to
student ownership. “The ownership to me comes from the opportunity to have control over what
and how we’re learning something.”
He also stressed that PBL facilitation should imply that students get more opportunities to
talk than the teacher. The increase in student voice also leads to more ownership because the
ownership comes when “students have an opportunity to explain what they understanding, and in
the ability to say, ‘I can explain this to you’.” Dr. Hess believes that student voice is connected to
student understanding and ownership of learning.
Theme 3- Co-Construct Understanding and Be the Model
Students and teachers co-constructing understanding, alongside teacher modeling, was a
theme that was drawn from the findings. Both Cara and Julian shared that they viewed the role of
the teacher as someone who “guided” versus fed information to students. All three teachers
modeled for their students in a way that guided them to developing their own understanding.
In his observation, Dr. Hess was witnessed modeling the main learning activity by setting
up the burner and equipment himself and demonstrating to students the do’s and don’ts of the
cooking lab. He also tapped into students’ prior knowledge and had them co-construct the
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 78
expectations of the activity. “Does anyone remember the rule in the first semester when working
with boiling water?” he asked his students.
Ms. Bren said she constructs because it helps kids buy into the learning. For example, she
co-constructs what a “good conversation looks like” to set the expectation for class discussion
for the year.
Likewise, Ms. Lynn finds parallels between co-construction and teacher modeling. For
example, she shared how modeling problem-solving skills through co-construction allows
students to figure out problems on their own. “I try to show them how I would figure out a
problem,” she says. She also models time management and self-direction by co-constructing
agendas, to-do lists and schedules in the beginning of the year, and slowly weening students off
the dependency and having them “do it on their own.”
Theme 4- Ask Questions and Have Conversations
A common theme amongst the three teachers was that asking questions and having
conversations with students was a critical component of their PBL facilitation practice in making
the learning environment personalized for students. For example, Ms. Bren expressed that her
own strength as a PBL facilitator was the desire to be “involved” in what students were doing,
not through direct instruction but through sheer interest in their “process” of learning. She acts
on this by asking questions. Sometimes her questions are context based, helping students to
“generate more ideas or develop an idea.” Other times, her questions are pointed at deepening
their understanding. Often times, her questions are group management questions, to help students
to maintain focus on the task at hand.
Likewise, Ms. Lynn described the learning as a cycle, where she will “ask all these
questions, push them to research and theorize, and then ask more questions.” She adds that,
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 79
“what makes them construct their own questions is when they start asking questions and you
provide more questions.” She said she models the process of questioning by documenting what
students are saying and showing them strong and weak examples.
Similar to Ms. Lynn, Dr. Hess highlights the importance of students asking the questions.
“The person that asks the questions own authority,” says Dr. Hess. The facilitator’s role is to ask
questions, but also to open the floor for questions to be asked in order for students to get to a
deeper level of understanding.
Dr. Hess also asks questions of his own. “More than not, the questions I’m asking are
situational based on what I see someone doing and based on my observations.” Observations, he
points out more than once, are one of the foundations of evidence that show him what the
students understand. The dialogical nature of learning pushes Dr. Hess to use “conversation” as a
means of understanding where students are on a personalized level.
Theme 5- Allow for Multiple Opportunities and Modalities Before Assessing
The final common theme under RQ #3 was that all three teachers shared about allowing
for multiple opportunities and modalities before assessing student work, as a means for
personalizing learning.
Dr. Hess shared his belief, saying, “No one knows how long it will take a student to learn
something because every kid’s learning is different… I believe I need to give them multiple
modalities, forms of assessment and multiple opportunities to show proficiency and then
mastery.” The multiple components he looks for within the “dialogical nature of learning”
include artifacts, observations and conversations. Ms. Bren added that she believes all of her
colleagues prioritize formative assessments as a means of practice.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 80
When asked how they were assessed in PBL, Joseph was able to explain the process of
formative assessment and how it connects to how he views his work:
before we get into the bigger projects, we have smaller projects that are formative so we
can get a feel for what we are doing for when we get into the actual projects. We are
graded on the quality of work and how well we use class time. It is one thing to check off
all of the things you have, and it’s another thing to exceed the things you were told to do.
I take a lot of pride in my work.
Similarly, Cara shared that how she was graded is “what stuck out” to her when she
started PBL in the 9
th
grade. “I was graded based on my understanding and how much effort I put
in.” Prior to PBL, she disliked tests because of their emphasis on content and concepts. She felt
that the results were an “representation” of what she understood. Therefore, operating in a PBL
environment was a resonating moment for her because her “work was going to be graded on my
efforts instead of what I can do in an hour.”
Correspondingly, Ms. Lynn uses groups to provide accountability and multiple rounds of
feedback, and expects “multiple iterations” on all completed work. Ms. Bren gave the example
of Socratic circles, saying, “we practiced three times before it became a regularly graded item
and they know what it expected every time.” Similarly, “with blog posts, (we have) formative for
3 or 4 entries before they get graded,” she explains, to highlight the multiple opportunities
students receive to show their understanding. Dr. Hess provides an overarching perspective to
these practices, and said, “so the question is how do we help them get there (the end goal). One,
a clear, “where we are going”, and two, give feedback when it’s happening and guide when it’s
not. And working in a classroom where students learn from each other, we build in self-
assessment, and multiple opportunities.”
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 81
Dr. Hess referred to the learner profile of the school and noted that it refers to the
principle that school is an “environment where they have an opportunity to get feedback and
retest.” He said students should feel like “you turn something in and the deadline is next Friday,
but you still have multiple opportunities to get feedback so it is not a guessing game. Formative
feedback is informing their learning, and it can’t just be one time grading.” However, he brought
this up in the context of a student commenting that he didn’t get these same opportunities in his
other classes. Therefore, the principle may not be practiced school wide.
When asked to elaborate on assessment, Ms. Bren referred to the end of semester POL as
an authentic assessment. “Authenticity drives why it should matter. POLs at the end of the
semester is an opportunity to own their learning. What did I accomplish? What was meaningful?
What are my areas for growth?” Reflection and cumulative assessment appear to be indirectly
linked.
Dr. Hess also highlighted the importance of students showing what they know in an
authentic manner. The true value of assessment was not to show the world what you know, but
rather “inform the learner” on where they stand, and where they should go next.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 82
Table 1
Summary of Findings
Components of
Framework
Themes Summary
Construction of
Knowledge
RQ#1.1:
Build a community of learners
Facilitators should build community to establish an environment of
student accountability and ownership over learning.
RQ#1.2:
Set up a student-centered
learning environment
PBL defined as student-centered, where students are actively engaged in
“construction, conversation and dialogic work”, and where learning is
derived the students’ questions, needs and perspectives. Student centered
around guided exploration and discovery. Defined by students as letting
the student take over their learning.
RQ#1.3: Establish a culture of
feedback
A culture of learning and meaningful feedback allows students to see
what quality looks like, and is built by repetition of practice and co-
construction.
RQ#1.4:
Provide opportunities for
reflection
Daily thinking routines allow students to approach new information in a
reflective and metacognitive manner, collect data on their own project
process. Accepting feedback for revision is a method of reflection. Final
presentations of learning, an assessment of reflection versus a grade.
RQ#1.5:
Foster meaningful
connections to learning
When students feel the learning is personalized, they will stay connected
and take agency over their learning. PBL gives learning a purpose.
Authentic
Learning
RQ#2.1a:
start with an essential
question, and don’t forget it
Teachers need support in developing essential questions that drive
learning. Essential question should pose problems and bring purpose to
the learning.
RQ#2.2a: connect to the real
world
Students connect authentically to learning when its personal, and when its
grounded in the real world. Teachers set this up by providing choice and
planning intentionally.
RQ#2.3a:
make team work the
accountability for
understanding
Group work is an integral part of all of the PBL environments in this
study, and is often relied on as a means of holding students accountable to
each other.
RQ#2.4a:
build the feedback loop
Within the culture of feedback established (RQ #1) students engage in
multiple forms of the feedback loop and receive regular and consistent
feedback about their progress.
RQ#2.5a: exhibit learning to
an authentic audience
Teachers provide experiences for students to exhibit their learning to an
authentic audience.
Authentic
Teaching
RQ#2.1b:
keep learning
Authentic teachers constantly reflect on their values and philosophy for
teaching, and are grounded in their view of the tenants of PBL.
Practicing authentic teaching requires the mindset that teaching is a
continuous learning process. Teachers practice the feedback loop instilled
in their students within their own teaching practice, and collaborate with
willing and like-minded individuals to see progress.
RQ#2.2b: collaborate and
share
RQ#2.3b:
ask for feedback
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 83
Table 1, continued
Components of
Framework
Themes Summary
Personalization
RQ#3.1:
Set up purposeful routines and
clear targets
Students should know what they are expected to do, and what the end
goal of the project is. Teachers roll this out using a variety of different
methods, but anchor activities in standards, essential questions, and
purposeful routines that allow students to construct a road map to their
end goal.
RQ#3.2:
Provide student choice and
voice
Student choice is provided as a means of allowing for student voice, a
transparent way of seeing student understanding and ownership of
learning. Teachers provide student choice to hand over the power to the
students.
RQ#3.3: Co-construct
understanding and be the
model
Teachers facilitate by “guiding” students, allowing the co-construction of
knowledge to occur. One method of guidance is through modeling.
RQ#3.4: Ask questions and
have conversations;
Teachers ask students questions and have conversations as a method of
understanding where students are in their own construction of knowledge,
as well as a method of turning the authority of knowledge over to the
student.
RQ#3.5: Allow for multiple
opportunities and modalities
before assessing
Authentic personalization happens when students are given multiple
opportunities, as well as multiple modalities for demonstrating learning,
before being assessed.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 84
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
This study set out to examine how the facilitation of students in a PBL environment can
lead to authentic teaching and authentic learning. The rationale and purpose of this study was to
explore the PBL environment as a vehicle for reaching educational goals, as the means to an end.
This study was designed to collect and provide qualitative data to answer the following three
guiding research questions: (1) How does the teacher, as a facilitator, guide students to construct
their own learning in a Problem-Based Learning environment? (2) How does the teacher, as a
facilitator, promote authentic teaching and learning in a PBL environment? (3) What are the best
practices for teachers to facilitate a personalized PBL environment?
This study sought to understand the role of the facilitator in guiding students to construct
their own learning. Likewise, the study investigated the practices implemented by teachers when
facilitating a personalized PBL environment, and sought to understand whether these are best
practices that are transferrable to other learning environments. Using qualitative methodology,
this case study focused on a private institution that specialized in a high school PBL
environment. The study population consisted of three teacher participants and two student
participants, under the guise of pseudonyms. Data from interviews, classroom observations and
documents was used as primary data points, and triangulated.
