Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School

SPRINGER BRIEFS IN EDUC ATION
Samantha S. Reed
Carol A. Mullen
Emily T. Boyles
Problem-Based
Learning in
Elementary School
What Strategies Help
Elementary Students
Develop?
123
SpringerBriefs in Education
We are delighted to announce SpringerBriefs in Education, an innovative product type
that combines elements of both journals and books. Briefs present concise summaries
of cutting-edge research and practical applications in education. Featuring compact
volumes of 50 to 125 pages, the SpringerBriefs in Education allow authors to present
their ideas and readers to absorb them with a minimal time investment. Briefs are
published as part of Springer’s eBook Collection. In addition, Briefs are available
for individual print and electronic purchase.
SpringerBriefs in Education cover a broad range of educational fields such
as: Science Education, Higher Education, Educational Psychology, Assessment &
Evaluation, Language Education, Mathematics Education, Educational Technology,
Medical Education and Educational Policy.
SpringerBriefs typically offer an outlet for:
• An introduction to a (sub)field in education summarizing and giving an overview
of theories, issues, core concepts and/or key literature in a particular field
• A timely report of state-of-the art analytical techniques and instruments in the
field of educational research
• A presentation of core educational concepts
• An overview of a testing and evaluation method
• A snapshot of a hot or emerging topic or policy change
• An in-depth case study
• A literature review
• A report/review study of a survey
• An elaborated thesis
Both solicited and unsolicited manuscripts are considered for publication in the
SpringerBriefs in Education series. Potential authors are warmly invited to complete
and submit the Briefs Author Proposal form. All projects will be submitted to editorial
review by editorial advisors.
SpringerBriefs are characterized by expedited production schedules with the aim
for publication 8 to 12 weeks after acceptance and fast, global electronic dissemina-
tion through our online platform SpringerLink. The standard concise author contracts
guarantee that:
• an individual ISBN is assigned to each manuscript
• each manuscript is copyrighted in the name of the author
• the author retains the right to post the pre-publication version on his/her website
or that of his/her institution
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8914

Samantha S. Reed · Carol A. Mullen ·
Emily T. Boyles
Problem-Based Learning
in Elementary School
What Strategies Help Elementary Students
Develop?
Samantha S. Reed Carol A. Mullen
Carroll County Public Schools Virginia Tech
Virginia, VA, USA Virginia, VA, USA
Emily T. Boyles
Grayson County Public Schools
Virginia, VA, USA
ISSN 2211-1921 ISSN 2211-193X (electronic)

SpringerBriefs in Education
ISBN 978-3-030-70597-8 ISBN 978-3-030-70598-5 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021, corrected
publication 2021
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether
the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse
of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and
transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar
or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
I dedicate our book to my children, Blake and
Grant; my dad; and my work family.
—Samantha S. Reed
Dedicating this to the amazing 2017–2020
Roanoke doctoral cohort I had the pleasure
to grow alongside at Virginia Tech.
—Carol A. Mullen
This book is for my parents and my sister.
Thank you for showing me how to truly love
and support one another.
—Emily T. Boyles
The original version of the book was revised: Corrections made in References have been updated.
The correction to the book backmatter is available https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5_6
Acknowledgments
A very special thanks to Natalie Rieborn, Publishing Editor of Springer International

Publishing in the Netherlands who oversees Springer’s SpringerBriefs in Education
series. This innovative format combines the elements of journals and books and
explores timely educational subjects in a concise and impactful way. We’re pleased to
be adding our volume to it! Natalie was enthusiastic, responsive, and knowledgeable
at every turn. Encouraging our book proposal and completion of Springer’s Book
Information form, she oversaw the peer review and other publishing steps from
beginning to end. Supportive in all circumstances, Natalie is an exceptional guide,
coach, and friend in the publishing world.
Rajan Muthu, Project Coordinator with Springer, oversaw the production of this
book.
We also appreciate the helpful commentary provided by anonymous, expert
reviewers.
Carol Mullen’s partner Bill (Dr. William Kealy), always generous, improved the
book’s graphical displays. “Exhausting” the coffee machine, he fired up a new one,
making 100 cups in the first week of this project endeavor!
We are also grateful to the School of Education and the College of Liberal Arts
and Human Sciences at Virginia Tech for the support of research projects like ours
on the frontlines of education.
Samantha S. Reed, Ed.D.

Carol A. Mullen, Ph.D.
Emily T. Boyles, Ed.D.
ix
Praise for Problem-Based Learning
“This easy-to-read book makes an important contribution to the problem-based

learning (PBL) literature. The research is limited on this topic and specific instruc-
tional strategies that help students grow, learn, and develop. The study is important
for practitioners interested in effective PBL implementation in the elementary grades.
They will learn of vital strategies that elementary teachers use to effectively imple-
ment PBL, making the book very informative. The importance of utilizing PBL to
connect classroom experiences with real-world applications is illustrated. A vivid
picture is painted of practitioners’ experiences with PBL. Educators can readily
implement the strategies described to increase interest in learning tasks as well as
achievement for all students. As a guide, it will appeal to practitioners looking to
improve students’ achievement and twenty first century skills. It’s also an excellent
choice for higher education faculty seeking to develop school leaders and teachers
who can benefit from this alternative model of pedagogy for educating students.
Courses addressing effective instruction would gain from adopting this text.”
—Barbara M. Wickham, Montgomery County Public Schools, Virginia
“Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School makes an original contribution to

the field in that PBL is not that common in primary and elementary schools. Because
the research on PBL in elementary schools is not substantial, this book is instrumental
in adding to the research. The work contains key instructional strategies that promote
skills and knowledge that can be applied when using the PBL approach. I believe
that the ideas and practices described by the authors apply globally because PBL
has become a global instructional program that supports the development of critical
skills. The authors offer a well written book that does a great job delving into PBL
approaches that could benefit elementary schools all over the world. Without a doubt,
I recommend it as an outstanding choice for elementary curriculum and instruction
courses.”
—Lee B. Shields, Campbell County Public Schools, Virginia
xi
Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
About This Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Significance of the Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Purpose and Justification of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 A Review of Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Search Processes and Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Synthesis of the Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
PBL Defined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Compared with PjBL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
History of PBL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
PBL in Medicine: Howard Barrows’s Influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
PBL in Education: John Dewey’s Influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
PBL and Constructivism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
PBL in K–12 Public Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
PBL and STEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Closely Related Instructional Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Impact of PBL on Student Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Profile of a Virginia Graduate—The 5Cs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Engaging Qualities Present in PBL Tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Research Questions and Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Data Collection Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Instrument Design and Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
xiii
xiv Contents
Data Organization, Coding, and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Analysis of Interview Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Findings for the Research Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
5 Overarching Outcomes, Implications, and Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Discussion of Overarching Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Relevance and Implications for Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Relevance and Implications for Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Navigating Uncharted Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Correction to: Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School . . . . . . . . . . C1
Appendix: PBL Teacher Interview Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

About the Authors
Samantha S. Reed, Ed.D. is Principal at Hillsville

Elementary, a PK–05 school in Virginia, USA. She has
been serving for seven years as an education leader.
Previously, she was an elementary Teacher and division
math specialist. Her dissertation focused on problem-
based learning and student development of twenty-first-
century skills. She is a graduate of the Educational
Leadership program at Virginia Tech.
Carol A. Mullen, Ph.D. is Professor of Educa-

tional Leadership at Virginia Tech, USA, and a J.
William Fulbright Senior Scholar alumnus. She is
an internationally acclaimed, award-winning scholar
whose research in education encompasses leadership,
mentoring, creativity, and globalism using social justice
lenses. Her books published with Springer are Revealing
Creativity (2020); Veteran Teacher Resilience (with
Shields, 2020); and Creativity Under Duress in Educa-
tion? (2019, edited). Forthcoming is Handbook of Social
Justice Interventions in Education (edited). Her alma
mater, the University of Toronto/Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education (Canada), awarded her the Excel-
lence Award in 2020.
xv
xvi About the Authors
Emily T. Boyles, Ed.D. is Coordinator of English

Learner Professional Development for Grayson County
Public Schools in Virginia and Adjunct Professor
at Fortune University in California, USA. She was
formerly an elementary school Principal, Assistant Prin-
cipal, and high school Spanish Teacher. Her dissertation
examined principals’ support of student achievement in
Title I schools within rural Appalachia. She coauthored
a book chapter and journal article. She is a graduate of
the Educational Leadership program at Virginia Tech.
List of Figures
Fig. 2.1 Virginia’s 5Cs: Preparing future-ready graduates Source

Adapted from VDOE (2019b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Fig. 4.1 Top 10 PBL instructional strategies that nurtured the 5Cs . . . . . . . . 68
xvii
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Comparing case-based learning, inquiry-based learning,

and problem-based learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Table 3.1 Alignment of research and interview questions, data sources,
and analytic procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Table 4.1 Basic demographics of teacher/staff interviewees . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Table 4.2 Interview Q2: PBL strategies used by teachers A–G . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Table 4.3 Interview Q3a: Strategies used to develop critical thinking
by teachers A–G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Table 4.4 Interview Q3c: Strategies used to develop communication
by teachers A–G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Table 4.5 PBL strategies used to develop citizenship by teachers A–G . . . . 57
Table 4.6 Concerns/challenges with implementing PBL addressed
by teachers A–G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Table 4.7 Key instructional strategies of PBL identified through data
analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Table 4.8 Top 10 PBL strategies that contributed to the 5Cs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
xix
Chapter 1
Introduction
Abstract Problem-based learning (PBL) is a popular trend in public education.

Generally, PBL is defined as a teaching method that enables students to gain knowl-
edge and skills by working collaboratively to investigate authentic and engaging
open-ended questions and/or problems. It also promotes elementary students’ 21st-
century competencies and development for a global world. This chapter introduces
an underrepresented area of educational research—PBL in elementary schools and
strategies that help students develop. General questions guiding this study are, What
is PBL, and what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’
21st-century learning? By interviewing teachers who used PBL methods for 2
school years, the research team learned key instructional strategies that promote
skills and knowledge when students collaboratively investigate authentic open-ended
problems. In this book, peer-to-peer relational learning and other strategies used
in PBL classrooms are uncovered and examined. PBL, a dynamic instructional
tool for enlivening elementary classrooms, is shown in the literature to cultivate
student learning and interests, increase engagement, support skills building, and
advance capacities expected of college- and career-ready 21st-century graduates. The
information we gathered should support the implementation of PBL in elementary
schools.
Keywords Creativity · Critical thinking · Communication · Collaboration · And

citizenship (the 5Cs) · Elementary student development · Problem-based learning
(PBL) · 21st-Century skills
Overview
Problem-Based Learning in Elementary Schools: What Strategies Help Students

Develop? takes readers into places of learning invisible from the outside. In the
educational settings described, elementary teachers use key instructional strategies
to implement problem-based learning (PBL) effectively. Our review of literature
illustrates the importance of PBL to authentic learning and connecting classroom
experiences with real-world applications. We also feature quotes from practitioners
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 1

S. S. Reed et al., Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School,
SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5_1
2 1 Introduction
about their PBL practices to offer a practical study that is accessible and robust. This
book is for interested practitioners, education leaders, researchers, and policymakers.
PBL is a popular trend in public education. However, many classrooms have yet
to model stimulating projects that foster problem-solving and critical-thinking skills.
Students need guidance with 21st-century problem solving to benefit their school and
post-school years (Carroll, 2014). Generally, PBL is defined as a teaching method
that enables students to gain knowledge and skills by working collaboratively to
investigate authentic open-ended questions and/or problems (Bas, 2008; Marra et al.,
2014). PBL, a learning catalyst, promotes elementary children’s contemporary skills
in preparation for academics, career, and life.
The 21st-century education movement in the United States is over 2 decades old
(Boss, 2019; also, National Education Association [NEA], n.d.). Since 2002, it has
been led by the Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21) (2019), a consortium
of at least five million education, business, and government leaders, worldwide,
including the NEA. P21 is founded on the premise that “all learners need educational
experiences in school and beyond, from cradle to career, to build knowledge and skills
for success in a globally and digitally interconnected world” (p. 2). P21’s Framework
for 21st Century Learning’s 12 discrete skills were expected to be infused in K–12
education. However, the framework proved cumbersome, so the most important skills
“became known as the ‘Four Cs—critical thinking, communication, collaboration,
and creativity” (NEA, n.d., p. 3). These have made their way into public schools,
including those US school districts that also adopted the Portrait of a Graduate, a
related education reform; with a foothold in Virginia, USA, for example, Portrait of a
Graduate is invested in “all students hav[ing] benefitted from educational experiences
preparing them to be effective lifelong learners and contributors” (BattelleforKids,
2018).
Consolidated into the Four Cs, the idea is that key subjects (e.g., language arts,
mathematics, and science) should incorporate critical thinking, communication,
collaboration, and creativity to prepare graduates for careers and life. Educators are
expected to use tools and strategies that “engage students” and promote participation
in learning, which NEA (n.d.) deemed “imperative” (p. 3). In response, we offer study
of PBL instructional strategies aimed at nurturing elementary students’ competencies
for a global world. The term 21st-century skills refers to “a broad set of knowledge,
skills, work habits, and character traits” that educators, reformers, employers, and
policymakers believe to be “critically important to success in today’s world, partic-
ularly in collegiate programs and contemporary careers and workplaces”; a general
assumption is that these “skills can be applied in all academic subject areas, and in
all educational, career, and civic settings throughout a student’s life” (Glossary of
Education Reform, 2016).
US states have developed their own version of 21st-century skills, Four Cs frame-
work, and vision of Portrait of a Graduate. Within Virginia (our own state), the
applicable competencies are critical thinking, creativity, communication, collabora-
tion, and citizenship (the 5Cs; Virginia Department of Education [VDOE], 2019b),
and the graduate portrait is called Profile of a Virginia Graduate (VDOE, 2019a).
Overview 3
Simply put, the 5Cs model absorbed the Four Cs (NEA, n.d.) and added a fifth skill:
citizenship.
Regarding our study, we now turn to PBL in elementary schools and strategies
that help children develop essential skills. General questions guiding this study are,
What is PBL and what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’
21st-century learning? By interviewing teachers who used PLB methods for 2 school
years, we (the research term) were able to identify PBL strategies that promote
skills and knowledge when students collaboratively explore authentic open-ended
problems. In this book, peer-to-peer relational learning and other strategies used in
PBL classrooms are uncovered and examined for their relevance. PBL, a dynamic
instructional tool for enlivening educative processes in elementary classrooms, is
shown to cultivate student learning and interests, support skills building, increase
engagement and knowledge gains, and advance capacities expected of college- and
career-ready graduates. The research on PBL is limited, particularly as it pertains
to specific strategies that help students grow, learn, and develop. Combined with
our original study, though, the information conveyed should support the successful
implementation of PBL in elementary schooling contexts.
About This Book
We wrote this book for practitioners, both teachers and administrators at the elemen-
tary level, who are looking to effectively implement PBL to improve student achieve-
ment and support the development of the 5Cs. Additionally, this book should appeal
to higher education administrators looking to develop school leaders and future
teachers by exploring this alternative model of pedagogy as a successful means to
educate students. Courses related to implementing effective instruction (for teachers
and administrators) and supporting/observing effective instruction (for administra-
tors/leaders) could benefit from utilizing this text. Because PBL is a tool that supports
the development of essential skills needed for global citizenship, this study has
relevance for educators, worldwide.
The pages ahead contain strategies that educators can readily implement to
increase interest in learning tasks as well as achievement for all young students. We
highlight intensive instructional accounts of educators’ approaches for applying PBL
strategies that mobilize children’s learning in a global world. Painting a lively picture
of student-centered educational environments, we draw upon frameworks, best prac-
tices, experiences, processes, strategies, and research results. Firsthand accounts of
best practices in PBL instruction connect this pedagogy to theory, research, practice,
and policy.
Why aren’t there more studies of PBL at the elementary level and information
about how it helps children develop 21st-century skills? As three inquisitive educa-
tion leaders, we sought to contribute to this area of study by identifying strategies
teachers use when implementing PBL in elementary classrooms. We were motivated
4 1 Introduction
to extend the educational research on this topic while supporting aspiring and prac-
ticing teachers with insights from PBL teachers, as well as building administrators
in making informed decisions about the implementation of PBL. General questions
for guiding this basic qualitative study were, What is PBL, and what PBL instruc-
tional strategies contribute to elementary students’ 21st-century learning for success
in work and life? We asked PBL teachers questions about their instruction and the
strategies they use in their classrooms. We also probed how they facilitate students’
development of the 5C skills in Virginia, with the common understanding that these
competencies are expected of successful graduates. Later in the book we discuss our
findings and map them onto existing literature.
What lies ahead in this book for the research community is 21st-century learning
and PBL frameworks, concepts, and practices in elementary classrooms that develop
students’ 21st-century capacities. Researchers will find out about teacher instruction
in the early years of schooling that purposefully fosters student-centered learning,
real-world relevance, and collaboration in accordance with capacities expected of
them to be successful. Practitioners (teachers, teacher mentors and trainers, school
leaders and other leaders, and policymakers) seeking information about PBL peda-
gogies for the elementary grades will find depictions that shed light on how teachers
approach PBL within real-world contexts. Anyone interested in pedagogic strategies
that advance critical thinking, creativity, communication, collaboration, and citizen-
ship capacities, particularly within demanding accountability and changing world
contexts, should find value.
This book is unique in that it
• Focuses on concepts and practices of PBL for the elementary classroom
• Uses interviews with teachers to illuminate PBL strategies for engaging all
students
• Highlights instructional accounts of teachers involving their implementation of
PBL strategies that advance 21st-century skills
• Combines frameworks, practices, experiences, processes, strategies, and results
to paint a lively picture of student-centered learning
• Clarifies outcomes that include increased student engagement and achievement,
and college and career readiness
• Connects firsthand accounts of PBL instruction to theory, research, practice, and
policy
A tightknit US-based research team, since 2017 we have been doing the work
underlying this book, initiated by Samantha Reed, Principal at Hillsville Elemen-
tary, a PK–5 school in Virginia. As of 2020, she has been serving for 7 years as the
administrative leader and was previously an elementary teacher and division math
specialist. An education leader with a passion for curriculum and instructional lead-
ership, she has a keen interest in PBL not only at the classroom level but also the
building level. As the project head, she initiated this exploration of PBL instruction
with teachers to better understand how it can enrich young students’ learning.
About This Book 5
Coauthor Carol Mullen, Professor of Educational Leadership at Virginia Tech,

served as Principal Investigator of this study. She is a seasoned researcher in educa-
tional leadership with expertise extending to curriculum studies and qualitative
research. She contributed to this project from its inception by guiding its research
components and contributing much of the writing while bridging the worlds of
practice and theory.
Team member Emily Boyles is Coordinator of English Learner Professional
Development for Grayson County Public Schools in Virginia and Adjunct Professor
in higher education. She has served as an elementary school principal, assistant prin-
cipal, and high school Spanish teacher. She conducted the teacher interviews for this
study and related tasks.
Statement of the Problem
This chapter introduces study of PBL in elementary schools and strategies that
help students develop. Even though child development has long been an extremely
important topic in education, PBL pedagogies, strategies, and tools are presently
investigated more extensively at secondary and postsecondary levels.
Unknown is the extent to which habits of learning are being instilled in students,
with the pressures of high-stakes standardized testing that can jeopardize the richness
of experiential curriculum like PBL. Today, educators, parents, policymakers, politi-
cians, and even corporate executives acknowledge the need for children to form habits
of learning. Children have a natural curiosity, are active learners, and develop cogni-
tively. Pedagogic knowledge, curricular expertise, and structured activity settings are
needed for cultivating discovery. Besides tapping into youngsters’ topical curiosities,
their interest in learning is an important life skill to foster.
In the twentieth century, educational philosophers offered insights into the need
for classrooms to be places where students can make discoveries and learn to learn
(e.g., Bruner 1960/1999). Earlier, Dewey envisioned (1916) schools as communities
in which learners partake in learning by doing and have the freedom to make discov-
eries within life-like environments necessitating their adaptation if they are to grow;
a powerful premise was that “it is only in experience that any theory has vital and
verifiable significance” and that children “learn in a meaningful way if the exper-
imental ‘face’ of a subject area—including its ambiguities and permutations—[is]
encountered during the learning process” (p. 144).
A pervasive goal of public education is to ensure all students achieve at high
levels through effective instructional delivery. This national goal is reflected in many
federal initiatives. The Every Child Succeeds Act of 2015 (a revision of the No Child
Left Behind Act of 2001) “requires states to test students in grades 3 through 8 …
in reading and math”; however, as Klein (2018) pointed out, “states also have to test
students at least three times in science.”
Virginia serves as an example of state initiatives that have grown out of the
21st-century skills movement. This state emphasizes performance-based assessment;
6 1 Introduction
the 5Cs; and pedagogic models focused on analysis, design, development, imple-
mentation, and evaluation (VDOE, 2019b). High school graduates are expected to
be capable 21st-century problem-solvers and lifelong learners who can critically
analyze complex problems (Koray et al., 2008). PBL supports this policy directive
by fostering student motivation and interest-driven learning. Research indicates that
PBL strategies have been shown to enhance students’ competencies, such as industry-
oriented skills (e.g., Chung et al., 2016). An implication is that PBL can be utilized to
generate problem-solving opportunities that motivate peer collaborators and develop
their learning capacities.
Student collaboration and self-directed learning have facilitated PBL instruction
in and out of school, wherein traditional teaching methods are not as effective owing
to the centrality of the teacher and passive modes of instruction centered on textbooks
(Strobel & van Barneveld, 2009). Against the tide of testing cultures, peer collab-
oration is a major thrust of PBL that involves learning relationally about authentic,
real-world problems (Drake & Long, 2009; Han et al., 2016; Hmelo-Silver, 2004;
Holm, 2011; Savery, 2006).
Significance of the Research
PBL’s growing popularity calls on teachers, administrators, and students to adapt to

a rapidly changing world. Importantly, while PBL promotes problem-solving skills,
it is constructivist in orientation. Also, PBL targets “a larger task or problem” to
which “all learning activities” are anchored (Savery & Duffy, 1995, p. 32), relies
on learners’ interests and perspectives, involves interrelated tasks (e.g., “purposing,
planning, executing, and judging”), and depends on real-world complexities (Bas,
p. 1; Koray et al., 2008). Being an innovator is simply not enough—humanitarian citi-
zenship, a democratic competency, is expected of generations entering workforces.
Consideration of these realities should impact PBL and undergird its instructional
values (e.g., collaboration and self-directed learning) and principles of community
(e.g., diversity and respect).
All such dynamics should be built into PBL instruction. How children approach
learning and each other informs any in-depth investigation, such as the degree to
which the relational learning allows for honesty and proves satisfying. The values
children embody will be carried into their futures—as problem-solvers, they will need
to be culturally attuned to the needs, interests, demands, and talents of members of
underrepresented groups (Klimaitis & Mullen, 2021). Children need the knowledge
and skills to succeed in modern-day workplace cultures and global economies. As
PBL researcher Bas (2008) put it, “This need is driven not only by workforce demands
for high-performance employees who can plan, collaborate, and communicate, but
also by the need to help all young people learn civic responsibility and master their
new roles as global citizens” (p. 1). PBL, while known for at least 100 years, accounts
for the environment in which students live and learn and that they in turn influence.
Purpose and Justification of Study 7
Purpose and Justification of Study
Our research purpose was to identify key instructional strategies teachers reported
using during their implementation of PBL in fourth and fifth grade classrooms during
the 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 school years. A related purpose was to find out what
strategies aided in developing the 5C skills for elementary students grades K–8
regarding the expectations of graduates who have been prepared for college, careers,
and life. The study context was a school division in Virginia that was encouraged
by the superintendent to experiment with a new or different approach to classroom
instruction during the school years specified.
Through this research, we arrived at pedagogic strategies used by teachers who
implemented PBL at their school to determine if these contributed to the 5Cs. Our
findings add to the literature surrounding the use of PBL as a means of effective,
engaging, and relevant instruction in elementary schools. We endeavored to make
our project informative for practitioners interested in implementing PBL.
Summary
In this book we take our readers on a journey that reveals pedagogic strategies
PBL teachers used for supporting 21st-century skills building. The focus on PBL
in elementary school, in addition to the current competency profile of US-based
graduates, makes it useful for elementary-level practitioners and other stakeholders
interested in child development and learning.
Rather than just theorizing the potential value of PBL as a worthwhile instruc-
tional tool for developing elementary students’ learning competencies, we took the
next step. After thoroughly reviewing the relevant literature on PBL instruction and
designing our interview method, we talked directly with PBL teachers of elementary-
aged children. In the pages that follow, we reveal what teacher participants—who
were all given permission from their school division to try something new—learned
from their innovations in classroom pedagogy.
Chapter 2 is a review of literature on PBL in elementary schools and other educa-
tional contexts; as such, it defines salient terms and covers a host of relevant ideas
and practices.
References
Bas, G. (2008). Implementation of multiple intelligences supported project-based learning in

