This weeks learning: PBL & TLCP

This week, I focused some teaching theories and practices that are being used, discussed and implemented across Ontario and beyond on. Specifically, I learned about problem-based learning and teaching learning critical pathways, and how I can implement these practices into my classroom.

Problem based learning is was pioneered by Howard Barrows and Robyn Tamblyn in 1980. It was originally designed for medical schools but has since been adapted by K-12 schools to raise student acheivement (Delisle 1997). In this method of learning, the teacher serves as a guide, giving students room to grow and build creativity independently. Students collaborate with one another rather than interact only through the teacher, and they initiate and manage many of their own activities (Delisle 1997). When using PBL, teachers help students to focus on solving problems within a real-life context, encouraging them to consider the situation in which the problem exists when trying to find solutions (Nasir, Hand, & Taylor 2009).

This method of teaching is advocated by the Ontario Ministry of Education through their “What Works? Research into Practice” series produced by the Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat and the Ontario Association of Deans Education in November 2009: “Problem-Based Learning in Mathematics”. The article described PBL and gives examples of how teachers can integrate PBL into their K-7 classrooms. For example, for grades 4-5 it suggests using PBL to help students gain a deeper understanding of measures of central tendency by having students investigate an issue that is of interest to them (either within the school, the community or the province) and design a survey that uses a numeric-rating scale for answers, thus having the students use measures of central tendency to analyze and make inferences from the data (p. 3-4).

Teaching-learning critical pathways is inspired by a strategy developed by Michael Fullan, Peter Hill and Carmel Crevola, and it is an inquiry model for developing learning activities for professional learning communities who are seeking to improve student learning. Ultimately, the TLCP focuses on precise teaching and assessment based on current student needs (source).

This method of teaching is advocated by the Ontario Ministry of Education through The Literacy and Numeracy Secretariat featured TLCP in their “Capacity Building Series” in June 2008. The article explains what TLCP is, the benefits of using TLCP and gives a sample process of how to develop TLCP’s. There are many benefits of this method for planning instruction for our students. TLCPs set clear and high expectations for our students - assessment criteria and rubrics are transparent so students know exactly what is expected of them. It involves scaffolded instruction based on current individual achievement levels, and gives students numerous opportunities to gain feedback from their teacher through “assessment for learning”. TLCPs also set up a cycle of continuous improvement toward student goals.

Based on my research, creating a TLCP is almost like the step you take before utilizing backward design when creating culminating tasks, because it requires you to consider your student’s current achievement levels and identify the areas of need first, before deciding on what you want your students to be able to know and do. This approach is still relevant for today’s learners because no matter what century we are in, the teacher’s primary focus should be on student success and achievement and this is the primary purpose of this model.

Between these two methods that I explored, the model I resonate with the most is problem-based learning. This is probably because problem-based learned lends itself very well to mathematics (my university major). In fact, throughout my research, I found many examples for implementing PBL into mathematics and science, but I realized that there are few for subjects such a literacy or art. Therefore it got me thinking and asking the question: how can PBL could be implemented in subjects that aren’t so “problem-based”?

I believe that both of these methods, in addition to and in combination with a variety of others, still have a place in 21st century learning. Teaching methods may have changed with the integration of technology, but that doesn’t mean that we don’t want our students to achieve in the same way, or that we don’t want our students to solve problems in the same way. Technology is a tool that enables our students to think deeper about the problems that we pose to them. Technology is a tool that teachers can use to create PLC’s with members of the broader education world. Therefore, technology when used effectively can enhance all of these teaching styles, in order to meet the needs of our 21st century learners.

Have you implemented PBL or TLCP into your practice? What worked, or what didn't? What other teaching and learning strategies have you tried and think work best?