This section breaks down the findings into four synthesized sections: setting up the
learning environment for student construction of knowledge; setting up the learning context for
authentic learning; maintaining a teaching practice that promotes authentic teaching; and setting
up day-to-day routines for personalization. Next, a new conceptual framework and the project-
based practice (PBP) are outlined and presented. This section concludes with the implications for
practice and recommendations for further research.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 85
Figure 2 breaks down the four components that were synthesized based on the findings
presented in Chapter Four. The purpose of this chapter is to help practitioners to visualize these
components in action, as well as draw connections between the literature presented in Chapter
Two and new literature that is significant to understanding the PBL facilitator’s role. Chapter
five also highlights the extent in which these components contribute to “good teaching” in
today’s educational landscape.
Figure 2. The PBL facilitator’s role
Setting Up the Learning Environment for Student Construction of Knowledge
In order for facilitators to “guide” students to construct their own learning in PBL, the
emphasis must be made on the classroom environment. The results of the study showed that
facilitators that focus on classroom environment through the lens of building community, setting
up a student-centered learning environment, establishing a culture of feedback, providing
opportunities for reflection and fostering meaningful connections to learning, frequently saw
•Keep learning
•Collaborate and
share
•Ask for feedback
•Set up routines and targets
•Provide student voice and
choice
•Co-construct, model, ask
questions, converse
•Allow for multiple
opportunities/modalities
before assessment
•Create a road map with
an EQ
•Connect to the real world
•Make team work integral
•Practice the feedback
loop
•Exhibit learning to an
authentic audience
•Build a community that is
student-centered
•Create a culture of
feedback and reflection
•Foster meaningful
connections Set up a learning
environment for
student
constructed
knowledge
Set up learning
context for
authentic learning
Maintain a
teaching practice
promotes
authentic teaching
Set up day to day
routines that allow
for personalization
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 86
students constructing their own learning. Table 2 outlines the five teacher actions and
summarizes the main findings from Chapter Four.
Table 2
Summary of The Learning Environment & Construction of Knowledge (RQ #1)
Components
of RQ
Themes Summary
Construction
of
Knowledge
RQ#1.1:
Build a community of
learners
Facilitators should build community to establish an
environment of student accountability and ownership over
learning.
RQ#1.2:
Set up a student-
centered learning
environment
PBL defined as student-centered, where students are actively
engaged in “construction, conversation and dialogic work”,
and where learning is derived the students’ questions, needs
and perspectives. Student centered around guided
exploration and discovery. Defined by students as letting the
student take over their learning.
RQ#1.3: Establish a
culture of feedback
A culture of learning and meaningful feedback allows
students to see what quality looks like, and is built by
repetition of practice and co-construction.
RQ#1.4:
Provide opportunities
for reflection
Daily thinking routines allow students to approach new
information in a reflective and metacognitive manner,
collect data on their own project process. Accepting
feedback for revision is a method of reflection. Final
presentations of learning, an assessment of reflection versus
a grade.
RQ#1.5:
Foster meaningful
connections to learning
When students feel the learning is personalized, they will
stay connected and take agency over their learning. PBL
gives learning a purpose.
In this section, these PBL facilitator roles are synthesized alongside the literature that was
presented in Chapter Two, and new literature that was found relevant to the study. Also
presented are how and why a teacher, in the role of the PBL facilitator, can incorporate these
roles into their teaching practice.
Building a Community of Student-Centered Learning
Two major components that were presented in the findings of this study emphasized the
need for building a community of learners and setting up a student-centered learning
environment. Therefore, it can be synthesized that building a community of student-centered
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 87
learning is a crucial role for PBL facilitators. The narratives presented in Chapter Four highlight
the different types of communities that can be built, depending on the teacher’s goals and
approach. However, all three teacher participants repeatedly mentioned the importance of
community and culture in their classes, underlining the need for facilitators to build community
to establish an environment of student accountability and ownership over learning.
According to Savery and Duffy (1995), designing a learning environment that challenges
and supports the learner’s thinking, and that promotes collaborative and social learning, is
essential to fostering an effective PBL environment. Ferreira and Trudel (2012) found that
because PBL environments demand collaborative problem-solving, the development of safe-
spaces for the exchange of ideas and group cohesion allowed for students to experience a great
sense of community. The learning environment that was observed in this study differed based on
the teacher. Some teachers, like Dr. Hess, viewed a community of learners as an environment
where students could independently direct themselves to complete tasks at hand and construct
their own learning, so that the teacher played more of a role as a guide. Ms. Bren and Ms. Lynn
spoke on the topic of community in the need to foster relationships with students. Ms. Bren
valued relationships so that students felt open and safe to receive feedback, and Ms. Lynn valued
relationships with her students so that they saw her as “on the same team” versus the individual
who held all of the knowledge. Regardless of whether the community was built around
accountability and ownership, or relationships, all three classrooms were observed maintaining a
community that was student-centered.
The student narratives shed light on the importance of student-centered communities.
Students who had experiences in this type of setting describe PBL as an opportunity to “take-
over” their learning, emphasizing the value they place on their personal ownership of their
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 88
learning experience. All three teachers emphasized that student-centered still implies that the
learning is “guided” by the facilitator but that the learning outcomes are centered around student
exploration and student discovery.
Savery (2006) asserts that PBL is meant to be a learner-centered approach that empowers
learners to research, apply theory, and apply knowledge and skills to develop a solution to a
problem. Within this type of environment emerges a complex nature of facilitating where
student-centered learning is the priority (Neumann, 2013). One way to view student-centered
learning is to provide a context where students make choices to guide them towards the “external
learning goals” established by the teacher (2013). However, the findings also showed evidence
of teachers setting up student-centered learning where the student also established the purpose of
the learning, such as when Ms. Bren’s students brainstormed their topics for their allegory
narratives, and when Ms. Lynn’s students merged their understanding of immigration issues with
engineering a putt-putt learning course. These examples align with Dewey’s (1938) argument for
“the importance of the learner (is) in the formation of the purposes which direct his activities in
the learning process” (p. 67).
The major difference between the literature presented in Chapter Two and the findings is
the focus on building a community first. The findings show that in order for a student-centered
learning environment to be a reality, it must be built into the already existing community.
However, the facilitator has an imperative to first build that community so that it can support a
student-centered learning environment.
Creating a Culture of Feedback and Reflection
With a community of student-centered learning established, teachers can then build in a
culture of feedback and reflection. The study findings showed that a major component of guiding
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 89
students to construct their own learning was allowing for feedback and reflection to be more than
a routine, but an ingrained culture, in the aforementioned community of learning. This section
focuses on the culture and practice that teachers can establish for feedback and reflection, where
the actual feedback practice will be discussed in further detail in the next section, “setting the
context.”
The qualitative findings pointed to a common view that a culture of learning and
meaningful feedback allows students to see what quality looks like, and is built by repetition of
practice and co-construction. This coupled with the culture of reflection allows students to see a
continuous, transparent reality of the road map that they need to follow for growth and progress.
New literature that emerged from the findings is the literature on culture of feedback, or critique,
as an essential component of facilitating an authentic PBL environment where students are
constructing their own learning. Ron Berger (2003) stresses the need to set up a culture of
critique, where students are taught and encouraged to provide each other with kind, specific and
helpful feedback. Ron Berger’s emphasis that feedback comes not only from the teacher, but also
from peers, resonates with the study’s findings (2003). All three teacher participants spoke
constantly of feedback, coming not only from them as facilitator’s but from peer groups that
helped each other collaboratively move towards learning goals. Teachers and students were also
witnessed providing feedback through classroom observations. This collaborative form of
feedback is made possible because of the community that is established prior.
Reflection, in addition to feedback, is a practice that is implemented throughout a
learning process, as well as an end goal. Teachers gave examples of daily thinking routines and
practices that allow students to approach new information in a reflective and metacognitive
manner. For example, Dr. Hess provided verbal prompts that pushed students to think about why
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 90
they took certain actions during their cooking lab. Another way that reflection can happen
throughout a learning process is by allowing students to collect and analyze data on their own
project process. By having students log their daily progress, they can then use that later on to
analyze their process of getting to an end goal.
In addition to the consistent practices of feedback and reflection, final POLs were viewed
by teachers and students as an assessment of reflection, more than an assessment for a grade. For
example, Joseph’s presentation of himself in 2050 as a solar engineer was a platform for Joseph
to apply, in a reflective and metacognitive manner, the skills he felt he had gained during a
project process to his life in the future. How well he could articulate this reflection was a
testament to his own processing and construction of learning.
The current academic literature on PBL briefly covers feedback and reflection as an
important component. Puntambekar and Kolodner suggest that younger learners may need
scaffolding in order to engage in reflection, such as through “structured diaries”, however, this
area of the literature still required further evidence to determine effectiveness (1998; Hmelo-
Silver, 2004). These scaffolded diaries are similar to Ms. Bren’s daily logs that she implements
in practice. Also, the literature on constructivist theory emphasizes the importance of providing
students with the opportunity for reflection (Savery & Duffy, 1995). However, the limited
priority that PBL specific literature gives to feedback and reflection differs from the priority that
practitioner-based literature places on these two components. “Reflection” and “critique and
revision” are two ingrained components of the eight essential project design elements presented
in Buck Institute’s “Gold Standard PBL” (Larmer et al., 2015). Therefore, there is a need to
bridge the gap between priorities outlined in academic literature on PBL, practitioner literature
on PBL, and what is practiced as seen in this study.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 91
Foster Meaningful Connections to Learning
Finally, the findings of the study highlighted that student ownership and connection to
learning occurs when students feel that learning is personalized. Once the community of student-
centered learning is established, and a culture of feedback and reflection is built, the facilitator
has an imperative role to provide learners with an opportunity to make meaningful connections
to their learning. One of the main priorities of the constructivist approach is that the learning
environment provides the learning goal and that the learner has a purpose for being in that
environment (Savery & Duffy, 1995). When students are operating within a strong established
community, the community itself provides purpose and reason for learning. Students will be able
to foster meaningful connections to their learning, and hence, construct their own learning.
The student experiences shared throughout the study pointed to the deeper connection to
learning that students made with projects that they had personal investment in, such as Cara’s
year-long hydroponics experiment. In this example, Cara recognized the moment when she cared
more about figuring the problem out and completing the project, then the grade. This shift in
mindset and investment in the problem was a crucial moment where Cara found herself making
connections to the learning that were more intrinsic than extrinsically motivated
The literature from Chapter Two strongly aligned with this theme, attesting that students
may form deeper connections to peers and teachers and be motivated by personal interests,
which in turn allows them to become lifelong learners (Childress & Benson, 2014). Regardless
of the problem or project set forth, facilitators who have established a strong community, built
around student-centered learning, reflection and feedback, will find that the interpersonal and
collaborative connections, supported by constructivist theory, are what allows the deeper
connection to the learning to be made. Furthermore, the findings consistently pointed to PBL as a
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 92
means of giving learning a purpose. According to Larmer et al. (2015), it is important for the
facilitator to foster a project environment where the context, tasks, and impact are, but the
students also need to be able to engage with the project on a level of personal authenticity. The
next section will outline how and why the facilitator can foster this type of project environment
for authentic learning. However, it is important to remember that the personal authenticity
referred to by Larmer et al. is grounded in the “community” presented in this section (2015).