EFL/ESL classrooms (pp. 1–11) (ERIC Number: ED503870). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED503870.
BattelleforKids. (2018). Portrait of a Graduate: A first step in transforming your school system.
https://portraitofagraduate.org.
8 1 Introduction
Boss, S. (2019). It’s 2019. So why do 21st-century skills still matter? https://www.edsurge.com/
news/2019-01-22-its-2019-so-why-do-21st-century-skills-still-matter.
Bruner, J. (1960/1999). The process of education: A landmark in educational theory. Harvard
University Press.
Carroll, M. P. (2014). Shoot for the moon! The mentors and the middle schoolers explore the inter-
section of design thinking and STEM. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research,
4(1), 14–30.
Chung, P., Yeh, R. C., & Chen, Y. C. (2016). Influence of PBL strategy on enhancing student’s indus-
trial oriented competences learned: An action research on learning weblog analysis. International
Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(2), 285–307.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Macmillan.
Drake, K. N., & Long, D. (2009). Rebecca’s in the dark: A comparative study of problem-based
learning and direct instruction/experiential learning in two 4th grade classrooms. Journal of
Elementary Science Education, 21(1), 1–16.
Glossary of Education Reform. (2016). 21st century skills. https://www.edglossary.org/21st-cen
tury-skills.
Han, S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2016). How science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics project based learning affects high-need students in the U.S. Learning and Individual
Difference, 51, 157–166.
Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational
Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.
Holm, M. (2011). Project-based instruction: A review of the literature on effectiveness in
prekindergarten through 12th grade classrooms. Rivier Academic Journal, 7(2), 1–13.
Klein, A. (2018, October 15). How does science testing work under ESSA? Education Week. http://
blogs.edweek.org/edweek.
Klimaitis, C. C., & Mullen, C. A. (2021). Including K–12 students with disabilities in STEM
education and planning for inclusion. Educational Planning, 28(2).
Koray, O., Presley, A., Koksal, M. S., & Ozdemir, M. (2008). Enhancing problem-solving skills
of pre-service elementary school teachers through problem-based learning. Asia-Pacific Forum
on Science Learning & Teaching, 9(2), 1–18. https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/download/v9_issue2_
files/koksal.pdf.
Marra, R. M., Jonassen, D. H., Palmer, B., & Luft, S. (2014). Why problem-based learning works:
Theoretical foundations. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25, 221–238.
National Education Association (NEA). (n.d.). Preparing 21st century students for a global society:
An educator’s guide to the “Four Cs” (pp. 1–37). http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/A-Guide-to-
Four-Cs.pdf.
Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisci-
plinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 9–20.
Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its
constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31–38. https://www.jstor.org/stable/
pdf/44428296.pdf?casa_token=_mtdoc6-dnqaaaaa:pngbub0-olzfgi0ukennm9z9owcyeb6yqqs
ynqiptzfymd1gfhfaoefsstinuibqvy2wjcf54rakntxjxk2kugg0n4mhmrfjs6rfyffixae2s6t9ur4.
Strobel, J., & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of meta-
analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based
Learning, 3(1), 44–58.
The Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2019). Framework for 21st century learning (pp. 1–2).
http://static.battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/p21_framework_brief.pdf.
Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019a). Profile of a Virginia graduate. http://www.
doe.virginia.gov/instruction/graduation/profile-grad/index.shtml.
Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019b). Virginia’s 5C’s. http://www.virginiaisfo
rlearners.virginia.gov/media-library/#:~:text=Students%20in%20every%20grade%20will,com
munication%2C%20collaboration%20and%20citizenship%20skills.
Chapter 2
A Review of Literature
Abstract This chapter of Problem-Based Learning in Elementary Schools offers

a review of the literature addressing problem-based learning (PBL) in elementary
classrooms and other educational contexts. Definitions provided generally uphold
PBL as a teaching method in which students gain knowledge and skills by working
collaboratively to both investigate and respond to authentic and engaging open-ended
questions and/or problems. Also described is the history of PBL and its instructional
impact on student learning and achievement. In accordance with the current study
conducted in Virginia, key strategies of PBL instruction are identified that contribute
to 21st-century skills identified nationally and at the state level, which education
policy in Virginia denotes as critical thinking, creativity, communication, collab-
oration, and citizenship (the 5Cs). While exploring the PBL phenomenon and the
relevant literature, academic achievement, student impact, and patterns are discussed.
At present, much of the existing research focuses on grades K–12 in general terms
or postsecondary education. Elementary grades, while investigated, continue to be
underrepresented in explorations of PBL, a gap that this book helps to fill.
Keywords Definitions · Elementary school · 5cs · K–12 education · Literature

review · Problem-based learning · Project-based learning · Student achievement ·
21st-century skills
Overview
In this review of the literature conducted, problem-based learning (PBL) in elemen-

tary classrooms and other educational contexts is addressed. We provide definitions
that generally uphold PBL as a teaching method in which students gain knowledge
and skills by working collaboratively to both investigate and respond to authentic
and engaging open-ended questions and/or problems. Also described is the history
of PBL and its instructional impact on student learning and achievement. In accor-
dance with the current study conducted in Virginia, USA, key strategies of PBL
instruction are identified that contribute to 21st-century skills identified nationally
and at the state level, which education policy in Virginia denotes as critical thinking,
creativity, communication, collaboration, and citizenship (the 5Cs). While exploring

10 2 A Review of Literature
the PBL phenomenon and what the literature has to say about it in concert with 21st-
century skills, academic achievement, and student impact, patterns surfaced and are
discussed. At present, much of the existing research focuses on grades K–12 in
general terms and postsecondary education. Elementary grades, while investigated,
continue to be underrepresented in explorations of PBL, a gap that this book helps
to fill.
As the chapters progress in this book, we attend to these issues for fourth and fifth
graders.
Search Processes and Criteria
To better understand how PBL may influence academic achievement, with an interest
specifically at the elementary level, relevant literature was identified through our
university’s remote online library databases (EBSCO Host, Educators Reference
Complete from Gale, and ProQuest). Google Scholar was also searched to locate
peer-reviewed, scholarly articles and academic books focused on PBL in education.
Among the numerous search terms used were achievement, 5Cs, PBL (activity,
concept, instruction, lesson, pedagogy, program, etc.), elementary school, policy,
problem-solving, project-based learning (PjBL), and 21st-century skills. Initial
searches in both EBSCO Host and Gale using PBL yielded 6,498 results. Elemen-
tary school narrowed the results to 617. Achievement further reduced results to
298. Additional searches using K–12 education and student achievement produced
limited sources addressing student achievement in elementary grades. Thus, it was
decided that results incorporating K–12 and postsecondary education would also be
reviewed. While countries outside the United States and private schools were flagged
for further review, from the outset, the focus was US-based public schools to maintain
consistency with the national context in which data were collected for the current
study.
Abstracts and overviews from articles and books were scrutinized, out of which
86 sources were selected for close analysis. From the literature reviewed, definitions
of PBL identified it as a method of learning and a particular type of pedagogy that can
be usefully compared with other instructional methodologies. Also elucidated was
the history behind this method and its impact on academic achievement for students
in different grades.
Our interest was PBL in US public schools, specifically grades 1 to 7 (depending on
state and school policies). However, broader research in K–12 was essential for iden-
tifying a PBL-related framework and exploring possible application for elementary
classrooms. Moreover, non-USA-based inquiries informed insights and possibilities
for the elementary level in the United States. We share important information that
helped with conceptualizing PBL and comparing it to related concepts, as well as
with discerning impacts on children’s achievement and learning.
Synthesis of the Literature 11
Synthesis of the Literature
Our interest in PBL and instructional strategies that contribute to elementary students’
21st-century learning led us to conduct a review of relevant sources. Specific
questions guiding this synthesis of PBL literature were:
• What are PBL and PBL-oriented student engagement?
• Why is research on PBL more focused on learning at secondary and postsecondary
levels?
• What is the academic impact on elementary students exposed to the PBL
instructional method?
• What key strategies of PBL instruction contribute to children’s 21st-century
learning?
• What multiple, specific engaging qualities are typically present in PBL tasks?
This review’s focus on PBL at the elementary school level was broadened in
light of educational literature trends: Most PBL research addresses what it is and
how it relates to secondary and postsecondary levels, with interest in various issues,
including impact on student achievement (e.g., Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Hmelo-
Silver, 2004; Holm, 2011; Kek & Huijser, 2017; Savery, 2006). Consequently, the
elementary grades continue to be underrepresented in explorations of PBL. Among
the exceptions, elementary-level PBL studies have been conducted by Barron et al.
(1998), Drake and Long (2009), Inel and Balim (2010), Merritt et al. (2017), Sage
(1996), Siew and Mapeala (2017), and others.
PBL Defined
Real-world problems are at the heart of PBL. This teaching method is intention-
ally rigorous, and it treats complex real-world problems as the means for fostering
learning that is not bent on simple solutions or reductionist thinking. In Rigorous
PBL by Design (McDowell, 2017), PBL is defined as a “series of complex tasks that
include planning and design, problem-solving, decision making, creating artifacts,
and communicating results” (p. 122). A “comprehensive activity” (p. 122) or set
of tasks, students actively participate in inquiry, create or propose solutions, and
perhaps even take action (Tienken, 2020). All such processes occur in the context
of a problem, challenge, situation, or scenario of relevance or value to students and
their lives.
In addition to course content, PBL can promote the development of the 5Cs and
generate opportunities for collaborating in groups, locating and assessing materials,
and embarking on lifelong learning (Duch et al., 2001). The power of PBL resides
in student discovery wherein they gain knowledge and skills by working in groups
to both investigate and respond to authentic, relevant, and engaging open-ended
questions and/or problems (Duch et al., 2001). In a PBL elementary study specific to
mathematics and science education, Merritt et al. (2017) found that “although there
is no consistent definition of PBL, PBL is an effective method for improving K–8
students’ science academic achievement, including knowledge retention, conceptual
development, and attitudes.” Both the general definition and Merritt et al.’s finding
recognize PBL as an effective instructional method aimed at students’ academic
achievement.
Importantly, beyond achievement as an end point, definitions of PBL also bring
attention to student-centered learning, peer collaboration, and real-world relevance
(Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Marra et al., 2014; Savery, 2006).
Compared with PjBL
Definitions of PBL are not necessarily clear cut and the term is sometimes used
interchangeably with other instructional methods like PjBL in which students learn
through problem-solving. PjBL is like PBL in some respects (Grant, 2011; Larmer,
2013; Sutton & Knuth, 2017). Both PBL and PjBL
• Offer a learning-by-doing methodology
• Focus on an open-ended question or task
• Provide authentic applications of content and skills
• Build 21st-century success skills
• Emphasize student independence and inquiry
• Are longer and more multifaceted than traditional lessons or assignments (para.
8). Differences are more subtle:
• PBL is “more often single-subject, but can be multi-subject,” whereas PjBL is
“often multi-subject.”
• While PBL “tend[s] to be shorter [even a class period], but can be lengthy,” PjBL
“may be lengthy (weeks or months).”
• PBL “classically follows specific, traditionally prescribed steps,” in contrast with
PjBL, which “follows general, variously named steps.”
• With PBL, the “product” may be tangible or a proposed solution, expressed in
writing or in a presentation,” in contrast with PjBL, which “includes the creation
of a product or performance [and may involve multiple tasks, disciplines, and
responses].”
• PBL “often uses case studies or fictitious scenarios as ‘ill-structured problems,’”
whereas PjBL’s focus is on the real world.” (Larmer, 2013, para. 8)
While project oriented, PBL can be adapted to time-limited lessons that emphasize
knowledge gains about proposed solutions to complex problems. If PjBL “centers on
the production of a learning artifact, PBL learning [involves acquiring] new knowl-
edge,” including solutions that are “tangible or proposed” (Grant, 2011, p. 38). PBL
embraces process-based learning and is not product driven. Thus, social or collabo-
rative activities conducive to PBL can lead to learning artifacts (McDowell, 2017),
Synthesis of the Literature 13
such as presentations or performances, logs, diaries, maps, puzzles, illustrations,

graphics, scripts, and so forth (Mullen, 2019).
Being accountable for learning processes and gains carries over into PBL contexts.
Said of different kinds of problem focused settings, “students are encouraged to take
responsibility for their own learning. They are provided with resources and guided
and mentored throughout the learning process by a supportive teacher who holds
them accountable at various points of the project” (Colley, 2008, p. 23). Importantly,
beyond achievement as an end point, definitions of PBL draw attention to student-
centered learning, peer collaboration, and real-world relevance (Barrows & Tamblyn,
1980; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Savery, 2006).
Differences between PBL and PjBL activity settings can even be “semantics” that
should not worry or burden practitioners—both extend learning in ways intended to
“powerfully engage and effectively teach” students (Larmer, 2013, para. 10). Another
clarification concerns problem-solving—while PBL centers problems that are ill
structured or messy, “completing any type of project involves solving a problem”
(para. 9), which implies that, by default, PjBL ignites problem-solving as well. Illus-
trating this line of thought, Larmer (2013) named a few problems that could be under
study in a PBL or PjBL instructional context:
If students are investigating an issue, like, say, immigration policy, the problem is deciding
where they stand on it and how to communicate their views to a particular audience in a
video. Or if students are building a new play structure for a playground, the problem is how
to build it properly, given the wants and needs of users and various constraints. Or even if
they’re writing stories for a book to be published about the driving question, “When do we
grow up?” the problem is how to express a unique, rich answer to the question. (para. 8)
PBL and PjBL instruction alike should provide both enrichment and skills that
students can carry throughout their lives (Buck Institute for Education, 2018).
History of PBL
In this section, five major topics shed light on the history of PBL: (1) PBL in the
medical field, (2) PBL and constructivism, (3) other historical impacts on PBL, (4)
PBL in the field of education, and (5) instructional practices.
PBL in Medicine: Howard Barrows’s Influence
PBL originated in the medical field, where its stakeholders were earnest about solving
real-world problems that could impact the future (Savery & Duffy, 1995). Such PBL
assumed that learning through problem-solving could generate usable knowledge
and that patients could readily benefit from physicians with problem-solving skills
(Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980). Medical schools laid the foundation for future hands-on
learning experiences across many fields, including education.
Initially, this method arose from the instructional need to help students in medical
schools learn basic science knowledge in a more lasting way while simultaneously
cultivating their clinical skills (Marra et al., 2014). As a reaction to traditional health
education (Hung et al., 2007), PBL was conceived and implemented in response to
students’ unsatisfactory clinical performances (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Chung
et al., 2016) resulting from an education geared toward memorization of fragmented
knowledge.
PBL methods were devised under the direction of Howard Barrows (1928–2011),
an American physician and medical educator known for his introduction of PBL
and other innovations in medical education (“Howard Barrows,” 2020; Merritt et al.,
2017). Barrows promoted student-centered, multidisciplinary education steeped in
a problem-based curriculum (Savery & Duffy, 1995). Instead of being subjected to
lectures that decontextualized information and restricted it to disciplines and exam-
inations as the only form of assessment, his students explored problems authentic
to clinical settings. Medical students’ clinical competencies were assessed using
performance-based approaches, notably simulated patients (actors) who animated
problems and tested students’ knowledge in real-world scenarios (Savery, 2006).
Barrows expressed his pioneering curricular philosophy on PBL as “not simply
the presentation of problems to students as a focus for learning or as an example
of what has just been learned” (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980, p. ix). In the context
of medical learning, Barrows and Tamblyn, who described PBL as problem-based,
student-centered learning, claimed that it is the most efficient instructional method for
simultaneously developing knowledge, reasoning skills, and study skills. PBL, it was
theorized, is a rigorous, structured approach to learning that is based on considerable
experience and research and tailor-made for medical education. Explaining how
PBL can be used, they wrote that teachers facilitate students’ self-directed study
using an attractive, motivating format for learning and guide problem-solving and
skills development.
Objectives for introducing PBL to the medical field were to deliver knowledge
in a clinical context, use varied skills (clinical reasoning and self-directed learning),
and excite intrinsic motivation and inquiry (Yaqinuddin, 2013). In this vein, Barrows
and Tamblyn (1980) stated that the common factor is the need to actively apply
knowledge to the assessment and care of patients, as well as the ability to continue
to identify areas of study. Such continuance allows further learning to enhance or
improve the practice of these skills. Neville (2009) explained that one of the most
important differences between PBL curricula in the medical setting and traditional
medical school curricula lies in the learning environment. PBL environments use
small-group tutorials combined with a student-centered approach, active learning,
cases or problems, and significant time allotted for independent study.
History of PBL 15
PBL in Education: John Dewey’s Influence
Dewey’s (1859–1952) innovations were also steeped in experiential learning (i.e.,

learning by doing). An American philosopher and prominent educator, Dewey is
one of the most influential reformers of all time (“John Dewey,” 2020). PBL can
be also be traced to Dewey’s (1916) philosophy of learning by doing and advocacy
of hands-on approaches to classroom learning (see Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Krajcik
et al., 1994; Merritt et al., 2017). Among other progressive educators, Dewey laid the
curricular and psychological foundations for PBL (Colley, 2008), and advocated for
PBL in promoting K–12 students’ inquiry and construction of knowledge (Drake &
Long, 2009). To Dewey, teachers should be actively facilitating learning. Students’
intensive involvement in their own learning lessens the need for teachers to lecture
or present knowledge. Sahli (2017) further asserted that maturing students pursue
problems of interest to them for the sake of discovery, regardless of initial interests.
The PBL approach to learning was used prior to organized education and found
mostly in apprenticeships. In the earliest educational processes, whether the learner
was working toward a profession or toward obtaining a skill, the instructional
methodologies were informal and embedded within daily routine. As the need for a
widespread and more academic educational system arose, schools were created. The
learning model found in these early institutions followed a lecture-based model that
relied heavily on the ability to access and read printed materials; thus, learning was
reserved for the wealthy (Sahli, 2017).
Hands-on learning was later adopted and focused on design principles that
supported student learning. A group of researchers (Barron et al., 1998) described
four design principles of PBL that support learning by doing: learning-appropriate
goals, scaffolding that supports both student and teacher, frequent opportunities for
formative self-assessment and revision, and social organizations that promote partic-
ipation. Krajcik et al. (1994) stated that both teaching and learning are of primary
importance in how learners make sense of what they are learning—to make sense of
what you learn, you must do.
PBL and Constructivism
Learning by doing, advocated by both Barrows and Dewey, is common to

PBL and constructivism. As Neville (2009) stated, “Such a minimally guided
approach to learning, which is the essence of PBL, [is also called] discovery
learning, inquiry learning, experiential learning and constructivist learning” (p. 2).
Constructivism has been defined as a theory of how people learn, process,
interpret, and negotiate new information (Wilson, B. G., 2012). To this defini-
tion, Savery & Duffy, (1995) added that it is “a philosophical view on how
we come to understand or know” (p. 31). The expectation is that students
who learn using PBL actively participate in the learning process and even
direct their own learning and that of others. Educational constructivism impacts
instruction and curriculum design, and current educational approaches; constructivist

theory focuses on the role of the individual, the importance of meaning-making,
and the active role of the learner; consequently, it appeals to educators (Jones &
Brader-Araje, 2002).
Eight “instructional principles deriving from constructivism” (p. 32), articulated
by Savery and Duffy (1995), follow (verbatim), with an explanation of each in the
original source:
1. Anchor all learning activities to a larger task or problem.
2. Support the learner in developing ownership for the overall problem or task.
3. Design an authentic task.
4. Design the task and the learning environment to reflect the complexity of the
environment they should be able to function in at the end of learning.
5. Give the learner ownership of the process used to develop a solution.
6. Design the learning environment to support and challenge the learner’s thinking.
7. Encourage testing ideas against alternative views and alternate contexts.
8. Provide opportunity for, and support reflection on, both the content learned and
the learning process. (pp. 32–34)
A perspective on constructivism encompasses “construction and negotiation of
experience; communities of membership; active, transformative learning; multiple
identity formation and integration; and leadership, policy, or other impactful spheres
of responsibility” (Mullen, 2017, p. 39). Some of these empowering and transfor-
mational aspects of constructivist theory can also be found in PBL (Jones et al.,
2013). School-aged children—positioned as activists—seek solutions to profound
problems that are, in fact, ongoing global threats. Examples include the devastating
impact of poverty on families; the effects of pollution, biodiversity, and greenhouse
gas emissions on environments; and cultural and spiritual impacts of natural resource
extractions.
Learning by doing and from experience, the basis of PBL, adheres to constructivist
approaches to learning the “hows” and “whys” behind things, as opposed to being
restricted to rote memorization or recall of facts. A constructivist approach to PBL
in education has strong support (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Miller, 2018). In recent
years, instructional design for the 21st-century learner has evolved from established
behavioral and cognitive theories and more constructivist methods.
Rooted in the educational philosophy of constructivism that came to prominence
in the early 1990s (Wilson, B. G., 2012), basic precepts of the PBL model support
learning as an active process of meaning-making gained through experiences and
interactions. The PBL model also allows opportunities to arise as children and
youth encounter challenge and cognitive conflict during problem-solving activities.
A social activity involving interaction, collaboration, negotiation, and participation in
authentic practices of communities, PBL incorporates reflection and assessment; in
fact, feedback or performance assessment is to be embedded naturally within learning
activities (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Drake & Long, 2009). Wilson, B.G. (2012)
PBL and Constructivism 17
further explained that the PBL process, constructivist in nature, advances process-
based learning that prioritizes meaningful engagement and authentic practice, with
students at the forefront of their own learning.
In PBL environments, students construct knowledge from the setting in which
it was acquired or applied. Marra et al. (2014) explained that “fundamentally, PBL
is based on constructivist assumptions about learning” (p. 224) and that knowledge
learned can be demonstrated through expressing creativity, meaning making, and
breakthroughs.
Accounting for an opposing viewpoint, not all researchers support PBL and
constructivist approaches to classroom instruction. Among critics, Kirschner et al.
(2006) described constructivism as knowledge constructed by learners presented
with goals and minimal information from which they form their own meanings
and understandings. Their argument is that learning is idiosyncratic, which inter-
feres with developing and implementing a common instructional format; mini-
mally guided instruction like PBL and other types of constructivist learning, they
contended, renders teaching and learning ineffective: “The past half-century of empir-
ical research … has provided overwhelming and unambiguous evidence that minimal
guidance during instruction is significantly less effective and efficient than guidance
specifically designed to support the cognitive processing necessary for learning”
(p. 76).
However, based on all the literature we reviewed that discussed or studied PBL
in relation to young people, effective constructivist instruction supports educational
learning and outcomes. Thus, we proceed with this worldview and its assumptions
in mind.
PBL in K–12 Public Education
While PBL is not new, its prevalence has grown. Further clarifying the range, scope,
and benefits of PBL pedagogies, it is worth underscoring that student exploration,
interest, passion, motivation, problems, relevance, and so forth extend beyond formal
learning settings. Note that
in informal environments, youth benefit from participating in programs that provide oppor-
tunities to ask questions without penalty, explore new concepts, and think through realistic
problems that society faces. When youths’ interests increase, their excitement increases.
When youth are more connected with their passions, they are more willing to learn about
and correct society’s problems, thus potentially affecting global sustainability. (Evans et al.,
2014, p. 625)
Dispositions and aptitudes occurring in informal settings translate in formal

