Problem-Based Learning
Developed by:
Howard Barrows, McMaster University
Theoretical Underpinnings:
Jerome Bruner
Brief description of the model and/or its philosophy:
This model was developed in response to perceived deficiencies of medical school graduates. Students engage in teacher-designed simulations. Students approach a problem from the point of view of a stakeholder. Students act the part of the stakeholder as they work to understand and solve a problem. Process supersedes content. However, content is encounteredalong the way.
Key elements,components, and/or non-negotiables:
1. Ill-structured problem (a problem likely to be encountered outside of school)
2. Students work from a stakeholder’s viewpoint
3. The teacher acts as facilitator
Intended applicationsfor the model (enrichment, pull-out, whole school,classroom, etc.):
classroom, pull-out, whole school
Intended Audiences:
Elementary, middle, high
Relative strength and weaknesses:
Strengths:
High level of engagement from students
Some flexibility allowing students to incorporate individual interests and talents
Structural flexibility; whole class or pull out, whole year or single unit(s),single subject or fully
interdisciplinary
Weaknesses:
Large amount of initial planning time required
Content may be left out if the unit is not carefully planned
Time and SOL pressures
Resources required:
planning time, access to resource materials
Howard Barrows, McMaster University
Theoretical Underpinnings:
Jerome Bruner
Brief description of the model and/or its philosophy:
This model was developed in response to perceived deficiencies of medical school graduates. Students engage in teacher-designed simulations. Students approach a problem from the point of view of a stakeholder. Students act the part of the stakeholder as they work to understand and solve a problem. Process supersedes content. However, content is encounteredalong the way.
Key elements,components, and/or non-negotiables:
1. Ill-structured problem (a problem likely to be encountered outside of school)
2. Students work from a stakeholder’s viewpoint
3. The teacher acts as facilitator
Intended applicationsfor the model (enrichment, pull-out, whole school,classroom, etc.):
classroom, pull-out, whole school
Intended Audiences:
Elementary, middle, high
Relative strength and weaknesses:
Strengths:
High level of engagement from students
Some flexibility allowing students to incorporate individual interests and talents
Structural flexibility; whole class or pull out, whole year or single unit(s),single subject or fully
interdisciplinary
Weaknesses:
Large amount of initial planning time required
Content may be left out if the unit is not carefully planned
Time and SOL pressures
Resources required:
planning time, access to resource materials