Setting Up the Learning Context for Authentic Learning
In order for teachers, as PBL facilitators, to promote authentic learning, it is necessary for
them to set up a PBL learning context that provides a strong foundation for student-constructed
learning to occur. How a teacher chooses to roll out this context can determine the authentic
experience that students can have in the PBL environment. With a community of student-
centered learning, reflection, feedback, and opportunity for meaningful connections built,
facilitators can take explicit steps in their planning to promote authentic learning.
Table 3 outlines the five roles of the PBL facilitator, and summarizes the main findings
from Chapter Four.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 93
Table 3
Summary of the Learning Context for Authentic Learning (RQ#2, Part 1)
Components
of
Framework
Themes Summary
Authentic
Learning
RQ#2.1a:
start with an essential
question, and don’t
forget it
Teachers need support in developing essential questions that
drive learning. Essential question should pose problems and
bring purpose to the learning.
RQ#2.2a: connect to the
real world
Students connect authentically to learning when its personal,
and when its grounded in the real world. Teachers set this up
by providing choice and planning intentionally.
RQ#2.3a:
make team work the
accountability for
understanding
Group work is an integral part of all of the PBL
environments in this study, and is often relied on as a means
of holding students accountable to each other.
RQ#2.4a:
build the feedback loop
Within the culture of feedback established (RQ #1) students
engage in multiple forms of the feedback loop and receive
regular and consistent feedback about their progress.
RQ#2.5a: exhibit
learning to an authentic
audience
Teachers provide experiences for students to exhibit their
learning to an authentic audience.
The study found that facilitator actions can influence and promote authentic learning. In
this section, these PBL facilitator actions are synthesized alongside the literature that was
presented in Chapter Two, and new literature that was found relevant to the study. Also
presented are how and why a teacher, in the role of the PBL facilitator, can incorporate these
roles into their teaching practice.
Framing
When setting up the PBL context, it is essential to frame the learning platform in a way
that promotes authentic learning. There are two components, based on the findings of the study
and the literature, that contribute to this. First, the facilitator should anchor the learning in an
essential question. The essential question should pose problems and bring purpose to the
learning, as well as create a road map for students to know where they are going.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 94
The literature on “problem-posing” in PBL emphasizes a need for a clear learning goal
(Hmelo-Silver & Barrows, 2008; Savery & Duffy, 1995). Freire (1993) presents the problem-
posing method as an alternative presentation of reality, arguing that posing a problem allows the
problem to become the main focus of one’s perception, and allows individuals to be critically
objective about the reality that they are living in. The problem-posing method can take place in
the form of an essential question.
Wiggins and McTighe (2013) outline the defining characteristics of an essential question:
(1) open-ended, with no one correct answer; (2) thought provoking and intellectually engaging;
(3) calls for higher-order thinking, such as analysis, inference, prediction and evaluation; (4)
interdisciplinary; (5) sparks further inquiry; (6) requires support and justification; and (7) can be
revisited over time. Posing an authentic essential question that drives students to make real-world
and personal connections to the learning allows for more meaningful learning.
The framework of Understanding by Design, by Wiggins and McTighe, where facilitators
backwards map the intended student learning to an essential question, was a framework that was
found to be used by PBL facilitators to root the learning to a problem, and consistently revisit it
throughout a project (2005; Wiggins and McTighe, 2013). For example, Dr. Hess spoke of using
the essential question as a road map for student-centered learning. The simple question, “What is
matter?” that he encountered early on in his teaching career was a question that allowed him to
frame the learning as an investigation and scientific inquiry about the world that students live in.
However, developing an essential question that holds the weight of an entire learning
unit, and also drives the purpose of study to the end of the road map, can be a challenging task.
The study found that teachers need more support in developing essential questions that drive
learning and are rooted in problems. As the first component of “framing” authentic learning,
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 95
careful attention should be given to the comfort level that facilitator’s have with developing
essential questions.
Another component that is essential to framing PBL in a way that promotes authentic
learning is making connections to the real world. In truth, the essential question developed
should already allow for these real-world connections. For example, the question “what is
matter?”, in all of its simplicity, is a question that drives many real-world experiences that
teachers can bring to the classroom. A question such as “what is the significance of clean
water?” might drive real-world connections such as an experience where students conduct water
quality tests in a nearby stream as a launch activity into a new unit. In this way, the study found
that students connect authentically to learning when they are able to make a personal connection
to its purpose. The study also found that teachers and students see authentic learning as learning
that is grounded in the real world. Teachers set this up by providing choice and planning
intentionally.
In describing authenticity as one of the gold standards of PBL, Larmer et al. (2015) say
that all aspects of PBL should be authentic: first, the context of the project; second, the tasks that
students complete; third, the authentic impact that projects have on the world; and fourth, the
personal authenticity that speaks to students’ personal concerns, interests or issues in their lives.
The findings of the study, specifically the intentional planning done by the facilitators, align with
this definition of authenticity. The intentional planning done on the part of the teachers also
aligns with David Merrill’s phases for effective instruction demonstrate the need for this
connection:
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 96
(1) Learning is promoted when learners are engaged in solving real-world problems.
(2) Learning is promoted when existing knowledge is activated as a foundation for new
knowledge.
(3) Learning is demonstrated when new knowledge is demonstrated to the learner.
(4) Learning is demonstrated when new knowledge is applied by the learner.
(5) Learning is demonstrated when new knowledge is integrated into the learner’s world.
Merrill outlines a cycle of learning that takes place in an authentic PBL classroom, where
the learner first engages in, or is exposed to, solving real-world problems as a means to
activating prior knowledge and gaining new knowledge, which is eventually applied and
integrated into the learner’s world. One witnessing of this practice was in Ms. Lynn’s class,
where students were taking on the challenging of building a putt-putt golf course that applied
their prior knowledge and investigations of the topic of immigration, but in the context of a new
challenge. Learning needs to be grounded in an authentic problem, such as “raising awareness
about immigration issues in our nation”, that accurately depicts the reality that both the facilitator
and the student are living in, both in and outside of the classroom experience (Behizadeh, 2014;
Freire, 1993).
The major noticing in the literature is that the foundational literature of constructivist
theory and Freire’s work in problem-posing is strongly connected to the practitioner’s research
of prioritizing authenticity as a component of the “Gold Standard” of PBL (Freire, 1993; Larmer
et al., 2015). However, the academic literature still has gaps in making connections between the
facilitator’s specific actions in framing PBL, such as through essential questions and real-world
connections, and the need for promoting authentic learning.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 97
Practice
Once teachers, as facilitators, have established the framing of the PBL context through an
essential question and connection to the real-world, it is necessary to promote authentic learning
practices that can happen throughout the learning process. The two components of practice are
making team work an integral part of the learning, and building and practicing the feedback loop.
First, the findings show that group, or team work, is an integral part of the PBL
environment, and is often relied on as a means of holding students accountable to each other, and
to their own understanding of the learning. Thus, the results of group work are directly connected
to student’s constructing their own meaning of the learning. In all three classes observed,
students were seen working in teams, some driven from student choice and others selected by the
teacher. Students are therefore, often in different teams working on different projects and goals
simultaneously.
The findings of this study point to a strong connection between the socio-constructivist
theory, and collaboration’s role in fostering authentic learning. Literature on collaboration in the
PBL setting, although consistently discussed as a pillar of socio-constructivist approach, lacked
in the review conducted in Chapter Two. According to the literature, constructivists believe that
what is understood is a function of the content, the context and the activity, and that knowledge
evolves through interaction with a social environment within collaborative groups (Savery,
1995). For collaborative knowledge-building to be successful, the activity needs to be structured
so that learning is shared, expertise is distributed and building on each other’s ideas is the norm
(Palincsar & Herrenkohl, 1998). The consistent practice of having students work in teams allows
for this type of collaborative knowledge-building to occur over time.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 98
Another essential practice that PBL facilitator’s implement is the consistent use of the
feedback loop. With the culture of feedback established in the first section, the study found that
students engage in multiple forms of the feedback loop and receive regular and consistent
feedback about their progress as an important component of constructing their own learning. The
feedback comes in many forms, sometimes as formative, quick verbal feedback, structured
feedback on written and tangible assignments, or in the form of “critiques” provided by both
peers and teachers. The teacher participants highlighted the need to include a feedback loop at
multiple points in a project, which built onto the general philosophy that multiple drafts of work
were required in order to show growth towards progress.
Some of the teachers, such as Dr. Hess, referred to it as the need for formative practice,
where students received feedback on their practice along the way. John Hattie (2012) attributes
student-constructed learning, and ownership over learning, to students engaging in formative
practice and receiving feedback. Additionally, Buck Institute’s Gold Standard for PBL
emphasizes opportunities for critique and revision, through the differentiation of formative and
summative work, to be a critical component of successful PBL environments (Larmer et al.,
2015). Although feedback is an integral part of practitioner PBL literature, there is a gap in
academic literature on PBL that emphasizes feedback as an essential component of authentic
learning. Therefore, more research should be done to bridge the gap between collaboration,
feedback and authentic learning in PBL environments.
Exhibit
The final component that PBL facilitators prioritize when setting up the context for
authentic learning is intentionally planning an experience for students to exhibit their learning to
an authentic audience.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 99
In Ms. Lynn’s class, the students were designing and constructing a putt-putt course that
will teach players about contemporary immigration issues. The intended audience for the project
was the school community, as the putt-putt course would be an integral part of an upcoming
school fair. This meant that students had to consider not only their content knowledge in
planning the project, but soft skills such as craftsmanship that would attribute to how the
authentic audience perceived the final work. In Ms. Bren’s class, students were introduced to the
allegory project, with the intended audience (for both feedback and final presentation) as a 5
th
grade class. The audience, regardless of age, provided an authentic measure to how students
invested in the project, and what choices they would make along the way.
Another component of Buck Institute’s Gold Standard for PBL is to provide students
with an opportunity to create a project that they can then share with an audience beyond the
classroom (2015). As a result of this, Larmer et al. attest that students perceive the projects as
more “real”, encourages students to do their best, and increases student engagement. There is
little research in academic PBL literature that emphasizes the importance of the authentic
audience, however, in practice, giving students an experience where they can present their work
to an authentic audience is seen to allow students to take their learning to the next level, and
therefore, find personal authenticity in their learning.