contexts as a push for cultivating students with contemporary mindsets and skills
evidencing the 5Cs. K–12 public school teachers are formally charged in some
school divisions and districts with addressing students’ interests, peer cultures,
and academics (course content/knowledge). “Merging interests, peer culture, and
academics” are arguably applicable not only in “informal learning settings where
PBL informs participants of current global issues to utilize design processes to solve
those problems” (Evans et al., 2014, p. 625; also, Delisle, 1997) but also in formal
learning contexts. As such, PBL instruction is a potentially powerful vehicle for
building capacity of state-of-the-art skills acquisition in both formal and informal
settings and across grade levels and subject areas. The skills set forth as an expecta-
tion of education policy can be developed in and out of school, with graduates having
learned to
• Achieve and apply academic and technical knowledge
• Demonstrate workplace skills, qualities, and behaviors
• Build connections and value interactions with others as a responsible and
responsive citizen
• Align knowledge, skills, and personal interests with interests with career oppor-
tunities (VDOE, 2019b)
With pressure from education policy and agencies, as well as businesses and
corporations, teachers seek to nurture problem-solving capacities (Duch et al., 2001).
As viewed by Delisle, (1997), “Educators who use [PBL] recognize that in the world
outside of school, adults build their knowledge and skills as they solve a real problem
or answer an important question—not through abstract exercise” (p. 12). Graduates
with problem-solving abilities are lifelong learners capable of critically and creatively
analyzing complex problems and generating solutions (Koray et al., 2008).
PBL places students in realistic, contextualized problem-solving environments
wherein complex problems connect the classroom, studio, or other setting to real-
life experiences (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). K–12 curriculum today reflects many
of the characteristics that typify PBL in medical education: teacher as a facili-
tator of learning, self-directed and self-regulated learners, and ill-structured (messy)
or instructional problems as the driving force for inquiry (Marra et al., 2014;
Savery, 2006). Utilizing these characteristics of PBL, a comparative study examined
how instruction using PBL and traditional learning (whole-class, instructor-driven,
lecture-based delivery of curriculum) affected retention of knowledge; Strobel and
van Barneveld (2009) found that PBL was superior for long-term retention, skills
development, and satisfaction.
Through PBL, students absorb important content knowledge and develop cogni-
tive, socioemotional, and democratic skills by tackling authentic problems or
completing projects reflecting a perceived need in the global community (Sutton
& Knuth, 2017). PBL learners not only investigate but also respond to an authentic,
engaging, and complex question, problem, or challenge (Buck Institute for Educa-
tion, 2018). Skills learned through PBL instruction should aid in real-life situations
within and beyond the immediate school–community.
The teacher role differs from the traditional approach of direct instruction, which
many educators may be accustomed to—and comfortable with—in their classrooms;
this also extends to teacher preparation programs that all too often place little
emphasis on field-based experiential learning. In PBL, teachers accelerate learning
by seeking to find out what students already know, what they need to know, and where
PBL in K–12 Public Education 19
to find information relative to the given problem (Drake & Long, 2009). The teacher
models strategies for thinking and learning and scaffolds learning through modeling
and coaching (Hmelo-Silver, 2004). Students are moved through these processes
while the teacher monitors peer groups’ progress. PBL teachers model and coach a
skill and encourage groups to practice the skill on their own (Sage, 1996).
More than this, PBL teachers in their facilitative capacity prompt learning
sequences: “PBL typically follows prescribed steps” (Larmer, 2013, para. 6):
• presentation of an “ill-structured” (open-ended, “messy”) problem
• problem definition or formulation (writing a “problem statement”)
• generation of a “knowledge inventory” (creating a list of “what we know about
the problem” and “what we need to know”)
• generation of possible solutions
• formulation of learning issues for self-directed and coached learning
• sharing of findings and solutions (para. 6).
PBL is amenable to any subject, learning situation, and timeframe ranging from
individual lessons to entire semesters, with the latter more common because of the
time it affords problem-oriented projects, especially those of greater complexity and
magnitude (Duch et al., 2001). Case studies, role-plays, and simulations are all used
for staging or distributing PBL problems. The problems identified for PBL settings
come from any kind of media, whether printed or digital text, or a combination
thereof.
Ideally, PBL problems transcend disciplines rather than being limited to them.
Typically, interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary problems are interesting and moti-
vate participants to learn more about the concept(s) under study (a process known as
deeper learning). The decisions being made by students involve reasoning processes
that they should be ready to explain, such as through presentations and demon-
strations of artifacts (Evans et al., 2014). In formal learning environments, the
problem is not isolated from the goals and content of courses but rather incorpo-
rates the goals/content and advances pertinent knowledge. Problems that groups
tackle should be complex enough that all members must cooperate to work together,
thereby taking ownership of, and responsibility for, the artifact/project/outcome. For
projects that span an entire semester or multiple sessions, students need to participate
in open-ended projects with multiple stages or processes (Duch et al., 2001).
Students are expected to carry forward the capacities and skills learned through
PBL instruction: “PBL prepares students for academic, personal, and career success,
and readies young people to rise to the challenges of their lives and the world they
will inherit” (Buck Institute for Education, 2018, p. 1).
Finally, guidelines from different sources can be adjusted for developing, imple-
menting, and assessing PBL curriculum. Steps for undergraduate classes utilizing
the PBL method can be modified for elementary, middle, and secondary grades (see
Duch et al., 2001). Our summary that follows is based on a blend of sources (e.g.,
Duch et al., 2001; Evans et al., 2014; Illinois Center for Innovation and Teaching &
Learning, n.d.; Semiscoalition.org, 2013):
1. Choose a concept (“big idea”/universal theme summarized in one word like

sustainability) that is fundamental in each course (or setting) but not restricted
to it or subject-specific content or topics.
2. Identify a task to be completed by students to help them learn that concept in
the context of the problem (e.g., build a solar-powered vehicle for advancing
human use of renewable energy sources).
3. List the learning objectives that should be met when students work through the
problem (e.g., capacity to work theoretically and practically in the processes of
renewable energy by planning, designing, and presenting results to peers).
4. Think of a real-world problem context for the concept under consideration (e.g.,
human use of nonrenewable energy sources at a rate far outpacing alternative
energy sources).
5. Introduce the problem in stages so students will be able to identify learning
issues that can lead them to research the targeted concepts. Here are some
prompts that may help guide this process:
• What open-ended questions can be asked? What learning issues will be
identified?
• How will the problem be structured?
• How long will the problem be? How many class periods or sessions will it
take to complete?
• Will students be given information at the outset or in subsequent stages as
they work through the problem?
• What resources will the students need and how might they find them?
• What product/artifact, if any, will the students produce at the completion of
the problem?
• What knowledge will be acquired and skills developed in anticipation of the
completion of this exercise?
• Address specially the outcomes or gains for 21st-century learning relative to
the Four Cs, 5Cs, or another relevant framework.
PBL and STEM
No “single definition or conceptualization of what STEM (Science, Technology,

Engineering, and Mathematics) integration is or should look like at the elementary
level” exists (Estapa & Tank, 2017, p. 2). By STEM, we refer to STEM in educa-
tion befitting “an interdisciplinary approach to learning where rigorous academic
concepts are coupled with real-world lessons as students apply [STEM] in contexts
that [connect] school, community, work, and the global enterprise” (Hallinen, 2019,
p. 6). Gerlach (2012) expounded, “Everyone knows what [STEM] means within their
field,” yet meanings of STEM “all have one thing in common: It is about moving
forward, solving problems, learning, and pushing innovation to the next level” (p. 3).
We extend these definitions to fully include K–12 students with special needs so they
too can reap the benefits of STEM education.
Importantly, PBL is heavily utilized in STEM education, which integrates knowl-

edge from diverse disciplines to immerse students in authentic problem- and project-
based learning experiences (Klimaitis & Mullen, 2021). Instruction in STEM content
areas is embedded in the scientific method, design processes, and modern-day skills
(Basham et al., 2010). PBL-driven studies of STEM frequently accentuate one of
the disciplines (e.g., engineering). Perspectives vary as to what needs attention in
STEM education. In engineering, for example, STEM learning is guided by a “social
constructivist perspective” that supports students making meaning from their inter-
actions and experiences; not only are they “active[ly] problem-solving” but also
“creat[ing] impactful change” (Carroll, 2014, p. 16). STEM-embedded PBL involves
integrating “the engineering design process into theories of learning and topics in
STEM subjects” (Evans et al., p. 626). Both Carroll and Evans et al., then, incor-
porated engineering design into STEM concepts and practices for the purpose of
tackling global challenges, whereas Zollman (2012) upheld STEM literacy as the
pressing problem context for “satisfy[ing] societal, economic, and personal needs”
(p. 1).
Sometimes PBL activities occur outside regular school hours, wherein testing
preparation may dominate and curricular choices are limited. There are benefits
from considering alternative scenarios from informal or out-of-school learning, so we
briefly illustrate Carroll’s (2014) and Evans et al.’s (2014) studies involving middle
school students. We end this section by summarizing similar studies of elementary
student engagement in STEM-related PBL contexts.
Making Water Accessible Everywhere—Problem Context. In urban California,
USA, a university group reached out to the Diamond Afterschool Program involving
36 underserved middle school students (Carroll, 2014). To enact peer mentoring,
18 university engineering students were assigned to mentor youth facing poverty,
language, and other barriers to success. The general PBL goal (called a “problem”)
was water accessibility. This STEM setting focused on consciousness-raising about
basic resource deficits and making water accessible everywhere and eliciting empathy
and creativity. During class, the university students designed activities aligned with
“engineering and design thinking” goals for middle school youth, extending to STEM
design, “adolescent development,” “mentoring,” and more (p. 18).
PBL components were apparent. University students in this problem context
decided the activities to use with the youth. They collaboratively designed activi-
ties using research and resources, handled the youths’ participation themselves, and
reflected in journals on their learning using prompts. Water activities were experi-
enced. For the “Gummi Bear Water Tower Challenge,” children “worked in teams
to build a water tower with playing cards [gummi bears, etc.]. A hair dryer was used
to test each structure’s stability. Students learned about physics as they built their
towers” (p. 18). In the “Water Without Faucets” activity, “[University and middle]
students compared their own experiences of water use with [life] in developing
countries.” Children “were divided into teams [with and without a faucet nearby]
to replicate what it would be like to not have access to a faucet.” Then, “the teams
competed to see who filled their buckets more quickly [and the children] reflected
on the difficulties of living in a place where there is not easy access to water” (p. 18).
This experiential study supported relevant learning in six ways (Carroll, 2014,
p. 29):
• A “prototyping mindset” for engaging in design thinking forged “a bond” for
the university students who were learning to work together to experiment and
find answers to their questions; the children, also learning to develop a “sense of
resourcefulness,” “experienced what it meant to adopt a prototyping mindset.”
• Empathy, “a critical component of human-centered innovation” that enhances
problem contexts, was developed as the university students read pertinent
literature and got to know the children.
• Uncertainty on the part of the university students was channeled into action as
they “built prototypes” that led to activities to be tested with the children.
• Collaboration supported the creation of “team culture,” which in turn made it
possible to generate many “creative ideas” and keep the work going.
• Becoming “a STEM role model” depended, for the university students, on
having “strong personal connections”; these mentors shared their STEM career
“biographies” with the children who could imagine having a career in STEM.
• Most importantly, “design thinking provided a frame within which [the univer-
sity] students learned” about mentoring, “creat[ing] user-centered learning expe-
riences,” and “shar[ing] their experiences as developing STEM professionals with
[children].”
Building a Winning Solar Vehicle—Problem Context. Within an out-of-school
STEM studio in rural Virginia, USA, 14 youth from middle schools participated
in a 4-day studio challenge to build a solar vehicle. Evans et al. (2014) sought
to know if learning could deepen for youth immersed in a STEM-embedded PBL
situation, so they geared the program’s “designed features” and engineering process
to potentially influence participants’ deeper learning, motivation, and interest. Using
pre- and post-assessments and individual interviews, deeper learning was tracked for
each participant.
In this STEM studio, the global problem of sustainable energy was presented
to the entire group. Small teams were challenged with creating a design to save
seabirds using an engineering kit. Cases featuring Ryan (female) and Sam (male)
probed whether they progressed and gained “deeper learning about science concepts
related to energy sustainability” from experiencing PBL, team collaboration, and
“new media” utilization (e.g., “social networking forms”; pp. 626–627).
Ryan and Sam’s teams built winning solar vehicles to “carry” and “save” (plastic)
seabird eggs. Over just 4 days, there was evidence of deeper learning about engi-
neering concepts, design, and problem-solving. Ryan extensively interacted with
her peers, initiated team consultations, and heavily used technology (e.g., iPad).
Sam’s test score dropped, yet he was active and collaborative in building the vehicle.
Wanting to win the challenge, he threw himself into preparing for the presentation.
Sam seemed more collaborative in her approach. A finding was that “problem-
solving, new media, and peer interaction as designed features of Studio STEM
[stimulated] interest in STEM for deeper learning” (Evans et al., 2014, p. 638).
Other Research on Elementary Students’ Engagement. A grade 4 classroom

study highlighted the potential for engineering at a young age, like the engineering
investigations just described. English and King (2015) described how, with balanced
scaffolding by the teacher, student groups partook in a design and redesign process
for 3-D model planes. Another study conducted at a STEM institute used video
recordings of students to rate their engagement in the design process. This research
team (i.e., Nadelson et al., 2015) developed a rubric for 142 K–5 elementary teachers;
after the training, classroom observations were conducted. The rubric measured the
success of engineering design–based STEM lessons and their facilitation. Students’
high “motivation and engagement” was revealed; “beyond their excitement about
creating solutions, students were also eager to develop and refine their products”
(p. 7). They explored possibilities and made modifications and provided explanations
and evaluated their own products. Examples of participation for which evidence is
sought are problem-solving, collaborating with peers, designing accurately, commu-
nicating, contributing to the group, and presenting results (Carroll, 2014; Evans et al.,
2014; Nadelson et al., 2015).
Engagement and PBL-oriented STEM. What is engagement, and how is student
engagement defined? Being immersed in a particular activity, such as problem-
solving, and being “energized by four goals—success, curiosity, originality, and
satisfying relationships” means one is engaged (Strong et al., 1995, para. 1). Students
who are absorbed in these ways “are attracted to their work [and persist] despite chal-
lenges and obstacles, [and] they take visible delight in accomplishing their work”
(Strong et al., para. 4). Various concepts in the literature describe engagement (e.g.,
“emotional engagement,” “cognitive engagement,” and “situational engagement”).
To ensure student involvement is beneficial, those conducting PBL lessons, activ-
ities, and programs must thoughtfully prepare. Advice to teachers is to “provide a
safe, caring, and energetic environment,” “make things interesting,” “demonstrate
why the content is important,” and “help student realize that personal effort is the
key to success” (Marzano, 2013, paras. 1–5).
Determining if students are, in fact, involved in a PBL-oriented STEM setting
needs to be revealed in the context, although tracking of engagement (quantitative
and qualitative) has been demonstrated (e.g., Evans et al., 2014). Student participation
is not to be viewed as an add-on, despite pressure from testing. In fact, engagement
is “a robust predictor of student learning, grades, achievement, test scores, retention,
and graduation” (Skinner & Pitzer, 2012, p. 21).
K–16 STEM education programs and curricula offer relevant contexts for learning
in which STEM content is integrated using PBL and other strategies (Klimaitis &
Mullen, 2021). In STEM settings, PBL is expected to align with best practices that
adhere to instructional approaches like those that follow (Kennedy & Odell, 2014,
p. 255).
• STEM is taught in a way that challenges students to create, innovate, and invent.
• Student engagement is directed at specific learning outcomes.
• Meaningful learning opportunities are created using applied and collaborative
learning.
• Students demonstrate understanding of the pertinent disciplines (e.g., science) in

an environment that models learning and work in the real world.
• New perspectives (e.g., multicultural) developed illustrate STEM’s global reach
and linkage with STEM communities and workforces.
Indicators for monitoring or measuring progress toward successful K–12 STEM
education extend to the US education system. Capacity for PBL-oriented STEM
programming in classrooms is built around teachers who are educated in their
discipline, quality learning opportunities, supportive policies, and available funding
(National Research Council of the National Academies, 2013).
All in all, it can be said that students’ commitment to PBL tasks depends on their
attention, curiosity, and interest, in addition to the perceived value of the activity.
As explained by Evans et al. (2014), “interest-driven learning” occurs when students
seize the “opportunity to self-direct learning,” relating the “situation or problem at
hand [to] their interests and experiences” (p. 630). Participation in STEM projects
involves peer interaction and collaboration aimed at fostering deep learning (Evans
et al., 2014). PBL approaches to active learning enable learners to improve and
experience success (Parsons et al., 2014).
With so much emphasis on student engagement, it would be wise to prioritize
learners’ interests and strengths, interaction with peers, and attraction to curricular
formats with STEM-designed features (e.g., media and digital technologies with
embedded social groups) that focus participation while stimulating interest (Evans
et al., 2014). Experimenting pedagogically, investing in best practices, incorpo-
rating design features, advancing creative learning, taking calculated risks, building
on success, monitoring progress, overcoming stumbling blocks, and learning from
failure are all attributes of STEM learning environments that strategically expedite
PBL (e.g., Carroll, 2014; Evans et al.; Klimaitis & Mullen, 2020).
By closely attending to their influence on participation and learning, teachers can
cultivate dynamic 21st-century STEM classrooms. To check for learners’ commit-
ment to tasks in PBL-driven contexts, teachers can reflect on Marzano’s (2013)
advice by asking themselves: Has the importance of the content been established? Is
the environment they are providing interest-driven? Does it allow for choices, and is
it challenging? Is it conducive to engrossing students in activities? Has the value of
effort been conveyed to students? Reflective questions like these are especially appli-
cable to STEM lessons, as many involve PBL activities and projects. As emphasized
in studies, for increased participation, learning must involve student choice and be
authentic, collaborative, and challenging (e.g., Parsons et al., 2014).
The PIRPOSAL framework can assist teachers with fostering hands-on learning
during STEM lessons: P = problem identification, I = ideation, R = research, P =
potential solutions, O = optimization, S = solution evaluation, A = alterations, and
L = learned outcomes (Wells, 2016). As Klimaitis and Mullen (2020) described, this
organizer can be used to guide PBL projects, in addition to students’ development
of executive functioning skills (e.g., organizing tasks, staying focused, regulating
emotions, self-monitoring; Marino, 2010), step-by-step procedures enable struggling
learners to follow a process for investigating problems and communicating results.
To be remembered, children are curious beings that ask why, build things, and take
risks. Implying a gap between natural and formal learning, Couros (2015) remarked,
“Kids walk into schools full of wonder and questions, yet we often ask them to
hold their questions for later, so we can get through the curriculum” (p. 4). When
students leave schools less curious than previously, Couros argued, public education
has failed them. Students need to be able to think for themselves. Natural curiosity,
independent thinking, and keen interests are strengths for gearing activities, curricula,
and programs in PBL settings.
Closely Related Instructional Practices
Instructional practices closely related to PBL—case-based, design-based, and

problem-based—are popular with K–12 practitioners. Many have similar compo-
nents or general themes to PBL and are based on similar research studies. Larmer
(2013) explained that many newer learning models are modernizations of the PBL
concept. These fall under the general category of inquiry-based learning. Inquiry
is key: Dewey, a science teacher, encouraged K–12 teachers to “do” inquiry as the
primary teaching strategy in science classrooms (see Friesen & Scott, 2013).
Like PBL, inquiry-based learning is student-centered, active learning that
advances questioning, critical thinking, and problem-solving (Savery, 2006). Inquiry-
based learning also encourages the use of real-world problems to facilitate higher-
order thinking. The main difference between inquiry-based learning and PBL
involves the teacher. Teachers facilitate learning and provide students with informa-
tion in inquiry learning-oriented classrooms. But in PBL classrooms, teachers support
the process of learning without directing or supplying information. However, this
could very well be an overstatement. Many variations exist in terms of how teachers
operationalize PBL, with contextual dynamics, developmental appropriateness, and
more driving decision making in practice. For example, Duch et al. (2001) explained
that while students need to learn to identify and utilize learning resources on their
own in PBL environments, instructors may get them started with leads and good
sources, encouraging them to use the library and other sources, not only the Internet.
In contrast, teacher collaboration through coteaching, planning, and troubleshooting
is a feature of inquiry-based learning, the aim of which is to avoid or resolve issues
and provide direction (Jones & Eick, 2007).
One type of learning closely related to PBL and inquiry-based learning is case-
based learning. This type of based learning helps students understand important
elements of a problem in a clinical setting and develop critical thinking by assessing
information and identifying flaws or false assumptions. Student learning is assessed
after instruction (Savery, 2006). (For comparison of PBL with case-based learning,
consult Srinivasan et al. [2007].)
PBL, inquiry-based learning, and case-based learning promote active learning and
task immersion and provoke higher-order thinking. Major distinctions among them
are noted in Table 2.1. Generally, in PBL settings, the student is involved in open
Table 2.1 Comparing case-based learning, inquiry-based learning, and problem-based learning
Concept Case-based learning Inquiry-based learning Problem-based learning
Method Guided inquiry Leads to open inquiry Open inquiry
Pre-reading Provided Provided Not provided
material
Teacher advance Yes Yes Yes
preparation
Role of facilitator Active Mixed Passive
Uses guiding questions, Provides problem, Does not guide discussion
moderates loud learners, procedures, and materials to even when learner explores
provides feedback guide student exploration tangents
Role of student Active Active Active
Interaction with Less Moderate More
teacher
Skills learned Clinical Problem-solving Problem-solving
inquiry, and the role of the teacher is passive, compared with the other two types of
inquiry where the teacher is more directly involved. Like PBL, inquiry-based learning
encourages the use of real-world problems to leverage student thinking. Figure 2.1
reviews the similarities and differences of project-based and problem-based learning.
Goals of PBL are to help students develop flexible knowledge, effective problem-
solving skills, self-directed learning skills, effective collaboration skills, and intrinsic
motivation (Hmelo-Silver, 2004), like best practices currently being utilized in
elementary classrooms in public schools.
Fig. 2.1 Virginia’s 5Cs:

Preparing future-ready
graduates Source Adapted
from VDOE (2019b)
Impact of PBL on Student Achievement
PBL in secondary classrooms and the 5Cs competency-based Profile of a Virginia

Graduate are taken up in this section.
PBL in Secondary Classrooms. Through research on how PBL or PjBL impacts
student achievement, it was found that many classrooms follow a specific model
(Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Grant, 2011; Horak & Galluzzo, 2017; Jones & Eick,
2007; Summers & Dickinson, 2012) with a driving question or problem and the
production of an artifact(s). Sources (Chung et al. 2016; Drake & Long, 2009; Krajcik
et al., 1994; Miller, 2018) indicate that PBL includes analysis, design, development,
implementation, and evaluation of the problem in addition to following a design
process. Student immersion through an authentic question or problem ignites PBL.
They begin by identifying the question or problem and organize information. Then,
they pursue investigations of the question or problem. Curriculum in a PBL model
is organized around problems (not disciplines), with emphasis on cognitive skills
and knowledge (Drake & Long, 2009). Also, PBL is a process-based model that
bridges phenomena in the classroom and real-life experience (Blumenfeld et al.,
1991). PBL models allow students to develop flexible knowledge, effective problem-
solving and collaborative skills, self-directed learning skills, and intrinsic motivation
(Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007).
Some sources address the academic effect of PBL on student achievement. A
majority focused on secondary grades, specifically middle and high school math
and science classes (Geier et al., 2008; Horak & Galluzzo, 2017; Jones & Eick,
2007; Krajcik et al., 1994; Sage, 1996; Summers & Dickinson, 2012). These studies
describe PBL’s effect on achievement at the middle and secondary level.
Geier and colleagues (2008) compared student achievement in seventh- and
eighth-grade classes receiving PBL instruction versus classes receiving traditional
instruction using quasi-experimental methods. PBL was shown to be more effective
in delivering content, and students performed better on high-stakes standardized tests
in science. Similarly, in Horak and Galluzzo’s (2017) study, academic and student
perceptions of PBL instruction favored the PBL group. An indirect and constructivist
approach to teaching can outperform a more direct approach to teaching. Students
in this study found the PBL setting created a better learning environment than the
traditional learning approach. Earlier, Summers and Dickinson’s (2012) study of
a high school social studies class identified this outcome. Students receiving PBL
instruction had higher standardized tests scores and more positive learning outcomes
than students receiving traditional instruction. Also, the PBL group had higher rates
of promotion to the next grade. These findings all demonstrate the positive effects of
PBL in secondary classrooms.
PBL in Elementary Classrooms. Research on the impact of PBL on student
achievement in elementary grades has produced similar, albeit fewer, findings. Sage
(1996) reported that much has been written about PBL and its effects on learning at the
postsecondary level (especially medical school) and that literature on PBL at the high
school level is increasing. Little research has been found in K–12 classrooms using
PBL—main barriers to investigation include constraints of classroom organization

and state-mandated assessments of students in specific subject areas. Also, it requires
careful planning to succeed at captivating learner attention in the scheduled class
period. Furthermore, there is a lack of qualified PBL facilitators who can model
good strategies for thinking and learning, including those who can scaffold student
learning through modeling (e.g., Hmelo-Silver, 2004).
Therefore, more documentation is needed of PBL’s relationship to academic
achievement, especially at elementary and middle school levels (Hmelo-Silver,
2004). Although fewer studies have been found on PBL in the elementary setting,
studies that look at elementary achievement do support the use of this instruc-
tional method (Barron et al., 1998; Drake & Long, 2009; Inel & Balim, 2010;
Sage, 1996; Siew & Mapeala, 2017). According to Inel and Balim’s (2010) quasi-
experimental study, the use of PBL in science and technology is more effective
in enhancing students’ academic achievement than traditional instruction. Students
rely on previous knowledge to identify a problem and resolve it. Students learn new
information simply by participating in the learning and discussing of knowledge with
peers. Koray et al. (2008) concluded that students participating in PBL performed
significantly better on a problem-solving skills assessment. They developed problem-
solving skills, enhanced communication, and improved group-working skills and
knowledge.
In a pilot study of fourth graders in science, Drake and Long (2009) found that there
was significant growth in content knowledge of the PBL group compared with the
control group receiving only traditional instruction. Students receiving PBL instruc-
tion demonstrated problem-solving strategies, unlike their peer counterparts in the
control group. The researchers concluded that PBL has promise in the elementary
classroom.
Siew and Mapeala’s (2017) study of fifth-grade science students’ motivation found
that the PBL method can foster science learning and the attainment of performance
goals. However, they found that PBL “is not a sufficient condition to effectively
promote students’ motivation toward science learning”—“The more explicit teaching
is about thinking and for thinking, the more substantial the impact it has on students’
motivation towards science learning” (p. 392). As Kain (2003) stated “Given that
PBL has a record of success in sparking such curiosity and motivation, it is well
worth considering as another tool to engage students” (p. 5). The demands of high-
stakes testing make the teaching of science secondary to math, reading, and writing
(Drake & Long, 2009). Priority attention given to reading and math instruction in
elementary grades can reduce instructional time for science instruction. Using PBL,
multidisciplinary instruction becomes the focus of learning. Holm (2011) concurred
that PBL fosters critical thinking and collaboration:
With renewed emphasis being placed on the basics of education, and increasing pressure
to streamline instruction and teach to specific standards, the idea that the most effective
instruction for these goals is also one that fosters depth of learning and engages students on
a personal level is quite appealing. (p. 10)
Answering one question or problem can allow students the opportunity to use
skills relevant to reading, math, science, and other areas of curriculum through the
facilitation of the teacher.
In Sage’s (1996) study, facilitators in first and second grade found that their
coaching skills, especially questioning strategies, were critically important in helping
students bring out prior knowledge, distinguish fact from opinion, and push deeper
for knowledge and ideas from students. Sage further explained a “model/coach/fade”
strategy in elementary classrooms (p. 21). To facilitate effective small groups, the
teacher may need to model a skill, coach group members on that skill, and fade input
to allow the groups to do it on their own. This supports the notion that elementary-
aged students need to be taught how to think for themselves and build a strong
foundation for inquiry.
Profile of a Virginia Graduate—The 5Cs
The push for graduates equipped with contemporary mindsets and the accompanying
skills has become the charge of schools in Virginia where “students in every grade
[are expected to] experience a new approach to instruction that focuses on key skills
for success in a modern world” (VDOE, 2019b). The Profile of a Virginia Graduate
asserts that the 5Cs—critical thinking, creativity, communication, collaboration, and
citizenship—need to be comprehensively addressed across grades in the state.
This profile of graduates is one state’s policy initiative (i.e., VDOE 2019a, b) for
meeting requirements (set forth by the 2016 Virginia General Assembly) to identify
the knowledge and skills that students should attain by the time they graduate to
achieve success. In developing the profile, the Virginia Board of Education deter-
mined that a life-ready graduate can apply content knowledge, demonstrate produc-
tive workplace skills, build community involvement and civic responsibility, and
participate in career exploration. PBL is an instructional method that allows students
to develop and build these skills.
The Profile of a Virginia Graduate reflects a commitment to “preparing future-
ready graduates” who, in Virginia, have been prepared “with the content knowledge”
and skills needed to be successful after graduation (VDOE, 2019b). Because of the
need for high school graduates to possess these capacities and younger students
to be making the expected developmental gains, we are incorporating information
about the 5Cs. PBL has good potential for furthering state-level goals and impact
student achievement. To achieve success, the development of the 5Cs should occur
through PBL instruction in a classroom and school environment, ideally extending
to informal learning, as illustrated by Evans et al. (2014). Figure 2.1 is a visual of
the 5Cs.
We now describe the 5Cs, each considered an essential skill for preparing future-
ready graduates that together constitute the framework of a high school grad-
uate (a state-level adaptation of the Portrait of a Graduate; see BattelleforKids
[2018]). Offering more detail, the VDOE’s (2019a) description of each component
is summarized in what follows, with extrapolations in the citizenship summary.
Critical Thinking. One of the most valuable skills in life and learning is the
ability to think critically. Students should be provided with opportunities to grow
as critical thinkers, and they need to be able to identify issues and formulate ques-
tions for investigation. They should discover and appreciate multiple solutions and
perspectives. Students need the opportunity to apply, analyze, interpret, evaluate, and
synthesize information in a variety of ways, as well as reason, make inferences, and
reflect on their own thinking. Allowing students to question and encouraging them
to wonder builds capacity for critical thinking.
Creative Thinking. Valuing original work means that the process of producing it
will be welcomed. Creative thinkers need to be pushed beyond surface understandings
to experience deeper learning that will promote content knowledge. Using their
imagination confidently during tasks will produce success. To actively create in a
classroom, students need the opportunity and freedom to take risks. Their interests
and strengths, as well as background knowledge unique to themselves, should be
usefully tapped for propelling open-ended questions and interest-driven learning.
They should feel compelled to locate and creatively use information, be resourceful,
develop new knowledge, and present it. Innovating, they will experiment and fully
immerse themselves in the flow of activity while monitoring progress and learning
from mistakes and failures. Students should be encouraged to embrace new ideas
and perspectives and direct their own explorations. Embracing creative collaboration
with peers and sharing results with other groups, in addition to giving and receiving
feedback, are also important.
Communication. Communication is more than just speaking. One must be able
to listen, articulate, evaluate, and respond. Students need opportunities to partake in
activities that develop these communication skills, which in turn advance collabora-
tion, creativity, and so forth. During such opportunities, they need to actively listen
and should know and respect their audience. They need to recognize and effectively
use verbal and nonverbal cues. Utilizing all forms of communication will allow
students to be successful and effectively communicate with others.
Collaboration. Working toward a common goal with others is a difficult task
for many children. Learning to compromise, demonstrating flexibility, and sharing
responsibility will enable students to develop this skill. Students should value and
seek others’ opinions, perspectives, and abilities and use those to work toward a
common goal. Obtaining feedback on their contributions to joint work is also a
related skill. To grow and thrive in an ever-changing world, students need to make
synergistic connections; initiate or help plan, organize, and complete tasks; and be a
valuable team member.
Citizenship. Regarding children’s membership in the world community, one of
the best ways they can grow is to experience citizenship in action. This way, they
will internalize formulations of citizenship such as “birthplace alone does not define
a citizen” (Mason, 2013) and explore enriching ideas and examples. Because being
a citizen does not automatically make them a good one, students need opportuni-
ties to demonstrate civic duty, trustworthiness, respect, fairness, responsibility, and
Profile of a Virginia Graduate—The 5Cs 31
caring. Learning about the past, participating in the present, and caring about the
future can produce strong citizens. Understanding that citizenship involves “rights,
obligations, and identity,” and that it has racial, gender, and other dimensions allows
for complexity and meaning making (Mason, 2013).
To this we add that using themes of citizenship to approach PBL with chil-
dren can generate high interest. Elementary teachers can “help them learn how to
positively contribute to their community”; “citizenship themes” that could work in
PBL citizenship-themed lessons include “honesty, compassion, respect, responsi-
bility, and courage” (Kaplan Early Learning Company, 2017). To promote good
citizenship and explore intrinsic issues, teachers can use books, websites, and other
resources that feature citizenship values and actions (e.g., the Born This Way Foun-
dation led by Lady Gaga and her mother supports the emotional wellness of youth
through action and creative problem-solving [https://bornthisway.foundation/our-
mission]). Teachers can also allocate time for writing and art activities; designing
creative citizenship displays, models, etc.; and using citizenship enrichment kits. Any
themes explored with students should help them develop understanding of “good
citizenship,” activism and agency, and applicability, such as to human life or the
planet.
By preparing critical thinkers, embracing creative thinking, practicing communi-
cation skills, encouraging collaboration, and developing citizenship skills, students
are enriched by experiences that prepare them for high school and life beyond grad-
uation. Incorporating the 5Cs into classrooms, and in formal and informal learning
alike, promotes well-rounded students intent on making a difference in the world.
An instructional model, PBL-oriented settings can leverage growth by focusing child
development on the 5Cs so students will flourish.
Engaging Qualities Present in PBL Tasks
Activities that are truly engaging are sought after in the classroom. As such, this
leads us to explicitly list the various engaging qualities, as defined in the literature,
that are typically present in PBL tasks. PBL problems are said to “transcend fields”
even though “core problems vary among disciplines” (Duch et al., 2001); thus, PBL
focuses on problems, not disciplines (Drake & Long, 2009). Elaborating, Duch’s team
identified five characteristics of PBL activities (we highlighted [in parentheses] the
qualities of engagement):
• The problem must motivate students to seek out a deeper understanding of
concepts. (motivation)
• The problem should require students to make reasoned decisions and to defend
them. (decision-making)
• The problem should incorporate the content objectives in such a way as to connect
it to previous courses/knowledge. (connection)
• If used for a group project, the problem needs a level of complexity to ensure that
the students must work together to solve it. (complexity)
• If used for a multistage project, the initial steps of the problem should be open-
ended and engaging to draw students into the problem. (open-ended)
Other qualities specific to PBL activities include authentic, ill-structured problem,
student choice, discovery, challenging, scenario-based, skills-building, indepen-
dence, inquiry, solution-focused, expression, and learning artifact (Larmer, 2013;
Parsons et al., 2014), as well as student-centering, real-world problem-solving, ques-
tioning, and active learning (Savery, 2006). Besides self -directed learning (inde-
pendence), engaging qualities are constructive learning, collaborative learning, and
contextual learning (Yew & Goh, 2016). Intrinsic motivation, not just motivation,
is a desirable characteristic of PBL assignments (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007; Jones
et al., 2013).
Overarching emphasis is on the presence of citizenship learning, collaborative
learning, communicative learning, creative learning, and critical thinking in PBL
tasks (e.g., NEA, n.d; VDOE, 2019b). As such, the 5Cs were consistently identified
as essential skills (key elements) for implementing PBL and involving students in
learning across contexts and grade levels.
Recognized albeit less commonly cited engaging qualities of PBL activity were
two others: empowerment, as experienced through, for example, the functioning of
groups and practice of “equal say” (Jones et al., 2013) and transformative learning,
which looks to “impactful change” beyond immersive problem-solving (Carroll,
2014); it requires transformation of students’ “existing knowledge” and involves
changes in perspective. These qualities of engagement can be designed as learning
outcomes (Donnelly, 2016).
Summary
The PBL-related literature reviewed in this chapter considered elementary student

engagement and achievement and extended to other areas of interest. Student achieve-
ment not only refers to academics but also growth in the 5Cs. Much of the research
examined the effects of PBL in K–12 classrooms; however, middle and secondary
classrooms were more central than elementary classrooms. Young learners need to
learn how to utilize PBL strategies under the guidance of the teacher; hence, teachers
function as facilitators of learning. Students can become increasingly independent,
motivated learners who are able to apply their skills to real-world problems through
personal and group inquiry. This review of sources covered the background of PBL
and its evolution into public education and classrooms. It also supported the distinc-
tiveness and interchangeability of PBL, project-based learning, and other forms of
participatory involvement for the purpose of learning by doing. PBL is not new;
however, its exploration in elementary settings is limited. Studies that do address
PBL at the elementary level focus on students’ perceptions and attitudes toward
PBL, with very few addressing the impact on academic achievement. This review
Summary 33
adds to the knowledge base regarding PBL instruction, with attention on PBL strate-
gies utilized in elementary, middle, and secondary levels, extending into informal
settings. All can be developmentally adapted to benefit elementary children and their
skills’ development. We hope that the identification and analysis of PBL instruction
will help educators think about how they can plan, implement, and assess it.
Chapter 3 explains the interview methodology used for this study, with coverage
of data collection and analysis processes.
References
Barron, B. J., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., & Bransford, J.
D. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem- and project-based
learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3/4), 271–311.
Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical
education. Springer.
Basham, J. D., Israel, M., & Maynard, K. (2010). An ecological model of STEM education:
Operationalizing STEM FOR ALL. Journal of Special Education Technology, 25(3), 9–19.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991).
Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational
Psychologist, 26(3/4), 369–398.
Carroll, M. P. (2014). Shoot for the moon! The mentors and the middle schoolers explore the inter-
section of design thinking and STEM. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research,
4(1), 14–30.
Chung, P., Yeh, R. C., & Chen, Y. C. (2016). Influence of PBL strategy on enhancing student’s indus-
trial oriented competences learned: An action research on learning weblog analysis. International
Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(2), 285–307.
Colley, K. (2008). Project-based science instruction: A primer—An introduction and learning cycle
for implementing project-based science. Science Teacher, 75(8), 23–28. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=
EJ817851.
Couros, G. (2015). The innovator’s mindset. Dave Burgess Consulting.
Delisle, R. (1997). How to use problem-based learning in the classroom. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Macmillan.
Donnelly, R. (2016). Application of Mezirow’s transformative pedagogy to blended problem-based
learning (Unpublished resource paper, pp. 1–21). https://arrow.tudublin.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1032&context=ltcoth.
Drake, K. N., & Long, D. (2009). Rebecca’s in the dark: A comparative study of problem-based
learning and direct instruction/experiential learning in two 4th grade classrooms. Journal of
Elementary Science Education, 21(1), 1–16.
Duch, B. J., Groh, S. E, & Allen, D. E. (Eds.). (2001). The power of problem-based learning. Stylus.
English, L. D., & King, D. T. (2015). STEM learning through engineering design: Fourth-grade
students’ investigations in aerospace. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(14). https://
doi-org.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu/10.1186/s40594-015-0027-7.
Estapa, A. T., & Tank, K. M. (2017). Supporting integrated STEM in the elementary classroom: A
professional development approach centered on an engineering design challenge. International
Journal of STEM Education, 4(6), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-017-0058-3.
Evans, M. A., Lopez, M., Maddox, D., Drape, T., & Duke, R. (2014). Interest-driven learning
among middle school youth in an out-of-school STEM studio. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 23(5), 624–640.
Friesen, S., & Scott, D. (2013). Inquiry-based learning: A review of the research literature (Alberta
Ministry of Education report). https://galileo.org/focus-on-inquiry-lit-review.pdf.
Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., & Clay-
Chambers, J. (2008). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science
curricula in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 922–939.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20248.
Gerlach, J. (2012, April). STEM: Defying a simple definition. NSTA WebNews, p. 3. [Report].
[National Science Teachers Association]. https://www.nsta.org.
Grant, M. M. (2011). Learning, beliefs, and products: Students’ perspectives with project-based
learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 5(2), 37–69.
Hallinen, J. (2019). STEM education curriculum. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.
com/topic/STEM-education.
Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in
problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark. Educational
psychologist, 42(2), 99–107.
Holm, M. (2011). Project-based instruction: A review of the literature on effectiveness in
prekindergarten through 12th grade classrooms. Rivier Academic Journal, 7(2), 1–13.
Horak, A. K., & Galluzzo, G. R. (2017). Gifted middle school students’ achievement and perceptions
of science classroom quality during problem-based learning. Journal of Advanced Academics,
28(1), 28–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X16683424.
Howard Barrows. (2020). Howard Barrows. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/howard_bar
rows.
Hung, W., Jonassen, D. H., & Liu, R. (2007). Problem-based learning. In J. M. Spector, J. G.
van Merrienboer, M. D., Merrill, & M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational
communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 1503–1581). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Illinois Center for Innovation and Teaching & Learning. (n.d.) Problem-based learning
(PBL). https://citl.illinois.edu/citl-101/teaching-learning/resources/teaching-strategies/problem-
based-learning-(pbl).
Inel, D., & Balim, A. G. (2010). The effects of using problem-based learning in science and tech-
nology teaching upon students’ academic achievement and levels of structuring concepts. Asia-
Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 1–23. https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/dow
nload/v11_issue2_files/inel.pdf.
John Dewey. (2020). John Dewey. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey.
Jones, B. D., Epler, C. M., Mokri, P., Bryant, L. H., & Paretti, M. C. (2013). The effects of a
collaborative problem-based learning experience on students’ motivation in engineering capstone
courses. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7(2), 1–71. https://doi.org/10.
7771/1541-5015.1344.
Jones, M. G., & Brader-Araje, L. (2002). The impact of constructivism on education: Language,
discourse, and meaning. American Communication Journal, 5(3), 1–10. https://ac-journal.org/
journal/vol5/iss3/special/jones.pdf.
Jones, M. T., & Eick, C. J. (2007). Providing bottom-up support to middle school science teachers’
reform efforts in using inquiry-based kits. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(6), 913–934.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-007-9069-0.
Kain, D. L. (2003). Problem-based learning for teachers, grades K–8. Allyn & Bacon.
Kaplan Early Learning Company. (2017). How to teach citizenship in the elementary school class-
room [Blog]. https://www.kaplanco.com/blog/post/2017/06/06/how-to-teach-citizenship-in-the-
elementary-school-classroom.
Kek, M., & Huijser, H. (2017). Problem-based learning into the future. Springer.
Kennedy, T. J., & Odell, M. R. L. (2014). Engaging students in STEM education. Science Education
International, 25(3), 246–258. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1044508.pdf.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does
not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and
References 35
inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://www.tandfonline.com/

doi/pdf/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1?needAccess=true.
Klimaitis, C. C., & Mullen, C. A. (2020). Access and barriers to Science, Technology, Engineering,
and Mathematics (STEM) Education for K–12 students with disabilities and females (pp. 1–24).
In C A. Mullen (Ed.), Handbook of social justice interventions in education. Springer. http://doi-
org-443.webvpn.fjmu.edu.cn/10.1007/978-3-030-29553-0_125-1.
Klimaitis, C. C., & Mullen, C. A. (2021). Including K–12 students with disabilities in STEM
education and planning for inclusion. Educational Planning, 28(2).
files/koksal.pdf.
Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (1994). A collaborative model for
helping middle grade science teachers learn project-based instruction. The Elementary School
Journal, 94(5), 483–497.
Larmer, J. (2013). Project based learning vs. problem based learning vs. XBL [Blog]. https://www.
pblworks.org/blog/project-based-learning-vs-problem-based-learning-vs-xbl.
Marino, M. T. (2010). Defining a technology research agenda for elementary and secondary students
with learning and other high-incidence disabilities in inclusive science classrooms. Journal of
Special Education Technology, 25(1), 1–27.
Marzano, R. J. (2013). Art and science of teaching/ask yourself: Are students engaged? Educational
Leadership, 70(6), 81–82.
Mason, P. L. (2013). Encyclopedia of race and racism (2nd ed.). Macmillan.
McDowell, M. (2017). Rigorous PBL by design: Three shifts for developing confident and competent
learners. Corwin.
Merritt, J., Lee, M. Y., Rillero, P., & Kinach, B. M. (2017). Problem-based learning in K–8 math-
ematics and science education: A literature review. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based
Learning, 11(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1674.
Miller, A. M. (2018). Sustainable education and the use of problem-based learning as a concep-
tual framework for implementation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Spaulding University,
Louisville, Kentucky. https://pqdtopen.proquest.com/doc/2029839168.html?FMT=ABS.
Mullen, C. A. (2017). Critical issues on democracy and mentoring in education: A debate in the
literature. In D. A. Clutterbuck, F. K. Kochan, L. G. Lunsford, N. Dominguez, & J. Haddock-Millar
(Eds.), The SAGE handbook of mentoring (pp. 34–51). Sage.
Mullen, C. A. (Ed.). (2019). Creativity under duress in education? Resistive theories, practices,
and actions. Springer.
Nadelson, L. S., Pfiester, J., Callahan, J., & Pyke, P. (2015). Who is doing the engineering, the
student or the teacher? The development and use of a rubric to categorize level of design for the
elementary classroom. Journal of Technology Education, 26(2), 22–45.
National Research Council of the National Academies. (2013). Monitoring progress
toward successful K–12 STEM education: A nation advancing? The National Academies
Press. https://www.nap.edu/login.php?page=%2fbooksearch.php%3frecord_id%3d13509%26t
erm%3dengagement.
National Education Association (NEA). (n.d.). Preparing 21st century students for a global society:
An educator’s guide to the “Four Cs” (pp. 1–37). http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/A-Guide-to-
Four-Cs.pdf.
Neville, A. J. (2009). Problem-based learning and medical education forty years on. A review of
its effects on knowledge and clinical performance. Medical Principles and Practice, 18 (1), 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000163038.
Parsons, S. A., Nuland, L. R., & Parsons, A. W. (2014). The ABCs of student engagement. Phi
Delta Kappan, 95(8), 23–27.
Sage, S. M. (1996, April). A qualitative examination of problem-based learning at the K–8 level:
Preliminary findings (pp. 1–27) (ERIC Number: ED398263). A paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. https://files.eric.ed.gov/
fulltext/ED398263.pdf.
Sahli, R. (2017). An examination of the effectiveness of project-based learning on student
academic achievement and teacher perceptions of project-based learning (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). http://hdl.handle.net/11414/3337.
Savery, J. R. & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its
constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31–38. https://www.jstor.org/stable/
pdf/44428296.pdf?casa_token=_mtdoc6-dnqaaaaa:pngbub0-olzfgi0ukennm9z9owcyeb6yqqs
ynqiptzfymd1gfhfaoefsstinuibqvy2wjcf54rakntxjxk2kugg0n4mhmrfjs6rfyffixae2s6t9ur4.
Semiscoalition.org. (2013). Getting the big idea: Concept-based teaching and learning [Handout].
https://semiscoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/getting-the-big-idea-handout.pdf.
Siew, N. M., & Mapeala, R. (2017). The effects of Thinking Maps-aided Problem-Based Learning
on motivation towards science learning among fifth graders. Journal of Baltic Science Educa-
tion, 16(3), 379–394. http://www.scientiasocialis.lt/jbse/files/pdf/vol16/379-394.siew_jbse_vol.
16_no.3.pdf.
Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. R. (2012). Developmental dynamics of student engagement, coping,
and everyday resilience. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of
research on student engagement (pp. 21–44). Springer.
Srinivasan, M., Wilkes, M., Stevenson, F., Nguyen, T., & Slavin, S. (2007). Comparing problem-
based learning with case-based learning: Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions.
Academic Medicine, 82(1), 74–82. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.acm.0000249963.93776.aa.
Strobel, J., & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of meta-
analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based
Learning, 3(1), 44–58.
Strong, R., Silver, H. F., & Robinson, A. (1995). Strengthening student engagement: What do
students want. Educational Leadership, 53(1), 8–12.
Summers, E. J., & Dickinson, G. (2012). A longitudinal investigation of project–based instruction
and student achievement in high school social studies student achievement in high school social
studies. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 6(1), 82–103. https://doi.org/10.
7771/1541-5015.1313.
Sutton, P. S., & Knuth, R. (2017). A schoolwide investment in problem-based learning. Phi Delta
Kappan, 99(2), 65–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721717734193.
The Buck Institute for Education. (2018). PBL works. https://www.pblworks.org.
Tienken, C. H. (2020). Cracking the code of education reform: Creative compliance and ethical
leadership. Corwin.
Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019b). Virginia’s 5 C’s. http://www.virginiaisfo
Wells, J. G. (2016). I-STEM ed exemplar: Implementation of the PIRPOSAL Model. Technology
and Engineering Teacher, 76(2), 16–23.
Wilson, B. G. (2012). Constructivism in practical and historical context. In B. Reiser & J. Dempsey
(Eds.), Current trends in instructional design and technology (3rd ed., pp. 51–62). Pearson
Prentice Hall.
Yaqinuddin, A. (2013). Problem-based learning as an instructional method. Journal of the College
of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan, 23(1), 83–85. https://jcpsp.pk/archive/2013/Jan2013/18.
pdf.
Yew, H. J., & Goh, K. (2016). Problem-based learning: An overview of its process and impact on
learning. Health Professions Education, 2, 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpe.2016.01.004.
Zollman, A. (2012). Learning for STEM literacy: STEM literacy for learning. School Science and
Mathematics, 112(1), 12–19.
Chapter 3
Methodology
Abstract Initiating this study were general questions of pedagogic interest: What
is PBL, and what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’
21st-century learning? The methodology used for this exploratory qualitative study
for which interviews served as the main data collection source is the focus of this
chapter of Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School. The interview context
gave participating elementary educators the opportunity to share their classroom
experiences of PBL as an instructional method. This chapter provides an overview of
the research design and justification; original PBL Teacher Interview Protocol; study
site and participants; limitations and delimitations; and procedures for collecting,
managing, and analyzing data. The study was created to identify key strategies used
by selected participants during PBL instruction in grades four and five. Additionally,
the methods were designed to examine how PBL strategies reported and used by the
educators contributed to the development of 21st-century learning approached as the
5Cs (critical thinking, creativity, communication, collaboration, and citizenship) in
Virginia. One-on-one interviews with teachers who had been using PBL instruction in
their classrooms for 2 years yielded insights into perceptions of PBL. Data collected
from a school site were analyzed to identify teaching strategies used during PBL
implementation that contributed to the development of the 5Cs. An extended focus of
the data collection process targeted support for teachers and administrators interested
in PBL instruction and curriculum in elementary classrooms.
Keywords 5cs · Interview methodology · Project-based learning · Qualitative

study · Themes · Elementary teacher participants · Elementary school ·
21st-century skills
Overview
General questions of pedagogic interest steered this study: What is PBL, and
what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’ 21st-century
learning? The methodology used for this exploratory qualitative study for which
interviews served as the main data collection source is the focus of this chapter of