Maintaining a Teaching Practice to Promote Authentic Teaching
As important as the student experience is in having an authentic learning experience, the
literature and the findings of this study support that maintaining a teaching practice to promote
authentic teaching is equally important. One does not necessarily lead to the other in linear
fashion, but instead, both authentic teaching and learning were found to occur in cyclical motion.
In order for teachers, as PBL facilitators, to maintain a teaching practice that promotes authentic
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 100
teaching, it is necessary for them to be reflective of their personal values, be a continuous
learner, collaborate and share with one another and ask for feedback.
Table D summarizes the findings maintaining a teaching practice that promotes authentic
teaching.
Table 4
Summary of the Teaching Practice for Authentic Teaching (RQ#2, Part 2)
Components
of
Framework
Themes Summary
Authentic
Teaching
RQ#2.1b:
keep learning
Authentic teachers constantly reflect on their values and
philosophy for teaching, and are grounded in their view of
the tenants of PBL.
Practicing authentic teaching requires the mindset that
teaching is a continuous learning process. Teachers practice
the feedback loop instilled in their students within their own
teaching practice, and collaborate with willing and like-
minded individuals to see progress.
RQ#2.2b: collaborate
and share
RQ#2.3b:
ask for feedback
In this section, the role of the PBL facilitator in maintaining a teaching practice that
promotes authentic teaching is synthesized alongside the literature that was presented in Chapter
Two, and new literature that was found relevant to the study. Also presented are how and why a
teacher, in the role of the PBL facilitator, can maintain this type of teaching practice.
Practice What You Preach
In essence, the authentic teacher practices what they ask of their students. The study
found that the teacher participants all viewed themselves as lifelong learners, collaborated and
shared with one another, and asked for feedback. These three components of an authentic
teaching practice align with the tenants that PBL facilitators set forth for their students: building
a community of learners; team work as an integral part of PBL; and practicing the feedback loop.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 101
An important finding under this theme was that authentic teaching and authentic learning
happen cyclically, rather than one before the other. The study highlighted that the practice of
authentic teaching, or facilitation, requires the mindset that teaching is a continuous learning
process. As lifelong learners, PBL facilitators independently engage in current readings from the
field of PBL, share their own practice with other teachers at conferences and attend conferences
to support their deeper learning practice, write blog posts, and seek out like-minded individuals
to collaborate with. Teachers also practice the feedback loop that they instill in their students
within their own teaching practice, and seek, receive and give feedback to see constant progress
and change.
Furthermore, the teacher participants in the study were strongly grounded in their
personal tenants of PBL. By having a strong understanding of what they valued in the
philosophical framework of student-centered learning, they were able to approach their teaching
practice with a “PBL mindset” that promoted authentic teaching.
The literature presented on authentic teaching in Chapter Two aligned with the findings.
Authentic teaching was emphasized when it comes to curriculum planning, pragmatic focus on a
problem, and personal authenticity, in other words, that the teacher is personally invested in how
the student engaged with PBL (Larmer et al., 2015). Furthermore, Laursen (2004) identifies the
following competences related to authentic teachers: personal commitment, embodiment of the
task, realistic intentions concerning teaching, working in contexts where these intentions can be
realized, respect for students, intense co-operation with colleagues and a continual striving
towards personal and professional development, many of the traits recognized in the teacher
participants in this study.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 102
The literature on authentic teaching in PBL environments generally focuses on teacher
actions in relation to student actions, such as Buck Institute’s Gold Standard for Project-Based
Teaching. Larmer et al. (2015) identify the key knowledge, understanding and success skills for
teachers facilitating this environment as: design and plan; align to standards; build the culture;
manage activities; scaffold student learning; assess student learning; and engage and coach.
However critical each of these “teacher” skills are, the findings of this study focused on the
teacher mindset towards their own continuous practice as a precursory need for carrying out
these teaching competencies. There is a need for teachers to prioritize continuous learning,
collaboration with one another, and building their own feedback loop so that they can remain
grounded in their personal values for authentic teaching.
Setting Up Day-to-Day Routines for Personalization
With a focus on the learning environment where students can construct their own
knowledge, and the framing and practices implemented that promote authentic teaching and
learning, PBL facilitators will find a learning environment is supportive and centered around
most students. However, this study and the literature highlights a final, essential component to
ensuring that students are not only constructing their own learning in an authentic learning
environment, but are also personalizing their learning. The way in which students can
personalize their learning is through the day-to-day intentional routines and targets that are set
forth by the PBL facilitator.
The findings of the study point to a link between the facilitator’s choice in day-to-day
routines, purposeful planning, and student personalization of learning. The following section
provides a clear pathway for facilitators to support students in PBL environments, however, it
also points to a varied perspective of personalization than the literature currently offers.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 103
Table 5 outlines the practices that can be adopted by PBL facilitators to allow for
personalization, and summarizes the findings of this study.
Table 5
Summary of Day-to-Day Routines and Personalization
Components of
Framework
Themes Summary
Personalization
RQ#3.1:
Set up purposeful
routines and clear
targets
Students should know what they are expected to do, and
what the end goal of the project is. Teachers roll this out
using a variety of different methods, but anchor activities in
standards, essential questions, and purposeful routines that
allow students to construct a road map to their end goal.
RQ#3.2:
Provide student choice
and voice
Student choice is provided as a means of allowing for
student voice, a transparent way of seeing student
understanding and ownership of learning. Teachers provide
student choice to hand over the power to the students.
RQ#3.3: Co-construct
understanding and be
the model
Teachers facilitate by “guiding” students, allowing the co-
construction of knowledge to occur. One method of
guidance is through modeling.
RQ#3.4: Ask
questions and have
conversations;
Teachers ask students questions and have conversations as
a method of understanding where students are in their own
construction of knowledge, as well as a method of turning
the authority of knowledge over to the student.
RQ#3.5: Allow for
multiple opportunities
and modalities before
assessing
Authentic personalization happens when students are given
multiple opportunities, as well as multiple modalities for
demonstrating learning, before being assessed.
In this section, the day-to-day routines and targets that can be enacted by the PBL
facilitator is presented alongside the literature that was presented in Chapter Two, and new
literature that was found relevant to the study.
Intentional Planning
By intentionally planning prior to a rollout of PBL, teachers, as facilitators, can better
ensure that students will have opportunities for personalization. The existing literature on
personalization suggests that personalization is a pedagogical approach to teaching that address
diverse learning needs, preferences and approaches, and that student engagement comes from the
expectation of autonomy as students work towards self-reliance (Deed et al., 2014; Prain et al.,
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 104
2013). The literature also states that teachers should implement strategies such as: flexible use of
space and time, social reform of the classroom as a community space (RQ #1- building
community), interactions between teacher and student where choices are made together and the
consequences of decisions are experienced (RQ #3-co-construction), use of technology to shape
personal learning pathways, and use of collective intelligence to guide in problem-solving (RQ
#2- team work). Therefore, in order for students to come to a place in their learning where they
can achieve “self-reliance”, routines can be implemented. According to Hmelo-Silver et al.
(2007), PBL routines also provide a layer of scaffolding that reduces cognitive load. By reducing
cognitive load, students arrive at the learning already in a place where connections can be made,
and therefore the classroom becomes a space where students can construct their own meaning
and learning.
The study found that in ensuring an environment where personalization can be fostered,
one choice that facilitator’s make in the PBL environment in setting up purposeful routines and
targets. Students should know what they are expected to do, and what the end goal of the project
is. Teachers roll this out using a variety of different methods, but anchor activities in standards,
essential questions, and purposeful routines that allow students to construct a road map to their
end goal. For example, Ms. Bren’s benchmark calendar, a document that is provided on the first
launch day of a new project, outlines every expectation and deliverable, with due dates and
learning objectives, that will be expected from students from beginning to end. The road map
allows students of different needs to access the information in the way that suits them best. By
intentionally planning all of the expectations of a project or learning unit, and transparently
sharing that with students, students can have a clear understanding of what they are expected to
do, which can then lead to an overall confidence and autonomy over the learning goals.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 105
When it comes to anchoring learning in a target, Hmelo-Silver and Barrows found that it
is critical for the facilitator to keep the learning goals in mind at all times in order to go beyond
the specific problem that the student(s) are addressing (2008). The research on essential
questions (RQ #1) lends to this theme as well, as many PBL facilitators choose to anchor their
learning goals in the essential question. An essential component of the literature on
personalization is the use of technology. The study found that although technology is an integral
part of classroom routines, it is viewed more as a tool than the means to a personalized pathway.
Technology was used for posting assignments and calendars, completing assignments and
communicating with one another. Overall routines were implemented in order to exercise
flexibility of space and time, so that the classroom was a space where students could construct
their own meaning and learning.
In addition to intentional planning of routines and targets, PBL facilitators can ensure that
they provide opportunities for student choice and voice within their planning. Student choice and
voice are provided as a means of building community and a student-centered learning
environment, as described in the first section. However, student choice and voice plays a role in
intentional planning as well, because of its connection to personalization of learning. This study
found that student choice is provided as a means of allowing for student voice, and therefore
gives facilitators a transparent way of seeing what students understand. It also connects to
student ownership of learning, because as teachers provide student choice, it hands over the
power, or authority, of knowledge to the students.
Teachers can intentionally plan for opportunities of student choice. For example, students
can be given choice on topical issues, such as Ms. Bren’s students who were given the choice of
topic for their allegory puppet show. Choice is also given day to day in allowing students to see
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 106
that they own their time, and how they choose to use it is a direct reflection of the work they
produce. Planning for choice as an intentional component of teaching students to be autonomous
over their work can allow for personalization.
The literature on SDL in relation to PBL attempts to highlight an importance of student
choice and voice, but disregards the openness and autonomy that facilitators can provide students
with right from the start as a matter of exposure. The literature focuses on a guided approach,
where a teacher’s interventions decrease as students progressively take on personal responsibility
and become self-directed learners (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2006). What was found in the study, and
aligns with Merrill’s work on effective instruction, is that authentic and personalized learning is
promoted when learners first engage with the learning, before new knowledge is demonstrated.
A new area of literature that connects with the study’s findings on student choice and
voice is the critical theorist’s literature on democratic-based education, where student choice and
voice are an integral part of the approach (Morrison, 2008). The strong connection that critical
theorist’s make between the democratic classroom, and the democratic community at large, also
relates to the findings on the importance of making real-world connections in promoting
authentic learning (RQ #2). This is an area that can be further studied in-depth.
Facilitating Consistent Routines to Promote Understanding
In addition to the intentional planning of routines, targets and student choice and voice,
PBL facilitators can implement consistent routines that can help promote student understanding.
One facilitation routine is for teachers to “guide” students to construct their own understanding,
often through the co-construction of knowledge.