38 3 Methodology
Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School. The interview context gave partici-

pating elementary educators the opportunity to share their classroom experiences of
PBL as an instructional method. This chapter provides an overview of the research
design and justification; original PBL Teacher Interview Protocol; study site and
participants; limitations and delimitations; and procedures for collecting, managing,
and analyzing data. We created this study to identify key strategies used by selected
participants during PBL instruction in grades four and five. Additionally, the methods
were designed to examine how PBL strategies reported and used by the educators
contributed to the development of 21st-century learning approached as the 5Cs in
Virginia. One-on-one interviews with teachers who had been using PBL instruction
in their classrooms for 2 years yielded insights into perceptions of PBL implemen-
tation. The data collected from a school site, as discussed herein, were analyzed to
foster understanding of the strategies teachers used during PBL implementation that
contributed to the development of the 5Cs. An extended focus of the data collection
process was to gain insight for supporting teachers and administrators interested in
implementing PBL instruction and curriculum in elementary classrooms.
Research Questions and Design
Driving this exploration is our pedagogic interest in PBL and instruction at the
elementary level that benefits 21st-century learning. A basic qualitative method-
ology was used to investigate the specific research question, What key strategies of
PBL instruction contributed to the development of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth grade
students at one elementary school? We looked to the strategies teachers reported
using in their PBL instruction they thought supported development of the 5Cs. Data
collected were used to determine the strategies used by teachers during PBL instruc-
tion in elementary classrooms and their contribution to 21st-century skills. The Profile
of a Virginia Graduate’s expectations of the 5Cs, an expression of 21st-century skills
at the state level (Virginia Department of Education [VDOE], 2019a, b), drew partic-
ular interest in light of our work as education leaders in the Commonwealth of
Virginia.
In accordance with Virginia state law, “Elementary school means a public school
with any grades kindergarten through 5” (Commonwealth of Virginia, 2020, para. 9).
At the site-based level of elementary education, we (the research team) set forth to (a)
identify key strategies used in effective PBL instruction and (b) discern the relation-
ship between these strategies and progress with, or improvement in, the 5Cs. Also,
our sampling methods were purposive (Miles et al., 2020), meaning that our popu-
lation was well defined and preselected—teaching personnel eligible to participate
in the research met specified criteria, which we clarify (see “Participant Selection”
subsection).
We located and analyzed relevant literature on an ongoing basis and wrote
summaries that integrated research methods and findings. We also generated a
detailed matrix (not included herein). The sources are organized around themes,
Research Questions and Design 39
including ways PBL has worked in various educational and situational contexts,
particularly with children; what PBL-embedded STEM looks like for young people;
and how PBL compares with closely related instructional strategies. We chose the
setting and eligibility criteria for participating in the study, created the interview
instrument, conducted all interviews in person through a member of our team who
is at arm’s length from both the school and division, and independently analyzed
the data sources. Each of us led, as a collaborative unit, different aspects of the
study (i.e., literature review, interview procedure, data analysis). We made constant
comparisons in the analysis of the interview data before arriving at themes. Through
data-based analysis and conversations, we gained an understanding of key strategies
of PBL instruction.
General practical outcomes anticipated for this study were that key strategies for
implementing PBL in elementary schools would be identified and that the results
could steer practitioners’ informed decision making about PBL classroom instruc-
tion. Another projected outcome was that PBL instructional strategies would connect
with the development of students’ 5C skills. Methodological exploration of PBL
strategies and 21st-century skills development was expected to help fill the gap in
the literature surrounding the use of PBL as a means for instruction in elementary
school, as well as support current and future practitioners in implementing PBL in
elementary contexts.
This small-scale analysis of a specific situation involving a small sample size is in
keeping with qualitative research and open-ended (interview) questions said to work
best in studies with small populations. Such open-ended questions allow for deeper
understanding of people’s perspectives on their own experiences (Yin, 2018).
Setting Selection. An (PK–5) elementary school within a rural division in south-
west Virginia was chosen for exploratory study. One of the top elementary schools
in the division, it has been graded as above average. During the research period, the
school had around 525 students, with a student–teacher ratio of 14 to 1. According
to recent state test scores, 80% of students are at least proficient in math and 81%
in reading. The school is predominantly White, with 90% White, 7% Hispanic, 2%
multiple races, and 1% Black. All seven participating teachers/staff (interviewees)
were White. There were 42 certified teachers at this school (all White): 26 classroom
teachers and an additional 16 teachers (specialty, Title I, special education, English
as a second language). Building personnel served multiple classrooms, mostly grades
4 and 5. Because they spent a lot of time in the grade 4 and 5 classrooms, they were
accustomed to providing support for PBL-centered curriculum and guidance to these
students.
With divisional leaders’ encouragement, a PBL program supporting the Profile
of a Virginia Graduate initiative (VDOE, 2019a) was implemented 3 years prior to
our study. The onsite application had taken place in four grade 4 and 5 classrooms
during the 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 school years. The first author has been serving
as principal at the research site since 2015. Because of her inside knowledge, it was
possible to generate a purposive sample of teachers and teacher teamers. With the
school and district culture’s receptivity to pedagogic improvements, we were drawn
40 3 Methodology
to study this school, with an eye on how it was adapting to 21st-century policies and
practices as reflected by the division and state.
Teacher Participants. Eight elementary educators—general education, special
education, and Title I teachers and aides—who had been using PBL as an instructional
method since 2017 and for 2 school years fulfilled eligibility criteria for participation.
Seven of the teachers/staff who worked in grades 4 and 5 PBL classrooms during
those 2 years were voluntarily interviewed one-on-one.
Teaching personnel eligible to participate in the research met four criteria: (a)
occupy a teaching or staff post in an elementary school in Virginia, (b) possess peda-
gogic experience with PBL instruction in the elementary classroom, (c) utilize PBL
as the main method of teaching and learning in the classroom, and (d) participate in
teacher teams organized to advance experimentation with PBL teaching and learning.
This specific teacher profile was fulfilled by select teachers who accepted the invi-
tation to participate in interviews in February 2020. In 2017, these teachers decided
to experiment with an alternative learning opportunity, rising to meet the challenge of
the former superintendent to have students learn in ways that were unique to elemen-
tary classrooms within the division. This challenge was carried forth with the strong
support of the new superintendent (who started July 2017) and the assistant superin-
tendent, director of instruction, and principal. The teachers decided to reorganize the
traditional structure of grades 4 and 5 as two distinct, cross-grade-level teams: The
PBL team focused on exploratory PBL instruction and the traditional team attended
to a traditional approach to instruction. (Each team had four classroom teachers.)
Limitations and Delimitations. This research only accounted for the responses
of elementary teachers/staff who worked in classrooms using PBL instruction. As
such, teachers and staff from the same school whose instructional methods were not
primarily PBL centered were not included.
The major limitation, though, was Samantha’s role as the principal—her
researcher role during the data collection phase needed to be offset in all study-
related contact with participants to protect her supervisees. To shield participants
from potential or perceived supervisory bias, a creative solution was endorsed not
only by the research team but also university stakeholders and the ethics review board:
Interviews were conducted by a member of the research team (coauthor Emily). As
a “substitute researcher,” she was briefed on the interview protocol and procedures
prior to conducting interviews. Having a substitute researcher with recent experience
conducting research-based interviews and with a school practitioner background
who was employed in a different division in Virginia ensured her credibility with all
parties involved. Emily’s presence allowed the teachers and staff at the research site
to report honestly and openly without fear of consequences due to their supervisory
relationship with their principal.
Regarding delimitations of this study, the research team chose to focus on PBL
within a specific elementary school. It was also decided to exclude other instructional
methods (e.g., project-based learning) that may have been in used in the building.
Another decision was not to compare PBL to traditional or conventional methods
of teaching while allowing teachers to make any such comparisons even though the
interview prompts did not guide them in this direction.
Research Questions and Design 41
Confidentiality and Ethics. To monitor potential bias in the supervisory relation-

ship, measures taken beyond utilizing a researcher substitute to conduct interviews
were ensuring the anonymity of participants’ identities and responses, as well as
conducting member checks (McMillan & Wergin, 2006). The substitute researcher
guaranteed all participants’ anonymity, which was important so that their identi-
ties would not be revealed. With this assurance, they were free to speak about their
views, experiences, and opinions without fear of personal judgment or retaliation by
their principal. Participation was voluntary, and the participant consent letter, which
briefly explained the study, stated there would be no negative repercussions if iden-
tifying information were to arise. All research correspondence was also handled by
the third party. The principal was neither present during the actual interviews nor
given interview notes.
Following the interview sessions, the substitute researcher uploaded the recorded
interviews directly to GMR Transcription Services, an online company. After
receiving the electronic transcriptions, she forwarded the transcription to the corre-
sponding interviewee who, after reviewing the record, verified it by email. Using this
process, member checks occurred to accurately record their perspectives (McMillan
& Wergin, 2006). Once verification from the interviewees was received, the substitute
researcher shared the transcriptions for coding purposes.
Data Collection Procedures
Data collection occurred through a single one-on-one interview with Emily. Each
interview lasted up to 45 min, followed interview protocol, and was digitally recorded.
Electronic transcriptions of the recorded interviews were forwarded to the corre-
sponding interviewee, who then verified the record by email response. Once verifi-
cation from the interviewee was received and member checking concluded, Emily
moved the transcribed interviews to the research team for analysis. Samantha closely
reviewed each transcribed interview, noting possible themes and trends, which were
independently reviewed by the research team. Coded themes and notes were entered
into a Microsoft Excel sheet to organize data collected. (Specific analysis proce-
dures are discussed in the “Data Analysis” section.) Prior to beginning the study,
permission was obtained, as noted below.
As listed on Table 3.1, besides the primary data source, which was teacher/staff
interviewees’ responses, another source was the literature identified and analyzed
(see previous chapter). A secondary data source was relevant contextual informa-
tion provided by local, district, state, and federal sources, such as expectations for
21st-century graduates from a state education agency (e.g., VDOE; www.doe.virgin
ia.gov).
Before data collection, approval was received in February 2020 from the Human
Research Protection Program through our home university’s (Virginia Tech) Insti-
tutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB research protocol and appending materials
(e.g., participant consent letter), modified for the school division in accordance with
42 3 Methodology
Table 3.1 Alignment of research and interview questions, data sources, and analytic procedures
Research and interview Data sources Data analytic procedures
questions
Research question: 1. Interview transcriptions of Deductive and inductive
What key strategies of PBL teacher/staff responses coding of PBL strategies and
instruction contributed to the 2. Local, district, state, and 5Cs identified
development of the Profile of a federal informational Interview transcriptions read
Virginia Graduate’s sources (e.g., reports, numerous times by coders and
expectations of the 5Cs for policies, and websites) codes recorded in margins
fourth and fifth grade students 3. Literature documenting Labels created in Microsoft
at one elementary school in PBL in K–12 public Excel to organize data
Virginia? education and associated generated from eight interview
research-based themes questions
Interview questions (sample): Strategy (code):
PBL teaching strategies Teachers identified PBL
considered important → strategies used during
Interview Q2 and others implementation they
considered important
Strategies commonly used
were coded
5Cs skills development: Teachers reported which skills
5Cs development resulting were developed through PBL
from PBL instructional instruction
strategies used Commonalities coded in
→ Interview Q3, 4, and others responses
Teachers pinpointed which
strategy impacted which skill
Commonalities coded in
responses
→ Interview Q3a, 4a 5Cs codes:
Critical thinking (CT) skill CT = critical thinking
→ Interview Q3b, 4b CR = creativity
Creativity (CR) skill COM = communication
→ Interview Qc, 4c COL = collaboration
Communication (COM) skill CZ = citizenship
→ Interview Q3d, 4d
Collaboration (COL) skill
→ Interview Q3e, 4e
Citizenship (CZ) skill
its procedures, were also approved. Specifically, a meeting was held with the divi-
sion superintendent to request permission to conduct the study at the selected school,
and a letter followed describing the research, purpose, and data collection process,
including procedures for protecting participant anonymity. A letter was then sent to
selected teachers explaining the study and inviting voluntary participation.
The university’s required Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative course
on ethical standards in research was also completed by the research team. Data
collection and analysis procedures were organized around established processes:
Data Collection Procedures 43
“data collection; manage and organize the data; read and memo emergent ideas;
describe and classify codes into themes; develop and assess interpretations; represent
and visualize the data; and account of findings” (Creswell & Poth, 2018, p. 186; also,
Miles et al., 2020).
Instrument Design and Validation
To validate our account of the research and establish its reliability, we used at least
six “validation strategies” (Creswell & Poth, 2018, pp. 256–264):
• “Consensual validation”—as a research team, we worked in concert with multiple
stakeholders who gave input regarding the conduct of the study at the research
site, including data collection procedures involving the ethical treatment of
participants.
• “Triangulation of multiple data sources”—select literature, teacher interviews,
and state-level information was assessed by all members of the research team.
• Clarified “researcher bias”—to monitor potential researcher bias, the use of a
researcher substitute proved necessary and the justification for this action was
previously explained.
• Member checking—interview transcriptions were given to the teacher inter-
viewees soon after each interview took place and checked by them to ensure
accuracy.
• “Peer review of the data and research process”—the study was carried out by a
school–university team of expert practitioners and scholars; also, multiple stake-
holders from the university and division provided invaluable feedback, in partic-
ular, a university committee of professors involved from 2019 to 2020 proved
especially attentive to all methodological details and the process of considering
alternate ways of proceeding with the data collection, as well as re-interpreting
and displaying data; also, a full ethics review by the same university added to
the multiple enactments of peer review and critique that deepened researcher
reflexivity and produced sound research.
• “Intercoder agreement”—This was reached by coders who analyzed the interview
transcription data and agreed on codes and themes (see Table 3.1 for details).
Study Instrument. We created the study instrument titled PBL Teacher Inter-
view Protocol based on our research questions and initial literature results (see
Appendix). Words/ concepts were extracted from these two sources to inform
interview questions: citizenship, classroom, collaboration, creativity, communica-
tion, critical thinking, PBL instruction, and strategies. Published sources aided
the construction of prompts involving challenges and strengths of using PBL in
elementary classrooms from the perspective of the PBL teacher.
The interview questions and procedures were pilot tested (with a divisional coor-
dinator steeped in elementary knowledge). Questions were refined and reworded. A
decision was to list each of the 5Cs without specifically naming them; we simply
44 3 Methodology
specified each of the widely known 21st-century skills. Another point is that our
methodological plan and procedures were subjected to multiple reviews over time
by university project and ethics review committees, extending to an independent
review of the division in which the elementary school was located.
Table 3.1 was another procedural clarification and source of validity that resulted
from this process. It served as a check for ensuring close alignment between the
interview questions and research question.
Once teachers/staff agreed to participate, interview dates and times were sched-
uled. The in-person interviews with PBL teachers took place in a one-on-one format
with the research substitute. The location, decided by the teachers, accommodated
their busy schedules and eliminated their travel time. Interviews lasted up to 45 min,
took place in one sitting, and were digitally recorded.
Data Organization, Coding, and Analysis
Interview transcriptions containing de-identifying participant data were stored on a

password-protected laptop computer. The seven transcripts were read fully several
times and color-coded to note points of interest; a preliminary ordering of each tran-
scription was created. Initiating these and other data analysis processes, transcribed
interview responses were arranged in Microsoft Excel. A data summary form aided
us with organizing and categorizing the interview information. Each interview ques-
tion and subquestion constituted a column heading, and each row was labeled A,
B, C, D, E, F, and G (in accordance with the seven participants). Keywords were
extracted from the research and survey questions and converted into a list of codes
for deductive coding (as per Miles et al., 2020). We coded the transcriptions and
transferred the information into the data summary form, organizing the codes into
small groups, then larger groups, and eventually themes.
Notes taken in the margins of the electronic transcriptions were simultaneously
coded around these key points of high interest:
• Key strategies used in PBL instruction
• Identification of each of the 5Cs
• Impact on 5Cs skills development
Inductive coding (Miles et al., 2020) of these key points led to additional codes
that emerged while analyzing the survey data. We searched for strategies commonly
used during classroom implementation reported by the teachers/staff; beyond this,
we noted strategies that were thought to have had an impact on the 5Cs. Using
these coding processes, we extended the predetermined codes, made connections,
synthesized the data, and completed the within-case analysis.
To break down these various processes a little more, we adopted Stage and
Manning’s (2016) content analytic approach. As such, the transcriptions were
treated as documents that were coded deductively and inductively, and the interview
protocol’s embedded keywords were turned into deductive codes. Within the Excel
Data Organization, Coding, and Analysis 45
file, keyword usages were counted as an indicator of the relative weight/importance;

then, the context surrounding each keyword was studied to gain insight into words-
in-context and their nuances. Emergent themes were identified using these proce-
dures, with the goal of identifying PBL strategies, each of the 5Cs, and 5Cs skills
development and impact. All these processes and observations were tracked in the
researchers’ separate notes on coding and analysis.
By following Harding and Whitehead’s (2020) steps for analyzing data in qual-
itative research, we coded words and phrases line by line (in an Excel file). The
multiple “fractured” codes were grouped then hierarchically arranged. A search for
connections between and among the groupings led to discoveries that are described
in the next chapter. In the process of creating linkages, we moved back and forth
among the steps. Returning to read the full transcriptions during coding and revisiting
the coding process enabled rich coding to evolve and detailed notetaking to occur.
Tentative themes with data-based evidence were summarized.
In keeping with recommendations for visualizing qualitative data sources
(Creswell & Poth, 2018; Miles et al., 2020), we created data-based tables and figures
of our transcriptions, research findings based on the interviews, and select literature
analyzed.
Summary
General questions initiating this study of pedagogic interest were: What is PBL, and
what PBL instructional strategies contribute to elementary students’ 21st-century
learning? Interviews with elementary teachers served as the main data collection
source for this exploratory qualitative study. The interview context gave seven
elementary educators the opportunity to share their classroom experiences of PBL as
an instructional method. This chapter provided an overview of the research design and
justification; original PBL Teacher Interview Protocol; study site and participants;
limitations and delimitations; and procedures for organizing, coding, and analyzing
the interview data collected. The study was created to identify key strategies used
by selected teachers/staff during PBL instruction in grades 4 and 5. Additionally,
the methods were designed to examine how PBL strategies reported and used by
the educators contributed to the development of 21st-century learning approached as
the 5Cs in Virginia. One-on-one interviews with teachers who had been using PBL
instruction in their classrooms for 2 years yielded insights into PBL implementation
at the elementary level.
Chapter 4 is a data analysis and findings snapshot, complete with teacher
participant views and discussion of thematic outcomes.
46 3 Methodology
References
Commonwealth of Virginia. (2020). Virginia law. https://law.lis.virginia.gov/admincode/title8/age

ncy20/chapter131/section5.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among
five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Harding, T., & Whitehead, D. (2020). Analysing data in qualitative research. In Z. Schneider, D.
Whitehead, G. L. Biondo-Wood, & J. Haber (Eds.), Nursing & midwifery research: Methods and
appraisal for evidence-based practice (4th ed., pp. 141–160). Mosby.
McMillan, J. H., & Wergin, J. F. (2006). Understanding and evaluating educational research (3rd
ed.). London, England, UK: Pearson.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.
Stage, F. K., & Manning, K. (Eds.). (2016). Research in the college context: Approaches and methods
(2nd ed.). Routledge.
Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019b). Virginia’s 5 C’s. http://www.virginiaisfo
Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed). Sage.
Chapter 4
Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot
Abstract This chapter of Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School details

elementary educators’ responses to interview questions about their experiences of,
and views about, PBL instruction. Teachers/staff describe what PBL is or means
to them, and which PBL instructional strategies specifically contributed to 21st-
century learning and how. A safe environment enables sharing with peers, asking
questions, taking risks, and making new discoveries, all of which were considered
strengths of PBL intervention. The successes and benefits, as well as concerns and
challenges, of PBL instruction are described. The voices of pioneering individuals
come alive with descriptive examples of PBL units, lessons, and activities; the quality
of learning experiences; and advice and cautionary words. As narratively and numer-
ically presented, the data analysis identified two major findings: (1) key instructional
strategies (29 in total, 10 emerging as top and 19 as additional) and (2) overar-
ching thematic outcomes pertaining to the development of the Profile of a Virginia
Graduate. Together, these findings provide insight into strategies of PBL instruc-
tion that influenced the development of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth graders. The
findings snapshot, based on the data analysis, illuminates outstanding strategies that
facilitated PBL education in elementary classrooms.
Keywords Citizenship · Collaboration · Communication · Creativity · Critical

thinking (5Cs) · Interview · Elementary school · Finding · PBL instruction ·
Real-world relevance · 21st century
Overview
Here we present our analysis of data and snapshot of the findings. The interview
responses are from elementary teachers/staff experimenting with PBL learning in
their classrooms at one school for 2 years. Their pedagogic strategies emerged as
themes from their firsthand accounts of experiential learning. This chapter reveals
findings from the interview’s eight questions, with narrative and numerical support.
We begin with a close-up of each of the findings that allows for entry into, or
at least glimpses of, each teacher’s PBL classroom. Table 4.1 includes the basic
demographics of participating teachers/staff to assist with following the narration

48 4 Data Analysis and Findings Snapshot
Table 4.1 Basic demographics of teacher/staff interviewees

Participant Gender Age Highest degree Years teaching Grade levels Content
area
Angelica (1/A) Female 40 Master 20 K–5 Reading
specialist
Bethany (2/B) Female 45 Master 20 K–5 General
education
Connor (3/C) Male 50 Bachelor 20 4&5 Math
Destiny (4/D) Female 40 Master 15 K–5 Special
education
Ethan (5/E) Male 25 Bachelor 4 K–5 Special
education
Felix (6/F) Male 50 Master 6 K–5 Science
Gabriela (7/G) Female 50 Bachelor 10 K–5 Reading
specialist
Note Pseudonyms for the teachers/staff are used. Age and years of experience are indicated as
numerical approximations to ensure privacy (non-identification). Race/ethnicity was White (Euro-
American) for all participants
of individual responses. Participants included four females and three males, all but
one 40 years of age or older, and they ranged from 4 years of teaching experience
to 20. All but one teacher had taught grades K–5 at the school. Regarding their
content/subject expertise, two were reading specialists (Angelica and Gabriela), two
were special education specialists (Destiny and Ethan), one was a general education
specialist (Bethany), another was a math teacher (Connor), and one individual was a
science teacher (Felix). To clarify, Connor, Ethan, Destiny, and Felix were elementary
classroom teachers, and Angelica, Bethany, and Gabriela were support staff.
Analysis of Interview Questions
While there are 8 interview questions, question 3 contained 5 prompts, with 12 areas
of questioning in all (Q1, Q2, Q3a, Q3b, Q3c, Q3d, Q3e, Q4, Q5, Q6, Q7, and Q8).
While Connor, Ethan, Destiny, and Felix responded to the PBL and 5Cs questions
as tenured teachers, Angelica, Bethany, and Gabriela reflected on their involvement
as support staff.
How Would You Describe the PBL Instruction That was Used in Your Class-
room? (Q1) All seven interviewees shared personal experiences of PBL instruction
in the classroom over the course of 2 school years. Peer collaboration (7 out of
7), student choice (5 out of 7), and hands-on learning (3 out of 7) were overar-
ching themes. Angelica observed the importance of children having content choices,
which “kids seem to really, really like.” As described by Destiny, PBL is a hands-
on experience that facilitates real-world application of subject matter, about which
Analysis of Interview Questions 49
Felix used phrases like “highly effective” and “very engaging for the students.”
Connor portrayed PBL as “a hands-on, critical thinking, integrated type of teaching
and learning that kids love” and shared images of students engaging in teamwork.
Connor also mentioned teachers facilitating rather than “actually teaching in front
of the class.”
Angelica described students building scenery and characters, creating videos,
presenting projects to classmates, and partaking in tasks that demonstrated their
literacy knowledge and skills with books and other materials. Bethany noted that
students struggled in the beginning with working together or wanting to “do their
own thing,” but with modeling and practice, they learned how to cooperate as teams.
Gabriela emphasized the value of hands-on learning for students and noted that it
fostered peer collaboration.
What Strategies Used in Your PBL Instruction Do You Think are Important?
(Q2) Noteworthy PBL strategies these teachers/staff identified are modeling, collab-
oration, and communication. Destiny explained that by introducing a subject/topic,
modeling it, and allowing students to be creative in the search for solutions enables
them to grow as learners. She noted that there is more than one solution to a problem,
and that giving students the freedom to explore and self-discover was essential to the
spirit of PBL. To Gabriela, students need to be able to openly express themselves, to
improve not only their academic performance but also their ability to communicate
with peers, teachers, and other adults.
Similarly, Connor revealed, “I didn’t really tell my students how to think.” Instead,
they were encouraged to discuss their thinking process and approaches to solving
a problem, which became increasingly natural for them. During this process, they
would open to their teams, demonstrating the value of peer collaboration. Collabo-
rative learning and problem-solving were viewed as interdependent by Connor and
other participants. (For empirical evidence of the symbiotic nature of the collabora-
tive learning–problem-solving ability relationship in an empirical study with children
aged 6 and 7 years, see Fawcett & Garton, 2011.)
According to our findings, the importance of PBL strategies varied somewhat,
depending on the educator’s viewpoint, expertise, role, and approach. For example,
Bethany and Gabriela emphasized the value of individualized learning as a PBL
strategy. They monitored each student’s learning and progress in case the whirlwind
of activity otherwise overwhelmed the teacher’s awareness of what was happening not
only at the group level but at the individual level. As Gabriela explained it, structured
freedom helped teachers track what was working (and what was not) while allowing
for student choice within learning situations. Structured freedom and student choice
enabled learners to express themselves in meaningful ways while having ownership
over their own learning.
Connor upheld passion projects as key for fostering student development. In his
classroom, passion projects are student-selected activities that (a) embed PBL strate-
gies and instructional skills and (b) allow children to explore their passions in relation
to the world. Connor promotes passion in learning by, for example, allowing students
to select materials (e.g., books) of interest to them, as opposed to having to read the
same thing as the entire class. As Connor explained, children are thus motivated to
read: “When they are excited about a book and it’s something they want to read and
aren’t forced to, you’d be amazed by how much reading they do.” While Connor’s
content area is math, his approach to PBL is multidisciplinary, in keeping with the
PBL method.
Table 4.2 displays the PBL strategies that teachers/staff reported using in their PBL
instruction. Teacher modeling was named more frequently than the other strategies,
with individualized learning a close second. Each educator’s response to the open-
ended question for which no examples of strategies were named or given to them are
denoted with an “X.” In effect, we were able to not only discover what strategies the
teachers/staff used but also what they considered important in their PBL instruction.
We cannot help but think that if they had been handed a list of PBL strategies (like
those in Table 4.2) and asked to identify the ones used in their classroom, the resulting
strategies would have been more consistently recognized. On the other hand, we feel
confident venturing that the PBL strategies they named were indeed authentic. As
such, the interviewees were prompted to verbally generate or name PBL strategies
on the spot during the interview.
How Have Strategies You’ve Used Helped Students Develop Critical
Thinking Skills? (Q3a) Table 4.3’s strategies were identified for nurturing critical-
thinking skills. Asking questions, using real-world problems, and fostering learner
independence were referenced more frequently than the other strategies, suggesting
their greater utility in the classroom.
Table 4.2 Interview Q2: PBL strategies used by teachers A–G

PBL strategies used A B C D E F G
Collaboration ×
Communication × ×
Cross-curricular learning ×
Hands-on learning ×
High engagement ×
Imaginative detail ×
Individualized learning × × ×
Justify thinking/responses ×
Modeling × × × ×
Movement ×
Multiple solutions ×
Open-ended ×
Organized/structured × ×
Real-life application ×
Self-discovery ×
Student choice × ×
Table 4.3 Interview Q3a: Strategies used to develop critical thinking by teachers A–G
Strategies to develop critical thinking A B C D E F G
Asking questions × ×
Collaboration ×
Context clues ×
Independence × ×
Open-ended problems ×
Real-world problems × × ×
Self-motivation ×
Student choice ×
Summarizing ×
Asking questions was regarded as a tool for critical thinking and engagement.
From Angelica’s perspective, “Students need to be asking questions themselves,
think about what happened in a story, and pull all of that together into a product
that displays thinking.” Connor, too, explained that questioning plays a crucial role
in shaping students’ intellect; for example, asking students questions at different
points, including during the learning process, prompts them to think critically and
reflectively.
Bethany and Ethan similarly responded that independent learning and self-
learning promote students’ capacity for critical thinking. To Bethany, the teacher
is not pointing out specific things to the children—the goal is for them to learn to
think for themselves and gain independence. Ethan concurred, illustrating the value
of student-driven learning and independent thinking with an analogy: overcoming
fears despite feeling overwhelmed and swimming in the deep end for the first time.
Along these lines, he says to students,
I’m gonna throw you in the deep end [with the PBL unit ahead]—there are going to be
moments where you feel like the water is rushing in but, I promise you, you have a life
preserver. You’re going to move up to the top. Oxygen is coming. It’s going to be okay.
Felix, also addressing the importance of children developing independence, spurs

this on by making student choice central to the PBL setting:
I believe putting children in the driver’s seat of making choices in the learning environment
by selecting a topic of investigation or a problem to explore gets them more excited about
researching and discovering what it is they like or don’t like.
Promoting choice as to the type of assignment to complete or real-world, open-

ended problem to tackle makes for more involved students and better learning. Such
student-centered learning processes facilitate decision making and critical-thinking
skills. Connor and Destiny emphasized real-world problems for aiding in the develop-
ment of critical thinking and making creative connections. Big ideas/universal themes
summarized in a single word (e.g., “sustainability”) help shape the PBL setting
and challenging tasks. Asserting that real-world problems spur critical thinking
and creativity, Connor gave the example of a PBL unit from his classroom titled
“Shark week—sharks are coming to shore—what are we going to do about it?” Chil-
dren added to the sustainability of the world’s oceans and marine life. Open-ended
learning tasks challenging students’ critical and creative capacities were tied to the
high-interest ecological problem of sharks migrating to shorelines (which humans
may be populating, such as the Jersey Shore and Cape Cod Bay in the US), owing
to human-induced, ocean-warming climate change. Such change has a devastating
impact on oceans—activities like overfishing greatly reduce great white and other
sharks’ hunting opportunities, causing them to behave unnaturally and search for
food and safe breeding places in beach areas where people swim.
Through this multidisciplinary, problem-based curriculum, asking questions,
open-ended problems, and real-world problems were all executive-level strategies
used by Connor to foster critical thinking. Rather than have his students address
“sustainability” in the most general and perhaps elusive sense, he created a smaller
problem context (grounding the more general one) for them to relate to—shark migra-
tion to shores, which is a meaningful problem in their own home state. (See Mullen
[2020] for an exploration in transnational cultures wherein issues of sustainability,
ecology, nature, and human agency are all creatively expressed and revealed through
the critical engagement of undergraduate student teams.)
Destiny’s students were also collaboratively challenged to come up with solutions
to global problems. Regarding real-world problems and application, Destiny talked
about “taking assignments outside the classroom to see how they might apply in
different areas.” Applying class work to real-world situations allows students to see
the importance of what they are doing, she explained. According to the interviewees,
PBL empowers students to think “outside the box”; make connections to the real
world, themselves, and their peers; become immersed in high-interest topics; and
take ownership of their learning.
How Have Strategies You’ve Used Helped Students Develop Creativity Skills?
(Q3b) Examples of teachers/staff using creativity to support PBL were cited,
including how students use various classroom and home materials to make things that
demonstrate understandings of concepts. Value was expressed for students making
connections between classroom tasks and the real world. Student choice was again
a common refrain, but in this case as a catalyst for creativity.
Considering real-world connections when demonstrating creativity, Angelica
described an educational recycling activity. This was part of an environmental
problem context that taught the importance of turning trash into new products or
artifacts, thus reducing waste, conserving natural resources, and lowering pollution
levels. With the additional guidance of the school’s cafeteria staff, students learned
to reuse materials (e.g., cans, packaging materials, utensils, etc.), understanding that
they were making the world a better place while expressing their creativity.
Connor, also illustrating the power of creativity as a 21st-century skill, narrated
how one of his students wanted to build a bird sanctuary for a learning task involving
how to build habitats. The sanctuary reflected the girl’s love of birds, which she
had as pets at home. The miniature bird-friendly sanctuary was constructed as an
ecologically minded, safe structure for wildlife (or pets who could not escape). It
was something that birds could use to eat, fly around in, and raise their young, all the
while getting plenty of fresh air. Through this project, the student demonstrated her
ability to think creatively about habitats and their essential elements (e.g., water).
Bethany, too, felt that students showed their best creativity when allowed to
generate a problem to work through, including their own fresh ideas for presenting
information. The classroom teacher had posed an initial problem to the class about
needing to stack cups without using hands. Students were given cups and rubber
bands and no further direction. Bethany exclaimed, “About the ideas the kids came
up, I was thinking, ‘Wow! I wouldn’t have thought of that.’” Watching the student
groups work together and come up with solutions to problems was as beneficial to
her own learning as it was to the students’.
Allowing all students in a class to work through one problem and emerge from it
with a multitude of solutions and impressive content knowledge was Ethan’s goal.
He seemed to treasure how each solution to a given problem was unique and that
student groups were able to successfully collaborate: “Students all worked as part of
a team and closely with partners to solve a problem, and they even worked together to
‘show’ the end result.” As illustrated by similar responses from Ethan, collaboration
was the basis of PBL activity in his classroom. Besides approaching teamwork as
an opportunity for nurturing creativity, Ethan closely attended to how the problem
context connected to the curriculum. As he put it, when selecting a task, he asks
himself, “How does this one problem tackle multiple areas of content?” Keeping
this question at the forefront of planning helps Ethan ensure that subject matter is
strategically addressed through PBL activity.
Student choice was clearly valued by Felix. For example, he had the students
read a fictional text and then create something nonfictional that was connected to the
storyline:
I would give them some kind of choice, like the book about little boy called Fang. They
were using a fictional text to make them think about a nonfictional piece. One group created
a little clay museum of animals that have fangs.
The novel read by the class titled The Family Fang (Wilson, K., 2012) is about
a dysfunctional artist family trapped together under one roof, forced to endure the
parents’ art performances. Playing off the family name “Fang,” the team that made
a clay museum of animals with fangs (e.g., pointed teeth) learned about different
kinds and uses of fangs. A second group made a game board, and a third came up
with a jingle, like a commercial. All team members chose how to demonstrate their
understanding of knowledge, channeling their own creative preferences and styles of
creativity and eventually sharing with the class. By encouraging students to express
themselves in ways they found enriching, they seemed more likely to want to learn
from one another; for example, one asked another, “I would like to know how you
did that slideshow—can you show me?” Felix added, “Something like a community
of learners was being created in an environment in which they felt safe and could
express their creativity.”
Gabriela also cited examples of students using art to illustrate their creative
thinking and creativity skills. She shared that while reading Skeleton Creek (Carman,
Table 4.4 Interview Q3c: Strategies used to develop communication by teachers A–G
Strategies to develop communication A B C D E F G
Collaboration ×
Involving community ×
Modeling × × × ×
Questioning ×
Teamwork × ×
2016), a children’s horror mystery novel, students drew out what they thought was
happening in the story and what might happen next. These students found writing to
be a challenge, but because drawing was an outlet they enjoyed, they were guided to
express themselves in a way that was meaningful to them.
Destiny viewed each solution to a problem as unique, typical of PBL, saying,
“No two solutions are the same.” To her, a wealth of knowledge became apparent as
groups shared with one another. It was beneficial for students to observe their peers
presenting solutions to the class.
How Have Strategies You’ve Used Helped Students Develop Communication
Skills? (Q3c) Instructional approaches to developing communication skills identi-
fied in the interviews are listed in Table 4.4. All the educators indicated that the chil-
dren had to be taught how to effectively communicate with one another. Across the
interviews, five approaches were identified (collaboration, involving the community,
modeling, questioning, and teamwork).
Ethan discussed how students needed to be taught how to ask specific questions
rather than just say, “I don’t get this” or “I don’t understand.” To him, students
require teacher modeling to express exactly what they need help with and how to
ask a question. By the end of the year, students were becoming proficient at asking
specific, intelligent questions.
Felix was also keen about teaching students how to communicate successfully:
“We spent a lot of time at the beginning of the year talking about what effective
communication was.” The children even played games to learn communication skills:
One game was like the old telephone game where if you don’t clearly enunciate your words or
don’t clearly communicate an idea, by the time it gets through several people, it’s completely
different than what you started with.
Perhaps readers played this game as children or at least know of it, but Felix used it for
educational purposes. He shared a second example of students standing back-to-back
holding six pretzels. One participant had to design something using the pretzels and
explain to their partner how to create the same design. Once finished, they compared
their designs and discussed the outcomes, identifying where miscommunication on
the designer’s part had hindered the task (or misinterpretation at the receiving end had
had the same effect). These were among the examples shared by the teachers/staff
demonstrating the effectiveness of modeling, in this case by peers.
Angelica and Bethany attributed importance to all students having an equal voice
when cooperating or collaborating. Bethany divulged, “You always have one student
that wants to be the leader in charge and take over.” Angelica stressed that, as the
teacher, you must make sure all students are involved because you’ll always have
that one who will just watch everyone else do all the work. The implication was that
even in PBL settings, teacher nudges, reminders, and behavioral modifications are
present. Both these staff members thought that by modeling good communication
skills and verbalizing expectations, students could develop the ability to work well
together, not only to produce a product but also to have a healthy learning experience.
As Connor explained, a different way to foster the communication capacities of
students is to facilitate tasks that involve community members. For one task in his
classroom, students had to interview a community member and report findings to the
class. Interview questions were crafted by one of the student groups that conducted
the interviews by phone, by email, or in person. After all groups presented their
final community based PBL products to the class and visiting parents, the audience
asked questions. The students had to prepare for this public forum and demonstrate
effective communication skills through speaking, listening, and responding.
Destiny’s discussion around developing communication skills focused on three
areas: (a) teacher modeling extending to peer-to-peer modeling, (b) freedom for
group work and communication, and (3) tracking/monitoring to ensure that everyone
stays on task. Gabriela echoed the importance of teacher modeling for facilitating
communication skills. She revealed that, in the beginning, many students did not
seem inclined to want to talk to each other in groups. They also seemed to lack
confidence speaking in front of others and did not know how to ask specific task-
related questions. However, as they worked in a PBL-oriented environment as teams,
they “finally started opening up” and communicating with peers and teachers. The
learning process allowed students to “find their own voices” and realize that “their
voices matter.”
How Have Strategies You’ve Used Helped Students Develop Collaboration
Skills? (Q3d) Five teachers/staff stated that collaboration and communication go
hand in hand. As Angelica put it, “If students aren’t communicating and collabo-
rating with each other, then they won’t work well in a group.” Ethan reported that
communication and collaboration are interlocking pieces of the PBL puzzle: “In
order to be effective at collaboration, you have to be able to communicate with one
another.” He added that “when students realized that sometimes their best friends
weren’t the best communicators, they would react by thinking that they should not
be in their group if they want to do well.” Such interpersonal judgments are part of
the collaborative experience—people tend to want to find out with whom they work
better to allow for a more productive environment. Bethany focused on working
together to consider a dilemma or solve a problem, which necessitated effective
communication. The interviewees emphasized the value of teamwork and sharing
ideas.
Bethany also talked about how the classroom teacher did not tell students how to
solve the problem or even how best to work together. The children had to figure this
out themselves, with the aim of making the challenges and breakthroughs relevant
to students’ lives. Consequently, these young people had to learn each other’s styles
and strengths to navigate working together to address the challenge before them.
Connor expressed that because teamwork is essential, this PBL feature needs to be
highlighted in problem-setting and solving contexts. Many groups utilized students’
individual strengths in the various PBL classrooms, according to Connor. In the role
of teacher monitor, he added, “I didn’t want any of the kids just sitting around, waiting
on others in their group to do something, so they all choose a job every day.” A “job”
was a student’s designated role in the group for that session: facilitator, timekeeper,
recorder, illustrator, etc.: “The students would sometimes switch around their jobs
while figuring out how to be work together.” Like Connor, Destiny found that some
students would be just fine sitting back and letting the others do all the work, so the
teacher had to somehow “draw those kids in and get them to contribute to the team.”
Teachers/staff also mentioned the struggle students faced working with peers they
did not like. Connor tackled this problem head on by disclosing,
You know what, when I got this job, I didn’t get to choose everybody I work with. I adapted
to the people I work with because that’s what you have to do in the real world. So, you’re
going to learn to work together.
Interestingly, a counterargument to arranging work groups for students, regardless of

the reason, exists in the literature. Allowing them to choose “the peers with whom they
work” can actually motivate students while “capitaliz[ing] on their strengths” and
“meet[ing] their individual learning needs” (Parker et al., 2017). These comments
were made about high school classrooms. While giving youngsters the chance to
influence what and how they learn is certainly important (Parker et al.), context
is everything. Complexities like pedagogical beliefs, values, and prior experiences
shape the decisions teachers make. Another point is that tacit concerns may influence
their decisions, such as the concern that when individuals are put above the group,
students will end up not being flexible enough for the job market. Moreover, the
developmental level of the children being served and their readiness to solve problems
and make decisions for which they assume responsibility may also factor into what
teachers think and do.
Felix described a structured lesson he used to demonstrate collaboration and then
had students practice with examples of good and bad collaboration. The lesson’s
focus was how to collaborate (instead of just diving in and trying to do it without
knowing about the expected conduct). Students received specific, precise feedback
and were “encouraged to interact and inquire respectfully.” Felix shared,
I think that pays off, not just in our classroom, but at home or as they’re moving on up
through elementary school and middle school—to be able to state something in a way that’s
respectful and kind.
Gabriela found that just being able to work together through PBL challenges
comforted many students, leading them to share ideas and express themselves in new
ways. Teaching students the importance of collaboration and how to work together
well was considered an essential PBL skill.
How Have Strategies You’ve Used Helped Students Develop Citizenship
Skills? (Q3e) Respect was a common theme regarding PBL strategies used to develop
citizenship. A secondary theme was peer-to-peer support. Both ideas involved the
Table 4.5 PBL strategies used to develop citizenship by teachers A–G

Strategies to develop citizenship A B C D E F G
Ownership ×
Peace circles ×
Peer-to-peer support × × × ×
Positive attitude ×
Respect × × × × ×
use of students’ strengths in supporting one another. Table 4.5 illustrates the five
PBL strategies—ownership, peace circles, peer-to-peer support, positive attitude,
and respect—that the interviewees identified.
Connor explained that citizenship meant “learning to love each other” and used
peace circles in the classroom to solve problems and ensure students were held
accountable: “Everybody would sit in a circle and we would talk about things that
didn’t go well and how we could do better.” Students used this opportunity to build
each other up, saying, “You messed up, but we forgive you. Tomorrow you have to
work harder.” Connor elaborated, “Students want to do better because they want to,
not because the teacher is making them.” A restorative justice model from Indige-
nous cultures, peacekeeper (peacemaking) circles can teach students about care and
compassion, feelings, and life skills. They are brought together in a circle for conflict
resolution, healing, support, decision making, and more. Such processes can aid
in productivity and enhancing learning environments. The idea is to “listen to the
children” and move toward “restorative practice” and away from “punitive disci-
pline”—testimonies of elementary teachers who use peacekeeper circles is available
on the Internet, along with YouTube videos of actual circles involving children (see
Peacekeeper Circles, n.d.; https://www.peacecircles.com).
Regarding peer-to-peer relationships, Ethan and Gabriela each saw students’
strengths as a vital resource for nurturing relationships. If a student were strug-
gling, Ethan would find a peer who was succeeding to provide help, noting, “Help
doesn’t look like giving the answer. Help looks like explaining the process and using
fifth-grade language, as opposed to a teacher kind of language.” To Ethan, it was
important for students to feel empowered as well as comfortable giving and receiving
feedback: “There are moments you need help. We’re in this together.” Gabriela simi-
larly noted, “Everybody has a voice. A peer sitting beside a student can assist. It’s
great to see students asking each other for help and feeling comfortable doing this.”
Felix noted that some students think differently or have unusual ideas, and that they
are a resource for building relationships in new and unexpected directions. The PBL
classroom needs to be a place where thinking in a different way is recognized as an
avenue for success.
Are There Specific Strategies That Contributed to Stronger Development
of Any of These Skills (Critical Thinking, Collaboration, Creativity, Commu-
nication, or Citizenship)? (Q4) Collaboration and communication are important
skills developed by PBL instructional strategies. Getting students to work together
and communicate effectively was challenging. Angelica shared that closely moni-
toring students to ensure they are on task was vital. She added, “Often, facilitation
was necessary to show students what was expected (especially in the beginning).”
Connor also thought facilitation was vital early on: “I’m going to guide you, but I’m
not going to tell you everything. I’m going to give you these questions to think about,
but I’m not giving you the answers.” Connor believed that boundary-setting helped
set the tone for PBL learning and clarify task-related responsibilities. The idea was
that while elementary children must have some guidance in PBL contexts, and likely
more of it than older students, they also need to be able to learn freely within a
flexibly structured environment while being accountable to their own learning. They
cannot make discoveries and explore on their own or become absorbed in sense-
making around a problem or issue, if the teacher is excessive is some way, such
as by controlling the process, rescuing students, providing answers, or constantly
hovering.
Explicitly stated expectations and guidelines were common strategies discussed
by teachers/staff. Destiny noted that very clear guidelines of what students needed
to do were important. When just “thrown in,” students became frustrated and misun-
derstand what is intended or what to do. Ethan offered, “I would say to them, ‘here is
what I want done in X amount of time.’” As such, his students didn’t just have a “free-
for-all” learning experience. Additionally, the goal in Ethan’s classroom was pitched
around this strategic question: “What are we learning and how do we demonstrate
that learning?” Being direct about his expectations and attuning students to their own
learning were strategies he cited as bringing out the best from them.
Teacher modeling and student practice were strategies that supported collabora-
tion. Felix noted, “I think the modeling at the beginning, the practice at the begin-
ning, and defining things at the beginning are all pretty key.” He also used rubrics for
assessing student work, saying, “This is I’m looking for.” And he encouraged them
to work together on tasks conveyed as problems.
In sum, specific strategies that helped with developing the 5Cs are:
1. Giving clear and explicit guidelines for tasks
2. Providing students with structured choices that are meaningful
3. Establishing boundaries for teacher and student responsibilities
4. Demonstrating effective teacher monitoring to ensure on-task learning, engage-
ment, and behavior
5. Enacting teacher modeling and facilitation of activity-based performances,
particularly at the outset, to aid students’ understanding what is expected of
them
6. Utilizing metacognitive techniques that help students understand how they learn,
like helping them become aware of their own learning
Based on Your Teaching Experiences, What Are Some Strengths of Using
PBL in Elementary Classrooms? (Q5) Educators described the pride they felt
when their students committed to and successfully completed tasks and passed an
end-of year-test for the first time. Interviewees referred to the Standards of Learning
(SOL) test that requires minimum expectations for achievement of students at the
end of each grade or course (VDOE, 2020).
Gabriela described the strengths of a PBL classroom this way:
The kids were up, moving around the classroom. Someone was sitting the floor. As a support
teacher, you walk in there for the first time and think, “What in the world are they doing?
The teacher has no control of the classroom.” In reality, the teacher is working with two
students in one corner. Three kids are working individually. In another corner, students are
reading, and in another some are coloring a scene for a project, all super engaged. That was
one of the things I truly enjoyed, taking kids to another level of learning.
With this visual snapshot of PBL learning, Gabriela revealed the power of controlled
chaos in the classroom and the use of space, which was occupied differently from
traditional learning.
Movement was a strength of PBL that the educators identified. Bethany offered
that PBL instruction helps students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder
(ADHD) because it is conducive to movement: “They can get up, move around,
learn how to calm themselves, and not be stuck in a seat all day.” Moving is part of
communicating and learning how to work with teammates. Connor noted, “Kids are
so overstimulated. They come to school in a traditional classroom and are expected
to just sit down and listen to the teacher all day. They are not there mentally.” PBL
allows students to use their senses, such as by seeing and touching, as they move
about, explore, and discover. As Connor put it, “Somebody can tell you a million
times, but once you do it, it clicks. PBL keeps them awake, motivated, and wanting
to work.” Movement in PBL contexts simulates real-world contexts.
For Destiny, creativity and real-world experiences were PBL strengths: “[Humans]
have a tendency, sometimes, to become imitators of what we hear. So, as the students
are listening to us [in traditional classrooms], they just do whatever it is simply
because we tell them to.” In contrast, PBL approaches give children the opportu-
nity to see how and why things work, and to appreciate the practical application
of knowledge, theory, and concepts. Felix stated, “I saw acquisition of knowledge
that was far above and beyond anything I could have presented to them.” He then
described how trust was built between students as well as between the students and
himself. Working together was a crucial strength of PBL and learning how to do this
constructively—not in a “mine is better” way—is imperative for growth and success.
Creativity in students was also a noted strength. Felix shared a game created
by students that displayed knowledge of content. Those involved had yet to pass
Virginia’s (2020) SOL test in science but were able to express their knowledge
through a board game. Felix shared, “That was the proudest I’ve ever seen them.” In
that creative and collaborative departure from standardized testing, they were indeed
successful. Angelica confirmed that students were learning more from presenting
what they had learned than through a paper/pencil assignment: “Lots of kids do
better with hands-on activities, and you can see them excelling.” Seeing the growth
in students through PBL instruction was as beneficial for Angelica as it was for her
students. Being able to share their knowledge in a way that was meaningful to them
reinforced the value of PBL.
Returning briefly to the picture Gabriela painted of controlled chaos, self-directed