One method of guidance was found to be modeling. The literature on modeling in
relation to PBL facilitation does not directly align. The literature often discusses modeling in the
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 107
context of scaffolded instruction, or “gradual release of responsibility” (Fisher & Frey, 2007). In
the “I do” stage, which generally occurs whole class, the teacher “provides direct instruction,
establishes goals and purposes, models and thinks aloud,” and modeling occurs as teachers show
students exactly what is expected prior to students taking on the task themselves.
In contrast, this study found that teacher modeling happens differently in a constructivist
environment. Ms. Lynn shared examples of how she models and co-constructs skills with her
students, such as how to approach a problem and how to manage tasks. Similarly, Ms. Bren
shared examples of co-constructing norms and expectations for routines, such as having
conversations within Socratic circles. Dr. Hess was witnessed modeling the cooking lab for the
class period observed, but he did so by engaging with students and allowing students to construct
the expectations around how to behave in a lab setting. None of the teachers were witnessed
using the “I do” form of modeling, and in the case of examples where they were modeling, the
study found that they relied heavily on students to help them to construct expectations and skills.
The PBL literature supports this finding, as it highlights that teachers and students have
interdependent responsibilities, rather than the traditional approach where the teachers might
guide the class independently (Brannen & Nilsen, 2005; Campbell et al., 2010; Cusher, 2002;
Dabbagh & Kitsantas, 2012; Deed & Edwards, 2013; Deed et al., 2014; Halpin, 2007; Leiringer
& Cardellino, 2011; Selwyn, 2009). In a PBL environment, it is necessary for the teacher to not
feed information and content through modeling, but rather use modeling and co-construction of
knowledge as a tool for teaching students how to approach learning. Coaching students through
task-structuring, modeling of problem-solving skills, and metacognitive reasoning helps students
to engage in the PBL process independently (Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007;
Quintana et al., 2004).
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 108
In addition to “guiding” students through new knowledge and co-constructing
understanding, PBL facilitators can implement the consistent routine of asking questions and
having conversations. As a simply sounding method, the study found that all teachers and
students relied heavily upon this innate form of communication as a method for understanding
what one knows. Teachers ask students questions and have conversations as a method of
understanding where students are in their own construction of knowledge, as well as a method of
turning the authority of knowledge over to the student. In the beginning, teachers might feel that
the questioning is one sided, but as the student begins to personalize the learning to themselves,
the student in turn becomes the questioner. Teachers can and should base their formative
evaluation of a student’s understanding through questioning and conversations.
This aligns with the overall definition of personalized learning, where there is a
“differentiation of the curriculum to address diverse learning approaches, preferences and needs”
(Deed et al., 2014, p. 66). However, the study found that the differentiation of the curriculum
often happens on an individualized basis. When on an individual basis, teacher-student
conversations and questions allow the facilitator to address each student’s individual needs,
values and capabilities, as well as allow the learner to identify gaps in their own understanding
(Deed et al., 2014; Hmelo-Silver & Barrows, 2008; Prain et al., 2013).
The PBL literature presented in Chapter Two emphasized the facilitator’s role in
structuring activities that stimulate motivation and encourage reflection, while the study found
that motivation came from the learner’s personal desire to dig deeper into the learning.
Additionally, the study and the literature align in the finding that feedback and teacher prompts
through conversations and questioning, are a method for promoting self-directed, or self-
regulated, learning (English & Kitsantas, 2013). It is important to differentiate between guiding
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 109
students to ask question as a means of problem-solving, and asking questions as a means of
getting to the “right” answer. In the PBL method, there is no one “right” answer, but the
facilitator’s role is to ask the student questions to guide them to the best solution of the problem
or task at hand, and eventually allow them to be the questioner (Savery & Duffy, 1995).
Personalization and Assessment
Although personalization and assessment do not initially appear to be related, the study
found that word assessment is inherently linked to the culture of feedback built into the learning
environment (RQ#1 and RQ#2). Authentic personalization happens when students are given
multiple opportunities, as well as multiple modalities for demonstrating learning, before being
formally assessed. According to Behizadeh (2004), authentic learning refers to students
connecting to the learning in a way that they view school as more than a means to earn a grade,
and are able to connect and transfer their learning to experiences in other aspects of their lives. In
an educational landscape where most teachers are still tied to formal assessments, finding a way
to personalize the required “assessment” can allow for more authentic learning.
The student narratives in this study contributed to better understanding the role of
assessment. Cara’s realization that she was finally going to be assessed on what she knew how to
do when she first entered the Exploratory PBL Program is an example of how the approach to
assessment is just as essential as what teachers choose to assess.
According to the Buck Institute’s Rubric for Gold Standard Project-Based Teaching, a
Gold Standard PBL Teacher assesses when they have ensured that a variety of evidence are used,
the individual’s work is assessed when they are working on teams, students have engaged in the
feedback loop, students have been given an opportunity to self-assess, and the assessment pushes
students to deeper levels of thinking (Buck Institute of Education, 2015). As a result of the
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 110
facilitators implementing the other themes presented in this study, students are given multiple
opportunities, multiple rounds of feedback, and opportunity to own their learning prior to the
assessment stage. Whether students are assessed on content standards required by a school, as
students in Central Institute’s Exploratory Program are, or whether students only summative
assessment is their final presentation to the public or another authentic audience, the assessment
should not occur prior to the many opportunities for growth. There is still room for more
research in the academic literature on PBL in prioritizing authentic assessment for the purpose of
personalizing learning.
A New Conceptual Framework – “The PBL Mindset”
Despite the growing literature in the fields of PBL and personalized learning, as
presented in Chapter Two, the findings of this qualitative study highlight the discrepancies that
exist between the literature and the practice. The primary findings unearth an understanding that
highlights the importance of bridging what is written in the academic literature, the practitioner’s
literature and what authentic teaching and learning looks like in practice.
The conceptual framework presented at the end of Chapter Two and again here in Figure
3, which outlined the synthesis of literature, identified that in order to facilitate an environment
in PBL where students are constructing their own learning, the facilitator must approach teaching
“authentically”, which will lead to an authentic learning environment. An authentic learning
environment, according to the literature presented in Chapter Two, draws heavily on the
facilitator’s role of guided instruction, promoting self-directed instruction, and fostering a
personalized environment.
First and foremost, the findings of the study required the researcher to flip her perspective
of how the teacher approached facilitation (Figure 4). In fact, the original conceptual framework
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 111
(Figure 3) inferred that the teacher was doing the majority of the work in framing the learning,
and throughout the process of learning, students gained more and more autonomy and began to
construct their own knowledge (hence the triangle point is directed towards “student constructed
learning.”) This lens of viewing the teacher or facilitator’s role does not differ greatly from the
scaffolding model that emphasizes “gradual release of responsibility”, known as “I do, we do,
you do” (Fisher & Frey, 2007). Figure 4 shows that the findings suggest that facilitators
implement a model that supports more of an “I guide, you try, and then you connect to the
learning and personalize it” approach.
Figure 3. Original Conceptual Framework
Authentic
Teaching
Authentic
Learning
Student
Constructed
Learning
PBL
facilitator’s
role:
*Guided
*Self-Directed
*Personalized
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 112
Figure 4. Framework Based on Findings
Figure 4, developed based on the findings of this study, shows a flipped perspective of
the facilitator’s role. It implies that authentic teaching and authentic learning are happening
simultaneously, and cyclically, whereas Figure 3 implied that one had to happen for the other to
occur. It also implies that guided instruction, or the “I do, we do” happens for the shortest portion
of time, and is followed by collaboration and SDL amongst students. As guided learning and
teacher modeling were a component in setting up purposeful routines and targets, and co-
constructing knowledge, it is not completely ruled out of the progression of learning, but it was
found to be much less upfront than in the original framework. Collaboration was found to be an
essential pillar of the PBL settings in the study, and was therefore added as a key student role.
This is followed by personalization of learning for the majority of time, which leads to students
constructing their own learning.
Authentic
Teaching
Authentic
Learning
Student
Constructed
Learning
*Guided
Student’s active role:
*Collaboration
*Self-Directed
*Personalized
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 113
Figure 5. The new conceptual framework for a PBL mindset
Figure 5, The New Conceptual Framework for a PBL Mindset, breaks down the findings
by highlighting the specific role that the facilitator. The focus is on: setting up a learning
environment for student-constructed knowledge; setting up a learning context for authentic
learning; setting up day-to-day routines that allow for personalization; and maintaining a
teaching practice that promotes authentic teaching. This study found that when teachers engage
in this role as a PBL facilitator, students are more likely to find opportunities to construct their
own learning. The findings of this study highlight that despite the growing amount of research in
PBL focused studies, the practice of setting up an environment for PBL with the intention of
student-constructed, authentic and personalized learning is not yet a primary focus for studies
that seek to have a deeper understanding of the facilitator’s role. This study not only fills the
gaps of understanding the role of “collaboration” in a PBL environment, but also contributes to
Authentic
Teaching
Authentic
Learning
Student
Constructed
Learning
*Guided
Student’s active role:
*Collaboration
*Self-Directed
*Personalized
Set up a
learning
environment
for student
constructed
knowledge
Set up
learning
context for
authentic
learning
Maintain a
teaching
practice
promotes
authentic
teaching
Set up day to day
routines that
allow for
personalization
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 114
the body of research that seeks to understand how PBL requires a different approach to teaching
than the traditional methodology that teachers often learn. The findings also emphasize the
importance of the student owning the time in a classroom, versus the teacher owning that time, in
order for a student to be able to construct his or her own learning and knowledge.
The current literature on personalized learning environments aligned by definition, but
not by practice. This study found that personalized learning is more of a phenomenon, and an act
where students own their learning through the means of excellent PBL facilitation, rather than
mere creative uses of technology or adaptive programming, as much of the literature on
personalized learning still focuses on.
The New Conceptual Framework for a PBL Mindset reframes the way that practitioners
look at PBL. By adopting a PBL mindset, where student-constructed learning, authentic learning
and teaching, and personalization is the priority for deeper learning, teachers help to break down
the barriers and misconceptions of PBL as a curriculum or method. This study helps to highlight
the mindset, the approach, that good teachers have when facilitating an authentic PBL
environment.
Implications for a PBL Mindset
The findings of this study highlight that PBL, as much as the focus is on student learning,
requires the adoption of a project, or problem-based mindset (PBM) by teachers. By adopting a
PBM, teachers shift their approach from, “let’s work towards this project or product”, to “let’s let
student construct their own knowledge, provide them with authentic learning and teaching, and
give them a platform to personalize their learning.” The four main components for a PBM are:
setting up a learning environment for student-constructed knowledge; setting up a learning
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 115
context for authentic learning; setting up day-to-day routines that allow for personalization; and
maintaining a teaching practice that promotes authentic teaching.
First, the findings of this study highlight the implications of a teacher setting up a
learning environment that focuses on community, student-centered learning, feedback, reflection
and meaningful learning. In this environment, students are given an environment where they can
begin to construct their own learning. Second, teachers as facilitators ensure authenticity in their
teaching by focusing on the context of the learning. Teachers can do this by anchoring learning
in an essential question, connect learning to the real world, making team work and collaboration
integral, building in feedback loops at multiple stages, and providing experiences for students to
exhibit their learning to authentic audiences. Third, teachers with a PBM reflect on the
authenticity of their own teaching practice by engaging in continuous learning, sharing and
collaborating with colleagues and professionals to avoid reinventing the wheel, and ask for and
remain open to feedback to see continuous growth in their own practice. Finally, facilitators with
a PBM need to set up day-to-day routines that will guide their students to engage in personalized
learning, which guides them to construct their own learning. The day-to-day practice includes:
setting up purposeful routines and clear targets; provide student choice and voice; co-construct
understanding with students and model skills versus content; ask questions and allow students to
ask questions to identify gaps in their learning; and lastly, allow for multiple opportunities and
multiple modalities before assessing.
Ideally, teachers, as PBL facilitators, can adopt this mindset in all four component areas.
However, each of the components is a building block towards fostering the most authentic
learning environment. The specific actions that a PBL facilitator can take is based in the findings
of this study, the academic literature or practitioner-based literature for good teaching in a PBL
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 116
environment. A teacher with a PBM mindset could adopt these themes little by little to build up
their authentic PBL environment.
The participants of this study all had a strong PBM, and as a result, the student
participants were able to articulate their own experience in an authentic PBL environment. It is
important to note the overarching accountability that these teacher participants were held to,
despite the flexibility they were allowed in how they approached their teaching practice.
Teachers in Central Institute’s Exploratory Program were still held to academic standards
emphasizing breadth over depth and assessments driven towards college readiness, and students
would eventually move out of the program to join their peers in the mainstream traditional
environment in 11
th
grade. This goes to show that the findings of this study emphasize a practice,
more-so a mindset, that can still guide teachers and students to the same end. Despite outside
factors that will indefinitely influence a child’s education, a PBM acts as a vehicle that can arrive
at the same end as other approaches to teaching and learning.
Recommendations for Further Study
This study also adds to, and possibly redefines, the literature on personalized learning.
The findings align with the definition of personalization presented in the literature, but conflicts
with the focus that the literature on personalization has on technology and adaptive learning. It
helped to fill the gaps in the literature on the role of collaboration in a PBL environment, added
to the student narrative of what happens after students leave a PBL environment, and confirms
much of the literature presented on deeper learning practices and PjBL.
Nevertheless, this study opens many opportunities for continued research in this growing
field. First, Figure 3 and 4 present a new perspective of the existing literature on PBL that can be
further explored. The conceptual framework originally presented in this study confirms that the
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 117
literature that currently exists in this field does not present PBL as a drastic variance in how to
approach teaching and learning. The literature was synthesized to present a framework that
closely aligned with the traditional approach of “gradual release of responsibility” where the
teacher takes up the base of the triangle, or the majority of the time. The new perspective
presented in Figure 3 and 4 allows for a new definition of “guided” instruction, and a practice
that allows for increased student-time in a class where students can construct their own learning.
Further research could lend to a deeper understanding of the validity of participant experiences
that could help to fill the gap between what was witnessed in this study, and what the literature
says that PBL facilitation looks like.
Another recommendation for further research is a longitudinal study to better understand
the impact that PBL environments has on students after leaving this learning environment. Cara’s
narrative allowed for some understanding of the experience that students have after engaging
with PBL, but a longitudinal study would allow for the researcher to explore both explicit and
implicit effects.
This study also opened opportunities for intersections of PBL literature with the fields of
place-based education, culturally relevant pedagogy, and sustainability education. Central
Institute’s location in the Hawaiian Islands allowed for some intersections to be made visible,
such as what contexts teachers chose to place their projects in. This is a field of study that could
potentially overlap. A qualitative study conducted to better understand the similarities between
authentic teaching in PBL and place-based learning, culturally relevant pedagogy and
sustainability education, such as a case study of teachers engaging in place-based learning with
Native Hawaiian students, could broaden the scope of understanding how the roles of teachers in
these diverse learner environments is aligned, and contributed to authentic teaching and learning.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 118
Furthermore, a study that explores student experiences in PBL in urban versus rural
environments is a potential area of further study. Such a study may include interviews with
teachers, administrators, students and community members in both rural and urban settings to
determine the teacher’s role in facilitating a learning environment where students are
constructing their own learning. Another potential intersection is the literature of PBL with that
of democratic-based and philosophy based education approaches. Many of the facilitator “roles”
identified in the study align with the value systems of democracy based and philosophy based
education. A case study on student experiences in these settings could further contribute to the
literature on PBL and authentic teaching and learning.
Finally, the student narrative, although limited in this study, is one to be further explored.
Both students shared personal narratives of feeling passionate about their own experiences in
PBL, but unsure of the capabilities of their fellow peers who have gone through a traditional
education system for so long. Further studies, such a longitudinal study, can be conducted on the
effect of approaching education with a PBP earlier than high school, and the impact that that has
on students in high school and beyond.
Conclusions
Although this study set out to better understand the role of a PBL facilitator in setting up
an environment where authentic teaching and learning were to occur, the findings of this study
underline not only what the facilitator needs to do in order to ensure that this can happen, but
also why it is so essential to focus on authenticity as a pillar to student learning. Overall, the
findings of this study allows teachers to view their teaching practice, whether in a formal PBL
environment or in an environment where teachers wish to see more student-constructed
understanding, as a project or PBM.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 119
This study also allows us to view “personalization” not as the act of students “doing it
alone” in a self-regulated or self-directed environment, but as a word to indicate that students are
making meaning and constructing their own learning. A truly personalized learning environment
is an authentic learning environment, where teachers are engaging in authentic teaching and
students are engaging in authentic learning.
Although this study focuses on PBL as the vehicle of teaching and learning, it is
important to recognize that this is just one method or approach to authentic teaching and
learning. In fact, adoption of the PBM is adoption of a teacher approach that moves a learning
environment towards one where students are constructing their own understanding around their
learning. The components presented in this study that make up the role of a PBL facilitator are
components that align with general deeper-learning practices and practices for meaningful
learning. This dissertation hopes to highlight these practices as a way to emphasize the value of
the PBL facilitator, and the PBM approach to teaching, so that all students are given the tools
and the space to find personal meaning in their learning.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 120
References
Albanese, M. A., and Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of literature on its
outcomes and implementation issues. Acad. Med. 68, 52–81.
Barber, W., King, S., & Buchanan, S. (2015). Problem based learning and authentic assessment
in digital pedagogy: Embracing the role of collaborative communities. Electronic Journal
of E-Learning, 13(2), 59.
Barrows, H.S. (2000). Problem-Based learning applied to medical education, Southern Illinois
University Press, Springfield.
Barrows, H., and Kelson, A. C. (1995). Problem-Based learning in secondary education and the
problem-based learning institute (Monograph 1) Springfield, IL: Problem-Based
Learning Institute.
Barrows, H. S., and Tamblyn, R. (1980). Problem-Based learning: An approach to medical
education. New York, NY: Springer.
Behizadeh, N. (2014). Enacting problem-posing education through project-based learning.
English Journal, 2, 99–104.
Berger, R. (2003). An ethic of excellence: Building a culture of craftsmanship with students.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Bogdan, R.C. & Biklen, S.K. (2007) Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theories and methods. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Boud, D., & Feletti, G. (1997). The challenge of problem-based learning (2nd ed.). London:
Kogan Page Common Core State Standards Initiative.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 121
National Governors Association for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers
(2010). Common Core State Standards. National Governors Association Center for Best
Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, Washington D.C.
Brannen, J., & Nilsen, A. (2005). Individualization, choice and structure: A discussion of current
trends in sociological analysis. The Sociological Review, 53(3), 412–428.
Buck Institute of Education (2015). Project Based Teaching Rubric. Retrieved from:
https://www.bie.org/object/document/project_based_teaching_rubric
Campbell, R., Robinson, W., Neelands, J., Hewston, R., & Mazzoli, L. (2010). Personalized
learning: Ambiguities in theory and practice. British Journal of Educational Studies,
55(2), 135–154.
Childress, S., & Benson, S. (2014). Personalized learning for every student every day: The best
hope for accelerating student achievement is by using a range of pedagogical and
technological innovations that deliver personalized learning to each student. Phi Delta
Kappan, 95(8), 33.
Conley, D. T. (2005). College knowledge: What it really takes for students to succeed and what
we can do to get them ready. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Conley, D. T. (2015). A new era for educational assessment. Educational Policy Analysis
Archives, 23(8).
Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory (3
rd
ed.) Los Angeles: SAGE.
Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2000). Activating & engaging habits of mind. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 122
Cranton, P.A., & Carusetta, E. (2004). Developing authenticity as a transformative process.
Journal of Transformative Education, 2(4), 276–293.
Cuban, L. (2000). Why is it so hard to get “good” schools? In L. Cuban & D. Shipps,
Reconstructing the common good in education (pp. 148–169). Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-
regulated learning: A natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning.
Internet and Higher Education, 15, 3–8.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wilhoit, G., Pittenger, L. (2014). Accountability for college and career
readiness: Developing a new paradigm. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(86).
Deed, C., Lesko, T., & Lovejoy, V (2014). Teacher Adaptation to Personalized Learning Spaces.
Teacher Development, 18. 369–83.
Deed, C., Cox, P., Dorman, J., Edwards, D., Farrelly, C., Keeffe, M., Yager, Z. (2014).
Personalised learning in the open classroom: The mutuality of teacher and student
agency. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 9(1), 66–75.
Deed, C., & Edwards, A. (2013). Knowledge building in online environments: Constraining and
enabling collective intelligence. In P. Ordonez de Pablos, H. O. Nigro, R. D. Tennyson,
S. E. G. Cisaro, & W. Karwowski (Eds.), Advancing information management through
semantic web concepts and ontologies (pp. 176–194). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 123
Dinan-Thompson, M. (2001, June). Teachers experiencing authentic change: The exchange of
values, beliefs, practices and emotions in interactions. Paper presented at the
Experiencing change- exchanging experience, virtual conference.
Donmoyer, R. (1990). Generalizability and the single case study. In Elliot W. Eisner, & Alan
Peshkin (Eds.). Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate (pp.175–200).
New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Elmore, R. F. (2006). School reform from the inside out: policy, practice and performance.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
English, M. C., & Kitsantas, A. (2013). Supporting Student Self-Regulated Learning in Problem-
and Project-Based Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7(2).