PBL tasks can simultaneously unfold in various performance spaces and ways as
children move around and read, draw, talk, and so forth. PBL learning can be treated
as a movement intervention that departs from traditional learning. Because schooling
privileges cognition as the mode of learning, discovery learning is not a focus, which
is compounded by depersonalized approaches to teaching and learning. In response
to this problem, university researchers examined a US-based middle school with
African American and White children from lower-income families engaging in a
project involving hands-on, “body-based” activities (physical movement and role-
playing; Mullen & Cancienne, 2003). The objective was to enable eighth graders
to develop “sensory self-awareness” in anticipation of real-world career challenges
(p. 166). Students participated in verbal and nonverbal movement activities designed
around a career unit that was integrated into a language arts class. The children
experienced many of the elements common to PBL classrooms, making strides in
their development of 21st-century skills.
Based on interviews with the eighth graders (Mullen & Cancienne, 2003), they had
become attuned to the importance of communication, power, and self-awareness in
their own development. Specifically, participation in project activities (e.g., selecting
from among career options, creating and enacting skits without speaking, preparing
job interview questions, conducting mock interviews, creating imaginary businesses)
the children learned that bodies convey messages and are expressive (as opposed
to neutral) vessels of communication. They connected the new learning with life,
such as how to knowingly express themselves in job interviews in the real world.
While not a PBL curriculum per se, much of it did qualify as such, considering the
emphasis placed on student choice, open-ended problem-solving, movement, and
more. Students learned to “move” and think differently and approach sense-making
more holistically when considering problem contexts, themselves, and others. This
group of students experienced a new instructional approach directed at building skills
for success, which in today’s state-level policy world favorably satisfies readiness
expectations for high school graduates (e.g., the Profile of a Virginia Graduate; VDOE
[2019]).
Based on Your Teaching Experiences, what are Some Concerns or Challenges
with Implementing PBL? (Q6) The main issues educators identified with imple-
menting PBL were primarily time and organization, in addition to funding (and
costs), the lack of PBL instruction in some classrooms, and trust and buy-in (see
Table 4.6).
Concerns and challenges with time revolved around time-consuming planning
and organizing, time constraints owing to pacing guides and state mandates, and
instructional time spent on PBL lessons and activities. Ethan explained that deciding
how much time to devote to each PBL lesson or activity was challenging: “In the
beginning, students don’t understand what to do, they ask a lot of questions, and they
need you to hold their hand through a task.” On the flip side, clarified Ethan, the
more teachers act on PBL in the classroom, the more students understand what to do
in terms of task objectives, how to work together as collaborative problem-solvers,
how to work creatively and think critically for themselves, and what becoming less
Table 4.6 Concerns/challenges with implementing PBL addressed by teachers A–G

Concern/challenge A B C D E F G
Funding × ×
Not used in some classes × × ×
Organization × × ×
Time × × ×
Trust and buy-in × ×
dependent on the teacher “looks like.” Staying focused on the task at hand was
important, according to Ethan; otherwise, “you could go down a path you did not
intend and waste time.” He added that sometimes exploring what was unintended is
valuable, whereas at other times it is a distraction. To help with time and organization
in the classroom, Ethan suggested that students need to learn to distinguish between
what is and what is not important.
Connor addressed the time it takes to plan for and organize PBL instruction. As
a group, teachers at this school spent time together planning PBL units and lessons.
“It took a lot of work,” Connor insisted. “The planning time took forever.” However,
he added that once the actual planning was completed, the implementation “was
easy.” Similarly, Felix thought that the planning consumed a lot of time but that the
investment was worth it: “If you put in the work up front, it’s much easier in the long
run.” Anticipating roadblocks, preparing for questions students may ask, organizing
resources students will need, and prompting questions you can ask students are all
important in the preparation for PBL. Advanced planning, even when it includes
discussion and work with colleagues, is expected to pay off in the implementation
or application of PBL curriculum and its success.
Another challenge stipulated was funding. When selecting PBL tasks, the teachers
carefully considered the cost of materials. For Connor, providing supplies for activ-
ities got more costly when students were not able to buy or secure their own. In
general, it is not uncommon for teachers to spend some of their own money on
supplies. With PBL classroom activity, however, “a lot of money was spent out of
pocket, even though we spent some school’s money too,” clarified Connor. Ethan
added, “We teachers were given additional funds to purchase materials” for 2 years
of PBL experimentation. But “Now that we are not doing PBL full-fledged, the money
is not there because it is being spent elsewhere.” Connor also felt that larger class
sizes impact the ability to fund certain PBL activities that require lots of materials
or expensive ones.
Another challenge came from Angelica, Bethany, and Destiny, who noted that
PBL instruction was not used in all classrooms within the school. A traditional
learning environment where “the teacher wants you to do things a certain way”
was challenging for students who had experienced the PBL-oriented classrooms.
This difficulty was brought back to PBL teachers through casual conversation with
students providing feedback and observations, and during their visits at open house
events and over summer break. Conversation among teachers within the school and
the division were other sources of information along these lines. These sources also
conveyed that students who were struggling academically at the middle school level
had become accustomed to PBL instruction in elementary school and had to adapt
to traditional instruction.
A final difficulty mentioned was trust and support, as in the acceptance and will-
ingness to trust in PBL instruction and actively support it. Ethan noted that, while
not at this school but others in which he had worked, “buy-in from above” was
challenging: “When administrators, teachers, or visitors walked into a classroom,
they saw a lot going on.” Gabriela described PBL as “unstructured structure—from
the outside looking in it’s chaotic, but the teacher knows what’s going on, students
are on task, and there’s purpose holding everything together.” Connor, Ethan, and
Felix echoed that PBL spaces may seem (or be) noisy and hectic, but productivity
is at a premium. Trust from leaders and colleagues was essential—they needed to
understand the basics of PBL learning and what to expect, and, importantly, how this
process can develop students’ 21st-century skills and lifelong capacities as critical
and creative thinkers, communicators, collaborators, and citizens.
Based on Your Experiences With PBL, Have You Continued Using PBL in
Your Classroom? Why or Why Not? (Q7) In February 2020 at the time of the inter-
views, all seven grades 4 and 5 teachers/staff reported that they were “still using PBL”
in their classrooms but “not as much as they would like.” The frequency of having
utilized PBL on a daily or weekly basis had changed, but the pedagogic concept
and approach were being honored. In actuality, they were comparing the immediate
present with the recent 2 years in which they were experimenting with PBL. At
the same time, all interviewees confirmed the ongoing use of pedagogic strategies
like hands-on experiences, communicating with peers, and teaming among students.
Angelica, Bethany, and Gabriela continued to support the classroom teachers and
provide students with instructional guidance and support.
The question as to what had brought about the systemic change in PBL teaching
and learning in the building that the teachers/staff mentioned was explained by
Samantha. The lessening in frequency and intensity of PBL instruction was mostly
due to a restructuring of the fourth and fifth grades. An administrative decision had
been made to reduce the four classes per grade level to three, which was chal-
lenging for the teachers. Due to budgetary restrictions, divisional level decision
makers decided not to replace the teacher who had resigned, which left a vacancy
in personnel for grades 4 and 5; instead, central office consolidated these two grade
levels that just happened to be the ones in which PBL experimentation had been
occurring for 2 years. Due to the Code of Virginia’s Standards of Quality guidelines
for maximum class size and teacher–student ratios, grades 4 and 5 can have more
students (up to 35) than grades K–3 (see VDOE, n.d., for the policy document), so
this change was legally allowable.
An unintended consequence associated with the restructuring was the lessening of
teaming among the teachers, adding to the difficulty of continuing PBL. In Connor’s
words, “It’s hard when you don’t have everybody on board, so I haven’t done PBLs
as much.” Obviously, this comment underscores the limits on cultural transformation
within the school culture. At the same time, creatively responding to the restructuring,
Connor was experimenting with “mini-PBLs” that are more project than problem-
based. Ethan confirmed that while some PBL components were being implemented,
the scheduling of classes in the restructuring phase was making it difficult to do
“full-fledged PBL.” He liked the excitement coming from students when PBL was
in use, commenting that they enjoyed the hands-on activities and working together
on tasks. They were more apt to demonstrate knowledge because of being exposed
to and immersed in PBL, he reflected. Felix was also continuing to use PBL in the
classroom environment, feeling motivated by the task immersion that follows: “I just
love the look on the kids’ faces when they’re engaged and excited.”
As such, scheduling was noted by Connor, Ethan, and Felix as the reason they
were not using PBL as much. Gabriela had changed positions since the study period
but indicated that she was incorporating PBL strategies in her new job. Overall, PBL
instructional strategies were still in use to some extent by all educators. They also
revealed that there was “more interest in PBL in the building” among those teaching
other grades.
Is There Anything Else You Would Like to Add? (Q8) An overwhelming
message—an encouragement really—these K–5 educators conveyed was for elemen-
tary teachers elsewhere to try PBL in their classroom. Felix responded,
I really think all teachers should challenge themselves to do PBL and not even because of
the benefit to the students so much as the benefit to the teacher. You just learn so much more
about your kids. It’s overwhelming, so use baby steps.
Echoing this, Connor thought that every teacher should at least try PBL. By exper-
imenting with PBL instruction, “maybe people would see what kids can do and then
realize that PBL really works.” Ethan, too, encouraged PBL experimentation: “PBL
doesn’t necessarily have to be large in scope. Start small and incorporate the basic
components of PBL into what you do. Encourage students to work together. Relin-
quish some control within your classroom and give students the power.” Angelica
similarly explained that
PBL takes a different mindset for teachers. You’ve got to kind of get out of that “I’m in
control” and allow kids to be in control. It doesn’t mean it’s a free-for-all, but students can
be allowed to have more ownership over their learning.
Felix’s words of encouragement to practitioners spoke to inclinations like feeling

uncomfortable about taking curricular risks. Based on personal experience, he
decided to lend perspective to failure, explaining that failure is part of the real world
and acceptable in the context of experimentation. Failure can even serve as an oppor-
tunity for demonstrating teacher modeling while propelling reflection, appraisal,
discussion, analysis, and new understanding:
Teachers need to be prepared to be a little bit uncomfortable and try new things. If it’s a total
disaster, it’s okay. Kids need to see adults model failure. They need to hear adults say, “I
didn’t do this the best way. What could I have done to make this better? What is not making
sense?” This shows adults make mistakes, too. I think PBL brings that into a classroom.
Angelica also said it’s okay to take a risk and fail: “That’s the hardest for teachers,
to let go.”
Another point Felix raised was the importance of students explaining their
thinking. He encouraged educators new to PBL to establish a collaborative class-
room where students feel safe to express themselves, ask questions, work together,
and fail. In addressing his own classes, Felix would establish a PBL tone appreciative
of open-ended, process-based learning and authentic, engaging problem-solving. He
said to his students,
I want to know that you’re thinking. I want to know that you’ve put some thought into it and
that you’ve learned something from the process. And I never want you to get into a situation
where you think there’s only one answer because very few things in life are really like that.
All interviewees stated in one way or another that preparing students for real life
is the goal of PBL. They attested to developmental advances in children’s capacity to
communicate effectively, work together, and consider dilemmas or solve problems.
In a world that is ever changing, students need to be prepared to tackle the unknown.
To this end, they offered advice and cautionary words to educational practitioners
for consideration.
Findings for the Research Question
To restate, the research question driving the interviews was, What key strategies of
PBL instruction contributed to the development of the Profile of a Virginia Graduate’s
expectations of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth grade students at one elementary school
in Virginia? Our data analysis identified two major findings:
1. Key instructional strategies (29 in total, 10 emerging as top and 19 as additional)
2. Overarching outcomes regarding the development of the Profile of a Virginia
Graduate.
Key strategies of PBL instruction in elementary classrooms are listed in Table 4.7.
The order of entries reflects prioritization according to the number of interviewees
(starting with seven, the highest number, to one, the lowest number) who discussed
the specific PBL strategy directly or indirectly. The word count for each PBL strategy
refers to how frequently participants said it (from 37 times for collaboration, which
occupies the highest position, to one time for summarizing, which, among other
strategies, is in the lowest position). A strategy was categorized as vital if four or
more interviewees referenced it during the interview over 12 times (averaging once
per question). While individualized learning did not quite make it into the top 10, it
does deserve recognition for its value to PBL, as reflected in the present chapter.
Table 4.8 lists the top 10 PBL strategies teachers/staff identified that helped
develop the 5Cs. Real-world relevance and hands-on learning comprehensively
contributed to the development of these skills, with collaboration and student choice
influencing growth for four of them. Asking questions, communication, and peer-
to-peer relationships furthered learning for three of the skills. And modeling and
student choice provided support for two skills.
Findings for the Research Question 65
Table 4.7 Key instructional strategies of PBL identified through data analysis
PBL strategies Number of teachers Word frequency Examples of supporting
data
Top 10 strategies
Collaboration 7 37 Learn to work with others
Asking questions 7 28 Express to me what you
need help with—students
need guidance on how to
ask that question
Communication 7 31 By the end of the year,
students could openly
communicate with peers
Modeling 7 24 Introduce and model, then
let them be creative
Real-world relevance 7 21 Taking the assignment
outside the classroom to
see how it can apply in the
real world.
Hands-on learning 4 20 Provide a hands-on
experience of the concept
being instructed
Small groups 6 19 Students were able to
openly express themselves
in small groups
Student-centered learning 4 18 More facilitating occurs
than actual teaching in
front of the class
Student choice 5 16 Kids did research and
decided what problem to
study from among the
specific choices given to
them
Peer-to-peer relationships 4 13 Allow students to
communicate among
themselves.
19 Additional strategies
Individualized learning 3 10 Passion projects—everyone
did their own individual
thing
Respect 5 9 It came down to being able
to respect others’ thoughts
and ideas
Ownership 1 9 Give kids ownership over
their ideas—they’ll shine
and struggle
(continued)
Table 4.7 (continued)

data
Organized/structured 2 7 Give clear guidelines for
the task. Students need
organization and structure
but also free thinking
Positive attitude 1 7 Keep a positive attitude;
certain people in groups
want to be the boss
High engagement 1 5 Kids enjoy it, so they want
to do it. Everyone has a part
to play
Independence 2 5 The teacher is not pointing
out “this is what this is,” so
kids have to think for
themselves
Cross-curricular learning 1 4 Incorporate this standard of
learning for that part of that
subject
Multiple solutions 1 4 Open-ended problems
allow for multiple
solutions, making kids
think
Movement 1 3 Kids were up and moving
around, good for kids with
ADHD
Self-discovery 1 3 Kids would discover things
on their own
Open-ended 2 3 Start with some type of
question or problem that is
very open ended
Justify thinking/responses 1 2 Students must justify their
thinking—don’t just take
their word anymore
Imaginative detail 1 2 Allow students to be
creative and use their own
imagination
Involve community 1 1 Involve the community in
PBL service projects (e.g.,
interview people)
Context clues 1 1 Use context clues to find
the meaning of unknown
things to improve critical
thinking
(continued)
Findings for the Research Question 67
Table 4.7 (continued)

data
Peace circles 1 1 At the end of each PBL
class, we would sit in a
circle and talk about things
that didn’t go well and how
we could do better
Self-motivation 1 1 I have to contribute my part
if I don’t want my friends
to be mad
Summarizing 1 1 Pull together all the
information in their final
presentations
Table 4.8 Top 10 PBL strategies that contributed to the 5Cs

PBL strategies Critical thinking Creativity Collaboration Communication Citizenship
Collaboration × × × ×
Asking questions × × ×
Communication × × ×
Modeling × ×
Real-world × × × × ×
relevance
Hands-on × × × × ×
learning
Small groups × × × ×
Student-centered × × × × ×
learning
Student choice × ×
Peer-to-peer × × ×
relationships
Figure 4.1 is a visual snapshot of the top 10 instructional strategies that influenced
the development of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth graders, according to their teachers,
and the corresponding number of educators who discussed each strategy.
As demonstrated in this chapter, the educators’ responses to the interview ques-
tions illuminated their professional experiences of, and opinions about, using PBL
in the elementary classroom. All thought PBL was a beneficial instructional method
that offered alternative approaches to teaching and learning that realized multiple
gains, including high student engagement and increased motivation. When prompted
to offer additional comments, they encouraged other teachers to try it in their own
classrooms. They reported that communication and collaboration were essential skills
taught, practiced, and built upon through PBL lessons and activities, and that key PBL
Student choice
5/7
Hands-on
Collaboration
learning
7/7
4/7
Real-world
Modeling
relevance
7/7
7/7
Top 10
strategies
of PBL
Asking instruction
Small groups
questions
6/7
7/7
Student-
Communication centered
7/7 learning
4/7
Peer-to-peer
relationships
4/7
Fig. 4.1 Top 10 PBL instructional strategies that nurtured the 5Cs
strategies furthered student development in the 5Cs. Notably, real-world relevance

and hands-on learning comprehensively contributed to the development of the five
skills, with collaboration, student choice, asking questions, communication, peer-to-
peer relationships, modeling, and student choice all furthering these developmental
goals.
PBL education sponsors children collaboratively working on open-ended prob-
lems in critical and creative ways as developing global, humanitarian citizens and
communicative beings. A safe environment enables sharing with peers, asking ques-
tions, taking risks, and making new discoveries, all of which were considered
strengths of PBL interventions. While the educators felt that PBL instruction was
successfully implemented for the most part, challenges were present. The greatest
concern was the time involved in planning PBL instruction and implementing it.
The success of PBL implementation depended on considerable effort and organi-
zation beyond traditional instruction, and it seemed to thrive with the support of
administration and the school culture more readily, as well as funding.
Summary 69
Summary
In this chapter, the data analysis and findings snapshot were provided. Two major
findings were narratively and numerically addressed: (1) key instructional strategies
influencing students’ 21st-century skills and (2) overarching outcomes (see next
chapter) regarding the Profile of a Virginia Graduate. Insights associated with these
findings were articulated, illuminating strategies of PBL instruction that influenced
the development of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth graders. The findings snapshot,
based on the data analysis, surfaced outstanding and supplementary strategies that
facilitated PBL education in elementary classrooms.
The analysis of findings based on interview responses from teachers/staff led to
overarching outcomes. These outcomes are the subject of Chapter 5, along with key
instructional strategies.
References
Carman, P. (2016). Skeleton Creek. CreateSpace.

Fawcett, L. M., & Garton, A. F. (2011). The effect of peer collaboration on children’s problem-
solving ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1348/
000709904X23411.
Mullen, C. A. (2020). Revealing creativity: Exploration in transnational education cultures.
Springer.
Mullen, C. A., & Cancienne, M. B. (2003). Résumé in motion: Sensory self-awareness through
movement. Sex Education: Sexuality, Society and Learning, 3(2), 157–170.
Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (n.d.). Guidance regarding maximum class size and
student–teacher ratios in the Standards of Quality (pp. 1–3) [Code of Virginia]. http://www.doe.
virginia.gov/boe/quality/soq_max_class_size.pdf.
Parker, F., Novak, J., & Bartell, T. (2017). To engage students, give them meaningful choices in the
classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(2), 37–41. https://kappanonline.org/engage-students-give-mea
ningful-choices-classroom.
Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019). Virginia’s 5 C’s. http://www.virginiaisforlearn
ers.virginia.gov/media-library/#:~:text=Students%20in%20every%20grade%20will,commun
ication%2C%20collaboration%20and%20citizenship%20skills.
Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2020). Standards of Learning (SOL) & testing. http://
www.doe.virginia.gov/testing.
Wilson, B. G. (2012). Constructivism in practical and historical context. In B. Reiser & J. Dempsey
(Eds.), Current trends in instructional design and technology (3rd ed., pp. 51–62). Pearson
Prentice Hall.
Chapter 5
Overarching Outcomes, Implications,
and Conclusion
Abstract In this last chapter, overarching outcomes, implications for practice and
research, and conclusions are covered. In a discussion of overarching outcomes,
a summary of seven findings is provided about PBL instruction and 21st-century
skills in elementary education. Each finding is separately addressed, and insights are
articulated, illuminating strategies of PBL instruction that influenced the develop-
ment of the 5Cs. Building on the key instructional strategies previously reported, the
information provided effectively addresses the research question asking what key
strategies of PBL instruction influenced the Profile of a Virginia Graduate’s expec-
tations of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth graders at one elementary school in Virginia.
Implications for practice and research are also described, with school principals and
educational researchers in mind. The study’s purposes are re-examined involving
what PBL instructional strategies were in use within elementary classrooms and
which aided in skills development from the point of view of educators. The gap in
PBL at the elementary level and in relation to 21st-century learning is also revisited.
The chapter ends with a look at the present and future, with applicability to PBL
education, using the metaphor of navigating uncharted waters.
Keywords Conclusion · Key strategies · Overarching outcomes · PBL

instruction · Principals · Relevance and implications for practice · Relevance and
implications for research
Overview
Here we cover overarching outcomes, implications for practice and research, and
conclusions. In a discussion of overarching outcomes, we summarize seven findings
about PBL instruction and 21st-century skills in elementary education. Each finding
is separately addressed, and insights are articulated, illuminating strategies of PBL
instruction that influenced the development of the 5Cs. Building on key instructional
strategies previously reported, we effectively address the research question asking
what key strategies of PBL instruction influenced the Profile of a Virginia Grad-
uate’s expectations of the 5Cs for fourth and fifth graders at one elementary school
in Virginia. Implications for practice and research are also described, with school