Ferreira, M. M., & Trudel, A. R. (2012). The impact of problem-based learning (PBL) on student
attitudes toward science, problem-solving skills, and sense of community in the
classroom. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 47(1), 23–30.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the
gradual release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Freire, P. (1971). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
Gallagher, S. A., & Gallagher, J. J. (2013). Using Problem-based Learning to Explore Unseen
Academic Potential. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7(1), 3–15.
Halpin, D. (2007). Utopian spaces of ‘robust hope’: The architecture and nature of progressive
learning environments. Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35(3), 243–255
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 124
Hawaii State Department of Education (2016). Strategic Plan. Retrieved from:
http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/VisionForSuccess/AdvancingEducation/StrategicPla
n/Pages/home.aspx
Hmelo-silver, C. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational
Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2008). Facilitating Collaborative Knowledge Building.
Cognition and Instruction, 26(1), 48–94.
Hmelo, C. E., and Lin, X. (2000). The development of self-directed learning strategies in
problem-based learning. In Evensen, D., and Hmelo, C. E. (Eds.), Problem-Based
Learning: Research Perspectives on Learning Interactions (pp. 227–250). Mahwah, NJ,
Erlbaum.
Kilpatrick, W. H. (1921). Dangers and difficulties of the project method and how to overcome
them: Introductory statement: Definition of terms. Teachers College Record, 22 (4), 283–
287.
Kirschner, P., & Clark, R. (2006). Work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery,
problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist,
41(2), 75–86.
Larmer, J., Mergendoller, J. & Boss, S. (2015). Setting the standard for project based learning: a
proven approach to rigorous classroom instruction. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Laursen, P. F. (2004). [The authentic teacher. Become a good and effective educator—if you
want to]. Stockholm, Sweden: Liber AB.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 125
Lebow, D. (1993). Constructivist Values for Instructional Systems Design: Five Principles
toward a New Mindset. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(3), 4–
16.
Leiringer, R., & Cardellino, P. (2011). Schools for the twenty-first century: School design and
educational transformation. British Educational Research Journal, 37(6), 915–934.
Lenz, B., Wells, J. & Kingston, S. (2015). Transforming schools: Using project-based learning
performance assessment, and common core standards. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Markham, T. (2011). Project-based learning A bridge just far enough. Teacher Librarian, 39(2),
38–42.
Mergendoller, J. R., Maxwell, N. L., & Bellisimo, Y. (2006). The Effectiveness of Problem-
Based Instruction: A Comparative Study of Instructional Methods and Student
Characteristics. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(2), 11–17.
Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook (3
rd
ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Morrison, K. A. (2008). Democratic classrooms: Promises and challenges of student voice and
choice, part one. Educational Horizons, 87(1), 50–60.
Neumann, J. W. (2013). Developing a new framework for conceptualizing “Student-centered
learning”. The Educational Forum, 77(2), 161–175.
Kreber, C. (2010). Academics’ teacher identities, authenticity and pedagogy. Studies in Higher
Education, 35(2), 171–194.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 126
Kreber, C., Klampfleitner, M., McCune, V., Bayne, S., & Knottenbelt, M. (2007). What do you
mean by “authentic”? A comparative review of the literature on conceptions of
authenticity in teaching. Adult Education Quarterly, 58(1), 22–43.
Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual
Review of Psychology. 49, 345-375.
Palincsar, A. S., and Herrenkohl, L. R. (1999). Designing collaborative contexts: Lessons from
three research programs. In O’Donnell, A. M., and King, A. (eds.), Cognitive
Perspectives on Peer Learning (pp. 151–178). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Patel, V. L., Groen, G. J., and Norman, G. R. (1991). Effects of conventional and problem-based
medical curricula on problem solving. Academic Medical. 66, 380–389.
Patel, V. L., Groen, G. J., and Norman, G. R. (1993). Reasoning and instruction in medical
curricula. Cognition and Instruction 10, 335–378.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks:
SAGE.
Puntambekar, S., and Kolodner, J. L. (1998). The design diary: A tool to support students in
learning science by design. In A.S. Bruckman, M. Guzdial, J.L. Kolodner, & A. Ram
(Eds.), ICLS 1998, Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences,
pp. 230–236.
Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., et al. (2004). A
scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the
Learning Sciences, 13, 337–386.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 127
Reddy, V., Said, L., Sengupta, B., Chetlur, M., Costantino, J., Gopinath, A.. . .Vedula, S. (2015).
Personalized learning pathways: Enabling intervention creation and tracking. IBM
Journal of Research and Development, 59(6), 4-4:14.
Rodgers, C. (2002). Seeing student learning: teacher change and the role of reflection. Harvard
Educational Review, 72(2), 230–253.
Sanson-Fisher R. W., & Lynagh, M., C. (2005). Problem-based learning: A dissemination
success story? Medical Journal of Australia, 183(5), 258–260.
Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of Problem-based Learning: Definitions and Distinctions.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 13.
Savery, J.R. and Duffy, T. M. (1995). “Problem based learning: an instructional model and its
constructivist framework.” Educational Technology, 35(5), 31–38.
Selwyn, N. (2009). Faceworking: Exploring students’ education-related use of Facebook.
Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2), 157–174.
Terwel, J. (1999). Constructivism and its implications for curriculum theory and practice.
Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(2), 195–199.
Torp, L., and Sage, S. (2002). Problems as possibilities: problem-based learning for K–12
education (2nd Ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Trilling, B. & Fadel, C. (2009). 21
st
century skills: learning for life in our times. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Usher, R. (2002). Putting space back on the map: Globalisation, place and identity. Educational
Philosophy and Theory, 34(1), 41–55.
Van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum, awareness, autonomy and
authenticity. New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 128
Vernon, D. T., and Blake, R. L. (1993). Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of
evaluative research. Academic Medicine. 68, 550–563.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J.V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation in mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
The White House. (2016). Education. Retrieved from: https://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/
education
Yazzie-Mintz, E. (2010). Charting the path from engagement to achievement: A report on the
2009 High School Survey of Student Engagement. Bloomington, IN: Center for
Evaluation and Education Policy.
Zimmerman, M. (1986). The development of Heidegger’s concept of authenticity. Eclipse of the
self (Rev. ed.). Athens: Ohio University Press.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 129
Appendix A
Teacher Participant Interview Guide 1
Interview Guide
Teacher Name
Site
Interviewer
Date
Start Time
End Time
Introduction:
Hello _____________________________. Thank you so much for agreeing to be interviewed.
Before we begin, I would like to share the purpose of this study to help guide your responses.
I am studying the role of the facilitator in a Problem Based Learning environment, which I refer
to as PBL throughout the interview. I am interested in learning more about the facilitator’s role
in guiding students to construct their own knowledge. When answering questioning, please
provide responses in reference to the PBL environment you teach, rather than other traditional
environments that you may also teach in.
I will not tell anyone that you are participating in this study. I will not be using your name in any
presentation of my findings. In the findings, I will use pseudonyms.
I anticipate this interview to take approximately 60 minutes. I also ask your permission to have
you participate in a post-observation 60-minute interview.
Before I begin my questions, I would like to ask your permission to record our interview. The
purpose of this is to capture all you have to share while being able to engage in dialogue and not
write everything down word for word.
Would that be okay? *if yes, take out recorder (also on the informed consent form)
Do you have any questions before we begin?
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 130
Research Question: Interview Question:
1) How does the
teacher, as a
facilitator, guide
students to construct
their own learning in
a Problem-Based
Learning
environment?
2) How does the
teacher, as a
facilitator, promote
authentic teaching
and learning in a
PBL environment?
3) What are the best
practices for teachers
to facilitate a
personalized PBL
environment?
1) What is your definition of PBL? What does PBL look like at your school?
2) How long have you been a teacher? How long have you taught in the PBL
environment? Describe any significant comparisons between the different
environments you've taught in. In your opinion, what is the major
difference between students who have gone through a PBL model for
learning and those who have not? Describe your experience that informs
this response.
3) What types of PBL assessment and evaluation tools are in place as a
school (i.e. school wide rubrics, data collection)? Are there any other
supports for students in the PBL environment other than accessing you as
their teacher during class time?
4) Do you use technology in the PBL setting? If yes, how?
5) What types of supports and resources do you and the staff receive to
implement PBL?
6) How do you attempt to address each student's individual needs, values
and capabilities in the PBL setting?
7) How do you guide students in developing "effective problem-solving
skills"? How do you know when students have developed these skills?
8) How do you guide students in developing self-directed learning skills?
How do you know when students have developed these skills?
9) How do you guide students in collaborating productively? How do you
know when students are collaborating productively?
10) How do you guide students to practice empathy when addressing a
problem in PBL? How do you know when students have developed these
skills?
11) What types of strategies do you implement to guide learners through
reflection? What do you believe student’s gain from self-reflection of
their learning?
12) What do you believe your strengths are in facilitating a PBL
environment? What would you like to see yourself continue to grow in
when it comes to facilitating a PBL environment?
13) Describe the relationship between you, as the facilitator of PBL, and your
students. Can you please provide some examples?
Closing formalities:
Is there anything I should have asked about or that you didn’t say that you think I should know,
if I want to understand your perspective about your role as a PBL facilitator in guiding students
to construct their own knowledge?
Thank you for participating in the interview.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 131
Appendix B
Teacher Participant Interview Guide 2
Interview Guide
Teacher Name
Site
Interviewer
Date
Start Time
End Time
Introduction:
Hello _____________________________. Thank you so much for agreeing to meet for a
second, post-observation interview. Before we begin, I would like to review the purpose of this
study to help guide your responses.
I am studying the role of the facilitator in a Problem Based Learning environment, which I refer
to as PBL throughout the interview. I am interested in learning more about the facilitator’s role
in guiding students to construct their own knowledge. When answering questioning, please
provide responses in reference to the PBL environment you teach, rather than other traditional
environments that you may also teach in.
I will not tell anyone that you are participating in this study. I will not be using your name in any
presentation of my findings. In the findings, I will use pseudonyms.
I anticipate this interview to take approximately 60 minutes. You will not be asked to participate
in any other interviews.
Before I begin my questions, I would like to ask your permission to record our interview. The
purpose of this is to capture all you have to share while being able to engage in dialogue and not
write everything down word for word.
Would that be okay? *if yes, take out recorder (also on the informed consent form)
Do you have any questions before we begin?
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 132
Post-Observation Interview
Questions subject to change with classroom observation results.
Research Question: Interview Question:
1) How does the
teacher, as a
facilitator, guide
students to construct
their own learning in
a Problem-Based
Learning
environment?
2) How does the
teacher, as a
facilitator, promote
authentic teaching
and learning in a
PBL environment?
3) What are the best
practices for teachers
to facilitate a
personalized PBL
environment?
Give an example of an "authentic problem" that you and your students have
examined.
What does an ideal PBL environment, where a student is constructing their own
knowledge, look like to you?
How do you determine a problem you are examining as “authentic” or
“meaningful”? In what ways are the students personal concerns, interests or
issues apart of the problems that are examined?
Give an example of a "problem" that your students have examined through the
PBL model. What are some activities that were anchored to this problem?
Describe some class routines you implement in the PBL environment and why
you implement them.
How do you promote student ownership over the problem? What are some
challenges in promoting student ownership?
Describe how you set the stage for a new PBL unit or project. Can you walk me
through a specific example?
How do you set up the learning goal and the purpose of the project/problem?
How do you ensure that the students know the learning goal and the purpose of
the project/problem?
Describe the types of questions that you ask your students when they are unsure
of what their next steps are. Can you describe a scenario?
What types of strategies do you implement to make sure that students are able to
process the tasks at hand?
How do you model problem solving and self-directed learning skills for you
students?
What are your personal goals as a PBL facilitator for your students? How do
you ensure that these goals are met?
Closing formalities:
Is there anything I should have asked about or that you didn’t say that you think I should know,
if I want to understand your perspective about your role as a PBL facilitator in guiding students
to construct their own knowledge?
Thank you for participating in the interview.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 133
Appendix C
Student Participant Interview Guide
Interview Guide
Student Name
Site
Interviewer
Date
Start Time
End Time
Introduction:
Hello _____________________________. Thank you so much for agreeing to be interviewed.
Before we begin, I would like to share the purpose of this study to help guide your responses.
I am interested in learning about your experience as a student in a PBL environment, and how
this has influenced your learning. I am also interested in better understanding how your teacher,
or facilitator, has helped guide you into constructing your own knowledge. When answering
questions, please provide responses in reference to your experience in a PBL environment, rather
than other traditional environments that you may also participate in.
I will not tell anyone that you are participating in this study. I will not be using your name in any
presentation of my findings. In the findings, I will use pseudonyms.
I anticipate this interview to take approximately 60 minutes. This is the only time that you will
be formally asked to participate in an interview.
Before I begin my questions, I would like to ask your permission to record our interview. The
purpose of this is to capture all you have to share while being able to engage in dialogue and not
write everything down word for word.
Would that be okay? *if yes, take out recorder (also on the informed consent form)
Do you have any questions before we begin?
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 134
Research Question: Interview Question:
1) How does the teacher,
as a facilitator, guide
students to construct
their own learning in
a Problem-Based
Learning
environment?
2) How does the teacher,
as a facilitator,
promote authentic
teaching and learning
in a PBL
environment?
3) What are the best
practices for teachers
to facilitate a
personalized PBL
environment?
1) What is your definition or understanding of a “PBL”
environment? Please share about your experience in this
type of learning environment.
2) Can you please describe a typical PBL class period from
beginning to end?
3) How would you describe the role of your teacher in ensuring
that you're able to complete and present your project? Can
you give me an example?
4) What are some strategies you have to ensure that you are
able to complete your project in the time given?
5) Describe an example of a time when you had to collaborate
productively on a project. What were the advantages of this
experience? What were the challenges?
6) How are you assessed, or graded, in your PBL program?
How do you self-reflect on how you’ve done a project? Can
you give me an example?
7) Do you believe that there is a difference in your education
by going through the PBL program? Explain.
8) Do you believe that you’ve learned skills through the PBL
environment that you will be able to use in your future? If
so, what skills? And how?
9) What is your favorite thing about being in the PBL
environment? What is the biggest challenge?
10) Can you walk me through a project or problem that you
focused on in your PBL class from beginning to end
product? (probe on learning process)
11) What is your definition of “authentic” or “real, meaningful”
learning? Have you ever experienced this?
12) Describe your ideal learning environment.
13) Would you recommend a PBL environment to other
students your age? Why or why not?
Closing formalities:
Is there anything I should have asked about or that you didn’t say that you think I should know,
if I want to understand your perspective about your role as a student in a PBL environment?
Thank you for participating in the interview.
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 135
Appendix D
Classroom Observation Protocol
Name of Observer Date Time
Location Study
Brief Summary of Observation
Criteria Observed Observation Notes:
Teacher Role and Student Learning
Observed
Teacher Role
o Setting up and guiding students
through meaningful real-world
problems
o Focusing on creating a “learner-
centered” environment
o Moving around the room
monitoring/questioning
o Promoting student use of
inquiry/creativity
through questioning/collaboration
o Facilitating discussions about problem-
solving processes/ efficiency/
effectiveness
o Leading students through
discussions/journaling of their
understanding
o Utilizing student exemplars and
modeling techniques as a scaffold
o Reviewing learning goal and purpose
and helping students to internalize it
o Promoting student ownership of
projects
o Implementing class routines that
support self-directed learning and
student ownership
o Modeling self-directed learning skills
Student Learning
o Interacting with others
o Working individually/independently
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 136
o Applying content to real-world
problems
o Iterating on processes
o Utilizing each other as resources (not
just teacher)
o Personally connecting to problems and
projects
Instructional Strategies
o Connection to prior knowledge
o Provides differentiated instruction
o Teacher modeling
o Collaborative grouping
o Opportunities for students to justify
solutions
o Incorporate varied assessments
Classroom Climate
Student Involvement
o Majority of students demonstrated
interest/were engaged and on task
o Most students take initiative in
classroom discussions
o Majority of students uninterested or
apathetic
o Majority of students were frequently
off task
Learner Attitudes Demonstrated
o Dependent on others
o Cooperation
o Persistence
o Responsibility
o Confidence
o Enthusiasm
o Objectivity
o Accuracy
o Critical thinking
o Self-directed
o Curiosity
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 137
Physical Space
Sketch of the
space (including
bodies):
Elements of the
physical space:
• Items posted
on board
• Seating
arrangement
• Teacher-
student
proximity
Activity and Materials
Describe the
objective of the
class/activity:
Describe the
materials
available:
Narrative: Beginning
Time: Facilitator Students Notes/Interpretations
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 138
Narrative: Mid
Time: Facilitator Students Notes/Interpretations
AUTHENTIC TEACHING AND LEARNING IN PBL 139
Narrative: Closing
Time: Facilitator Students Notes/Interpretations
Documents and Materials to Collect:
Post-Observation Reflection:
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This qualitative study examined how the facilitation of students in a PBL environment may lead to authentic teaching and authentic learning in K-12 educational settings. The rationale and purpose of this study is to explore the PBL environment as a vehicle for reaching educational goals, rather than PBL as a means to an end. This study seeks to understand the role of the facilitator in guiding students to construct their own learning. Likewise, the study investigated the best practices implemented by teachers when facilitating a personalized PBL environment, and sought to understand whether these are best practices that are transferable to other learning environments. Using qualitative methodology, this case study focused on Central Institute in the State of Hawaii, a private institution that specializes in high school PBL environments. The study population consisted of three teacher participants and two student participants. Interviews and classroom observations were conducted and collected as primary data points. Data were coded using open coding, selective coding and thematic categories. Despite the growing literature in the fields of PBL and personalized learning, as presented in Chapter Two, the findings of this qualitative study highlight the discrepancies that exist between the literature and the practice. The primary findings unearth an understanding that highlights the importance of bridging what is written in the literature and what authentic teaching and learning looks like in practice. Furthermore, the findings highlight the role of the facilitator in adopting a project-based practice that focusing on fostering community, setting up authentic learning contexts, maintaining a continuous personal investment in the growth of the teaching practice and setting up day-to-day structures that reflect a meaningful learning environment where students can construct their own learning.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
The role of educational leadership in participation in the National Program of Science and Technology Fairs at Escuela Universitaria in the Nacional Region of Costa Rica
PDF
An evaluation of project based learning implementation in STEM
PDF
Latino cognitive apprenticeship: creating a meaningful learning environment for Latino students through authentic teacher care
PDF
Impact of technology on teaching and learning practices at high‐technology use K-12 schools: a case study
PDF
Influence of globalization, school leadership, and students’ participation in science competitions on 21st-century skill development, instructional practices, and female students’ interest in sci...
PDF
Improving student achievement at a restructured high school academy of health sciences using an innovation gap analysis approach
PDF
A case study of technology-embedded instruction: a student-centered approach to enhance teaching and learning in a K-12 school
PDF
Problem-based learning in a dental school: measuring change in students' critical thinking skills
PDF
A study of online project-based learning with Gambassa: crossroads of informal contracting and cloud management systems
PDF
Problem-based learning and its influence on college preparation knowledge, motivation, & self-efficacy in high school students
PDF
The relationship between learning style and student satisfaction in the Problem Based Learning Dental Program at the University of Southern California
PDF
Cultivating a growth mindset: an exploration of teacher beliefs and learning environments
PDF
Examining the learning environments of urban high school educators who are culturally aware and serve a majority of students from historically marginalized populations
PDF
21st century teaching and learning with technology integration at an innovative high school: a case study
PDF
The influence of leadership on the development of 21st century skills throughout Irish schools
PDF
Approaches to encouraging and supporting self-regulated learning in the college classroom
PDF
How does working in an ILE at ISSA influence teacher practice?
PDF
Nontraditional outperforming K-12 urban schools: a case study of the implementation of promising programs and practices, leadership and cultural norms in a project-based curriculum college prepar...
PDF
Technology practices and 21st century learning: a high school case study
PDF
A case study: technology, teaching and student learning
Asset Metadata
Creator
Beach, Kay
(author)
Core Title
Facilitation of authentic teaching and learning in a problem-based learning (PBL) environment
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
04/19/2017
Defense Date
03/17/2017
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
21st century learning,authentic learning,authentic teaching,authenticity,culture of feedback,education,facilitation,guided instruction,inquiry,inquiry based,inquiry-based,inquiry-based education,inquiry-based learning,K-12 education,OAI-PMH Harvest,PBL,personalized learning,problem based,problem based learning,problem-based,problem-based learning,project based,project based learning,project-based,project-based learning,self-directed learning
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Green, Alan (
committee chair
), Filback, Robert (
committee member
), Jones, Tammy (
committee member
)
Creator Email
beach.kay@gmail.com,kaybeach@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-361411
Unique identifier
UC11257887
Identifier
etd-BeachKay-5239.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-361411 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-BeachKay-5239.pdf
Dmrecord
361411
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Beach, Kay
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
21st century learning
authentic learning
authentic teaching
authenticity
culture of feedback
education
facilitation
guided instruction
inquiry
inquiry based
inquiry-based
inquiry-based education
inquiry-based learning
K-12 education
PBL
personalized learning
problem based
problem based learning
problem-based
problem-based learning
project based
project based learning
project-based
project-based learning
self-directed learning