72 5 Overarching Outcomes, Implications, and Conclusion
principals and educational researchers in mind. We re-examine the study’s purposes

involving what PBL instructional strategies were in use within elementary class-
rooms and which aided in skills development from the point of view of educators.
The gap in PBL at the elementary level and in relation to 21st-century learning is
also revisited. We end by looking at the present and future, with applicability to PBL
education, using the metaphor of navigating uncharted waters.
Discussion of Overarching Outcomes
In this section, light is shone on the findings identified regarding PBL instruction
and 21st-century skills in an elementary school in Virginia. First, we identify the
overarching thematic outcomes from this elementary-level PBL study with partici-
pating teachers/staff, and then discuss each in turn. The seven themes culled from
participant responses were:
1. The implementation of PBL successfully supported student gains.
2. Working in small groups increased student communication and collaboration
skills.
3. Student-centered learning and choice aided in developing creativity and
communication skills.
4. PBL instruction increased students’ critical-thinking skills.
5. Peer-to-peer relationships aided in furthering citizenship skills.
6. Modeling was a helpful strategy for guiding students in PBL classroom
environments.
7. PBL and project-based learning co-exist and function as PBL.
PBL Implementation Successfully Supported Student Gains (Finding 1). All
teachers/staff shared that students made academic and social gains from PBL instruc-
tion. They confirmed that communication and collaboration skills improved with
PBL interventions. Similarly, Koray et al. (2008) reported that students participating
in PBL performed significantly better on a problem-solving skills assessment than
on an assessment following traditional instruction. Specifically, they indicated that
students experiencing PBL “developed problem- solving skills,” “enhanc[ed] their
communication,” improved their “group working skills,” and acquired “knowledge”
(p. 16). In their case, the students were 85 preservice elementary school teachers in
an education faculty in Turkey. Interestingly, just as the teachers in the current study
indicated that PBL instruction takes more time and effort than traditional instruction,
students in Korey et al.’s study mirrored this comment, reporting that while “PBL
required more time and effort than projects in other courses” the learning process
was far richer and results superior (p. 15). The researchers recommended that PBL be
integrated into preservice teacher education to expose students to student-centered
inquiry through which communication, collaboration, and so forth are advanced. A
balance needs to be struck between giving students freedom and providing feed-
back, and PBL should favor facilitation over instruction. Also, participants need to
Discussion of Overarching Outcomes 73
be patient with the process of learning because the results can take time and success
comes from the willingness to navigate all such tensions.
A slight point of departure in the PBL instructional dynamics within the elemen-
tary classrooms we studied is that there was likely more of a heavy-handed instruc-
tional approach, at least at the outset of activity-based tasks, than with secondary and
postsecondary level research. Children who are learning the ropes simply need more
time and attention, which the teachers/staff pointed out numerous times in the inter-
views. For example, the interviewees described how students need guidance on how
to work collaboratively on a task because often the children in groups would work
individually on their own part of the task rather than collaborate. It was if they had to
be taught how to work productively with others. With the proper instructional guid-
ance, children can then become absorbed in PBL learning and collaborate, create,
communicate, think critically, and accept responsibility. Development of such 21st-
century skills was also broken down into specific gains, like learning to make choices,
finding one’s voice, researching challenging problems, creating artifacts of learning,
and presenting said artifacts. All such developments were realized by the children
who participated in PBL learning, as reported by the educators we interviewed.
Working in Small Groups Increased Student Communication and Collabora-
tion Skills (Finding 2). Most of the educators shared how working in small groups
allowed students to freely share ideas, work as a team, and establish viable roles
to complete tasks effectively. One educator shared that students realized working
with a good friend might not be the best fit because they did not always communi-
cate well. Neville (2009) supported the idea of working in a small group and noted
that one of the most important differences between PBL curriculum in the medical
setting and traditional medical school curriculum lies in the learning environment.
“PBL curricula,” Neville (2009) clarified, “use small group tutorials with a student-
centered approach, active learning, the use of cases or problems, and a significant
amount of time for independent study” (p. 2). The interviews conducted for our study
support this premise of PBL—that using small groups enables students to develop
their communication and collaboration skills in an exploratory fashion and more
quickly and thoroughly than in traditional classroom environments.
Student-Centered Learning and Student Choice Aided in Developing
Creativity and Communication Skills (Finding 3). Allowing students to make
choices in PBL settings—within such areas as topics to be studied, problems to
be undertaken, activity-based tasks to be completed, and presentational style of the
knowledge acquired or learning gained—was discussed by interviewees. A fifth area
of student choice that unevenly appeared in the interview data was choosing whom to
work with as partners and group members. However, as explained earlier, while this
option was weighed by the teachers, in some cases it was dismissed as problematic
or just not realistic for youngsters, whereas in other cases it was the norm, typically
for the more involved, time-consuming projects and units.
By allowing students a role in actively making choices, the process of learning
became meaningful, according to most of the interviewees. In this way, students
could leverage their personal strengths and develop creative and critical minds to
explore ideas and demonstrate knowledge and understanding. Allowing students
to choose among topics, activities, and so forth puts learners at the center of their
learning. Student choice is an important element of PBL that fits with Savery’s
(2006) explanation of PBL as a student-centered learning experience that empowers
participants to research and apply knowledge to arrive at one or more solutions to a
defined problem. While referring to PjBL and its utilization in a study involving new
and practicing science teachers, Colley (2008) asserted that student-centered teaching
approaches enable students to “produce tangible learning outcomes by posing and
answering research questions that are relevant to their own lives and communities”
(p. 75). Another benefit noted by Colley is that such learning processes put students in
charge of their own learning. Most of the interviewees in our study felt that allowing
students choice and focusing on student-centered learning improves their creativity
and communication skills.
PBL Instruction Increased Students’ Critical-Thinking Skills (Finding 4).
All participants thought that PBL provided the students with the opportunity to learn
how to become critical thinkers. The children were developing critical-thinking skills
by making choices, asking questions, and applying PBL tasks to the real world.
Simultaneously, they were learning to consider multiple possibilities in the realm
of solutions to problems (rather than only one definitive solution), explain/justify
solutions, and become independent thinkers. They were learning how to grow as crit-
ical thinkers, which involves identifying issues, formulating questions, discovering
multiple solutions, and making inferences (VDOE, 2019b).
Peer-to-Peer Relationships Aided in Furthering Citizenship Skills (Finding
5). Working together through peer-to-peer relationships was considered a major
strength of PBL approaches in elementary settings. PBL allowed students to
partner or collaborate constructively and provide feedback to one another in a non-
threatening way that promoted respect, such as by welcoming ideas and thoughts,
including different ones. Students need opportunities to demonstrate trustworthiness,
respectfulness, fairness, responsibility, and caring (VDOE, 2019a). Learning about
the past, participating in the present, and caring about the future can produce strong
citizens. Allowing students to work together (while focusing on individual student
strengths) promoted the development of citizenship skills.
Modeling Helped Guide Student Learning in PBL Classroom Environments
(Finding 6). PBL instruction is not something that came naturally to the teachers or
students. All participants felt that it succeeded in their classrooms largely owing to
teacher modeling. Elementary-aged students need guidance on how to work together,
how to communicate their thinking, and how to provide constructive feedback. PBL
gives students a structured opportunity to practice these skills with guidance and
facilitation from teachers.
Hmelo-Silver (2004) described the PBL teacher as a facilitator of knowledge who
models good strategies for thinking and learning and scaffolds learning through
modeling and coaching. Sage (1996) explained the coaching strategy known as
“model/coach/fade” for PBL in elementary classrooms—wherein the “teacher as
coach” carries out essential steps—prepares students to “meet the problem” and
define it, and provides guidelines and information (pp. 21, 26). Students are likely
Discussion of Overarching Outcomes 75
gathering some or all the information needed in the problem context and gener-
ating possible solutions, as well as assessing their own performance and/or having it
assessed. And the teacher debriefs about the problem and anything else, such as the
students’ performances, which may involve artifacts, and learning outcomes.
To facilitate effective small groups, the interviewees described how they fulfilled
the very steps outlined by Sage (1996)—they set the problem context, modeled a
skill and associated PBL strategies such as how to ask questions, coached group
members on that skill, and faded instructional input to allow the groups to work
on their own and learn interdependently. The group process involved organization,
planning, struggle, brainstorming, negotiation, discovery, appraisal, and many other
elements of independent learning, in addition to peer modeling.
PBL and PjBL Co-exist and Function as PBL (Finding 7). When discussing
PBL in their classroom, some teachers/staff stuck with the acronym PBL while
others interchanged it with PjBL, problem, project, problem-based, and problem-
solving. Regardless, the idea of student-centered learning involving a real-world
complex problem remained at the forefront of their responses. Their views were
consistent with PBL as described in the literature—anchored in student-centered
learning and incorporating real-world relevance, collaboration, and other dynamic
features (Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Marra et al., 2014; Savery,
2006).
All interviewees discussed projects they used or assigned within single classes, for
an entire week, and for longer periods. One perspective on PBL is that it is typically
conducted in a short time and involves a simpler problem, whereas PjBL encompasses
a longer period and often includes multiple tasks, disciplines, and responses (Buck
Institute for Education, 2018). However, the implication of PBL as always or by
default occurring in a short period and involving a simpler problem is a source of
debate. The controversy to which we refer is literature that addresses as well as
illustrates complexities of learning challenges in PBL settings at all grade levels.
These extend to engineering, science, and other (multi)disciplinary settings, formal
and informal alike (e.g., Evans et al., 2014).
Relevance and Implications for Practice
Elementary school principals and education leaders can do a lot to support PBL
learning in their domains. Understandably, the COVID-19 pandemic has been
systematically disrupting schools, worldwide, and the work of personnel respon-
sible for educating the young. Budgets are shrinking in public education, with fewer
resources available for classroom learning. The restructuring and consolidation of
grade levels, units, and so forth, including the shrinkage of teachers and support
personnel is unprecedented in this historic moment, with no end in sight. Regardless,
leaders and their teams can work to offset the negatives with positives. Knowing that
their administrative leaders support PBL instruction, trust their teachers/staff, and
have buy-in can be enough for some practitioners to proceed. While it may not be
realistic or practical to carry out PBL on a comprehensive scale in and across grades
levels and even within single classrooms during rapid changes and crises, mini-PBL
initiatives are still possible, as a teacher interviewee exclaimed based on experimen-
tations with this alternative. As more groups in education utilize electronic spaces
like “break rooms” in the Zoom conferencing interface for carrying out teamwork,
just as we (the authors) are doing these days, it is certainly possible that PBL activities
can unfold using cloud-based technologies.
Anyone interested in supporting the implementation of PBL initiatives in indi-
vidual classrooms, schools, or districts can benefit from consulting our study findings.
There are three actions that school principals can take:
1. Principals should provide professional development or training for
teachers/staff interested in PBL implementation. This support will give teachers
background knowledge about PBL; enable them to brainstorm with their
colleagues and create teacher support networks and planning teams; and help
them figure out how to go about implementing, facilitating, and assessing PBL
instruction in their own classrooms. Our data analysis confirmed that PBL
instruction encompasses crucial skills, namely communication and collabora-
tion, for developing activity-based conditions and realizing student success. As
such, coming to terms with the 5Cs in the context of PBL and how it can advance
21st-century capacities is on target with local, state, national, and international
expectations of global-ready graduates. Strengthening PBL practices beyond
the schoolhouse, principals can look to family engagement strategies for inno-
vatively building curriculum like e-platforms where youngsters need informed
guidance at home (Boyles & Mullen, 2020).
2. Principals should be knowledgeable about PBL instruction relative to such
realities as changing norms, risk taking, delayed outcomes, and failed attempts.
PBL is often viewed as chaotic and unorganized, and it is said to be time-
consuming, laborious, and potentially expensive. Those trying it for the first
time, both teachers and students, will find themselves feeling uncertain of what
to do, how, and when. However, principals should be knowledgeable of the
structure, processes, and conditions of PBL. Understanding that PBL is upheld
in education as a best practice approach to rewarding teaching and learning
should be motivating. Far from being “the flavor of the month,” PBL has long
been confirmed by scholars and practitioners from widely ranging disciplines
and different countries. Many in schools and universities have experimented
with this teaching method and sponsored active learning and real-world and
meaningful projects. Knowing about PBL’s credibility, staying power, and even
transformative effects on instruction, pedagogy, teacher morale, collegiality,
and collaboration can help justify the time and attention it takes. Being creative
and resourceful about the funding involved and helping teachers with supplies
would be applauded.
3. Principals should ensure that teachers understand the expectations associated
with 21st-century development to benefit student learning, social development,
and academic attainment. In the study context of this book, the associated
Relevance and Implications for Practice 77
policies at the state level concern the Profile of a Virginia Graduate and the
5Cs, which are consistent with the expectation that students’ knowledge and
skills will reflect the demands of a global economy and society (VDOE, 2019a,
b). PBL in today’s educational world addresses standards (possibly testing
oriented) and subject-specific content. It involves such teaching practices as
designing and planning (e.g., aligning with standards), identifying the problem
context and building the culture, generating and operationalizing the activity-
based tasks to be fulfilled, engaging and coaching, scaffolding student learning,
and assessing student learning. Anyone interested in seeing PBL operate will
be looking for a challenging problem, question, task, or assignment; student
voice, choice, and reflection; student commitment and motivation; authenticity
and real-world relevance; critical and creative thinking; citizenship values; and
learning performances (including artifacts or products).
Relevance and Implications for Research
Based on our research findings and the gaps in the literature that were addressed by
this study, we offer 13 suggestions for further inquiry. These ideas expand on PBL-
oriented elementary inquiries and 21st-century skills investigations, both of which
are aimed at developing young students for school, career, and lifelong success.
1. Investigate PBL instruction, implementation, and engagement at the elemen-
tary (or middle school) level with relevance for fostering development of
21st-century skills.
2. This study could be adapted or expanded to gain more information about
teacher-reported strategies used during PBL implementation. It would be
advantageous to do this study with different grade levels to see if strategies
operationalized to develop skills change with student age or other demographic
variables (e.g., socioeconomic class).
3. Conduct research on the key PBL instructional strategies identified through
this interview study with elementary teachers/staff (see Table 4.7); alterna-
tively, explore beyond the top 10 strategies to consider all 29, which together
played important and supplementary roles in influencing 21st-century skills
development in a Virginia school context.
4. Further research could narrow the key PBL instructional strategies identified
in the study to one or a few: collaboration, asking questions, communica-
tion, modeling, real-world relevance, hands-on learning, small groups, student-
centered learning, student choice, peer-to-peer relationships (Table 4.7).
5. Modern-day PBL units, activities, lessons, and tasks embed 21st-century skills.
Further research could be conducted on which skills are incorporated into PBL
curriculum in elementary, middle, or high schools.
6. Standardized testing is a reality of contemporary schooling, as was evident
whenever teachers/staff mentioned it in connection with how they would
approach PBL activities to facilitate gains for students, especially struggling
test-takers. Research could examine the role of standardized testing in shaping

PBL curriculum in the academic subjects that are tested. The influence of
testing on PBL teaching and learning can be monitored to understand how
learners are being prepared to develop as 21st-century citizens.
7. Focus inquiries on underrepresented student populations at risk of
academic, occupational, and other struggles in life, and challenges/barriers
and successes/gains relative to urban/rural/suburban, race/ethnicity, class,
dis/ability, and so forth.
8. Further research on PBL learning and 21st-century skills could be conducted
with feedback from various education stakeholders (e.g., district/division
leaders, principals/other building leaders, teachers and staff, parents, and
students).
9. To gain a deeper contextual or broader sense of key PBL instructional strategies
with children, expand the present study to consider more US-based schools,
divisions/districts, and states. Explorations can encompass many different
possibilities and configurations.
10. The current study was qualitative in nature, so new studies could be qualitative
(involving interviews and/or other data sources), quantitative, or methodolog-
ically mixed. Researchers are welcome to adapt our PBL Teacher Interview
Protocol for carrying out interviews with education stakeholders.
11. PBL explorations carried out in cyberspace could be designed by researchers
in partnership with classroom teachers, with the aim of involving students in
problem-solving endeavors within virtual spaces that produce growth in the
5Cs.
12. Obtaining feedback from students participating formally or informally in
PBL could not only benefit PBL instruction and curriculum but also profes-
sional development opportunities and training for principals, teachers/staff,
and others.
13. Utilizing the literature cited in this book, research-based instructional program-
ming could be incorporated into university-based preparation programs for
aspiring teachers and leaders to expose adult students to PBL theory and
practice, instruction, curriculum, and assessment.
Conclusion
This book pursued a knowledge gap in investigations of PBL at the elementary level,
which is underrepresented in the literature. Based on individual interviews with
seven PBL teachers/staff at one elementary school in a rural area of Virginia, key
PBL instructional strategies were identified. The top 10 strategies operationalized by
the educators were described from their frame of reference. A total of 29 strategies
were recognized for playing a role in influencing the 21st-century skills development
of children in grades 4 and 5.
Conclusion 79
The study contributes to the body of research on key strategies used during imple-
mentation of PBL in the classroom and how 21st-century skills were developed. The
focus on PBL in elementary school, in addition to the Profile of a Virginia Graduate,
makes this study especially helpful for educators who work with children.
A valuable finding was that PBL is a worthwhile instructional tool for engaging
as well as improving elementary students’ capacities in critical thinking, creativity,
citizenship, and particularly communication and collaboration. Modeling by teachers
was identified as an essential method for guiding elementary students in the facilita-
tion of new learning in PBL activity-based settings. The participating teachers/staff
made it known that children need explicit guidance and direction on how to effectively
communicate and collaborate with peers and interact with their teachers. Through
PBL, students were able to develop and practice the 5Cs, which generated momentum
for meeting expectations associated with global-ready, literate graduates.
As verbalized by the participating educators, the support of building principals is
crucial for PBL to be realized in elementary classrooms. From the outside looking in,
PBL appears noisy and chaotic, so it can be easily misconstrued as lacking structure.
However, PBL structures student freedom, choice, and problem contexts, and it gives
space to process-based learning and the practicing of skills. Gains are tracked in 21st-
century skills and in relation to the academic content to be mastered or understood.
With permission to try something new and allowing teachers and students to find their
own way with non-traditional learning, principals who understand the purposes and
character of PBL instruction make it possible. Because the school principal serves as
the instructional leader in elementary buildings, the principal should encourage the
implementation of research-based instructional strategies and attend to such matters
as the budgeting of resources.
Our research purposes have been fulfilled. We have pinpointed key instructional
strategies from interviews with teachers/staff with knowledge and information to
share about PBL, having experimented with this approach during the 2017–2018
and 2018–2019 school years. We also found out what strategies aided in the skills
development of the 5Cs for elementary students about the expectations of graduates
who have been prepared for college, careers, and life. The study context benefitted
from the leadership of the superintendent, who had encouraged experimentation with
alternative classroom pedagogy.
We offer pedagogic strategies endorsed by educators for creating the conditions
for 21st-century learning and meeting the expectations of global societies and work-
forces. Our hope is that other researchers and practitioners will find value in this
book and make good use of it for their own purposes.
Summary
In this last chapter, overarching outcomes, implications for practice and research,
and conclusions were covered. The study’s purposes have been fulfilled involving
what PBL instructional strategies have been in use within elementary classrooms
and which ones aided in skills development from the point of view of educators.
The gap in PBL at the elementary level and in relation to 21st-century learning has
been addressed. The understandings relayed benefitted from those on the frontlines—
educators who are teaching and learning in new ways and who generously shared
their personal stories.
Navigating Uncharted Waters
The PBL literature we reviewed considered elementary student engagement and

achievement and extended to related areas of interest. This book covered the back-
ground of PBL and its evolution into public education and classrooms. Together with
our elementary study, it adds to the knowledge of PBL instruction, with attention
on PBL strategies utilized in elementary, middle, and secondary levels, extending
into informal settings. Those answering the call seek non-traditional approaches to
classroom learning that enrich the quality of educational experience extending into
the future. Thus, they are future-minded in their preparation of students for lifelong
learning and contribution.
While we recognize that PBL is certainly not new, it is new to teachers in Virginia,
which puts the teachers/staff who participated in our study at the leading edge of
instructional change. Researching PBL and gaining insight from teachers through
this investigation has allowed us to share research with the global educational commu-
nity. We are excited about emboldening preK–12 teachers to try something new and
encouraging principals and other leaders to get behind their initiatives and join them
in their journey. The Portrait of a Graduate (BattelleforKids, 2018) and Profile of a
Virginia Graduate (VDOE, 2019a) can add value for preparing learners to enter the
global economy with the capacity to be not only effective but also public-spirited.
We are pleased to have added to the breadth of literature surrounding PBL in
elementary classrooms and to have had this opportunity to feature the experimenta-
tion at one school in Virginia. Based on our research results, coupled with insights
gained from the literature reviewed, we think that PBL is a worthwhile instructional
tool that has great potential to improve children’s 21st-century skills. However, the
support of principals and other building leaders is vital for the success of PBL imple-
mentation. We hope that principals who wish to support PBL at their school review
the findings and reflect on their own practices. Finally, we encourage principals to
implement PBL in their schools and support teachers who wish to experiment with
PBL in their classrooms. We encourage the utilization of this book in any way that
can help with making PBL-related decisions in the context of 21st-century learning.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, educational systems suddenly went from daily
face-to-face instruction to being physically closed and moving to online instruction,
with a new kind of schooling dependent on creative adaptations presently emerging.
PBL in the world of online learning is largely unchartered. However, we believe that
the basic components of student-centered learning and real-world application are
adaptable to online learning. Also, online learning can allow teachers and students the
Navigating Uncharted Waters 81
time needed for PBL, which was said to be the greatest challenge of PBL instruction
in the physical classroom. In electronic spaces there are innovative tools for enabling
collaboration, communication, and so forth, with cost savings a noteworthy benefit.
Students’ creativity, choice, and much more can be maximized in electronic spaces.
Sponsoring PBL learning can help with closing equity gaps in elementary schooling
and for all student groups, particularly vulnerable populations. Constraints allow us
to exercise our imaginations in entirely new ways. By imagining new possibilities
for PBL, we push boundaries in the world of learning. PBL of tomorrow is being
charted today.
References
Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical

education. Springer.
Boyles, E. T., & Mullen, C. A. (2020). Principals’ responsibility for helping impoverished students
succeed in rural Appalachia. In C. A. Mullen (Ed.), Handbook of social justice interventions in
education (pp. 1–27). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29553-0_93-1.
Buck Institute for Education, The. (2018). PBL works. https://www.pblworks.org.
Colley, K. (2008). Project-based science instruction: A primer—An introduction and learning cycle
for implementing project-based science. Science Teacher, 75(8), 23–28. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=
EJ817851.
Evans, M. A., Lopez, M., Maddox, D., Drape, T., & Duke, R. (2014). Interest-driven learning
among middle school youth in an out-of-school STEM studio. Journal of Science Education and
Technology, 23(5), 624–640.
files/koksal.pdf.
Neville, A. J. (2009). Problem-based learning and medical education forty years on. A review of
its effects on knowledge and clinical performance. Medical Principles and Practice, 18(1), 1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000163038.
Sage, S. M. (1996, April). A qualitative examination of problem-based learning at the K–8 level:
Preliminary findings (pp. 1–27) (ERIC Number: ED398263). A paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. https://files.eric.ed.gov/
fulltext/ED398263.pdf.
Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). (2019b). Virginia’s 5C’s. http://www.virginiaisfo
Correction to: Problem-Based Learning
Correction to:
S. S. Reed et al., Problem-Based Learning in Elementary
School, SpringerBriefs in Education,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5
In the original version of the book, the following belated corrections have been incor-
porated: The references in the book backmatter have to be removed. This correction
to the book has been updated with the changes.
The updated version of the book can be found at

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 C1

Appendix
PBL Teacher Interview Protocol
Opening Statement: Thank you for agreeing to participate in this interview with the
substitute researcher to collect information regarding problem-based learning (PBL)
instruction during the 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 school years in grades 4 and 5 at
your school. PBL is defined as a teaching method in which students gain knowledge
and skills by working collaboratively to investigate and respond to authentic and
engaging questions and problems. I will ask each question as stated. Based on your
responses, follow-up probes may be asked. A record of the transcribed interview will
be sent to you for verification.
1. How would you describe the PBL instruction that was used in your classroom?
2. What strategies used in your PBL instruction do you think are important?
3. How have the strategies you have used helped students develop the following skills?
a. Critical thinking
b. Creativity
c. Communication
d. Collaboration
e. Citizenship
4. Are there specific strategies that contributed to stronger development of any of these skills?
Please explain.
a. Critical thinking
b. Creativity
c. Communication
d. Collaboration
e. Citizenship
5. Based on your teaching experiences, what are some strengths of using PBL in elementary
classrooms?
6. Based on your teaching experiences, what are some concerns or challenges with
implementing PBL?
7. Based on your experiences with PBL, have you continued using PBL in your classroom?
Why or why not?
8 Is there anything else you would like to add?

SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70598-5

Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SPRINGER BRIEFS IN EDUC ATION

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8914

ISSN 2211-1921 ISSN 2211-193X (electronic)

A very special thanks to Natalie Rieborn, Publishing Editor of Springer International

Samantha S. Reed, Ed.D.

“This easy-to-read book makes an important contribution to the problem-based

“Problem-Based Learning in Elementary School makes an original contribution to

Data Organization, Coding, and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Appendix: PBL Teacher Interview Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

Samantha S. Reed, Ed.D. is Principal at Hillsville

Carol A. Mullen, Ph.D. is Professor of Educa-

Emily T. Boyles, Ed.D. is Coordinator of English

Fig. 2.1 Virginia’s 5Cs: Preparing future-ready graduates Source

Table 2.1 Comparing case-based learning, inquiry-based learning,

Abstract Problem-based learning (PBL) is a popular trend in public education.

Keywords Creativity · Critical thinking · Communication · Collaboration · And

Problem-Based Learning in Elementary Schools: What Strategies Help Students

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 1

About This Book

Coauthor Carol Mullen, Professor of Educational Leadership at Virginia Tech,

Statement of the Problem

Significance of the Research

PBL’s growing popularity calls on teachers, administrators, and students to adapt to

Purpose and Justification of Study

Bas, G. (2008). Implementation of multiple intelligences supported project-based learning in

Abstract This chapter of Problem-Based Learning in Elementary Schools offers

Keywords Definitions · Elementary school · 5cs · K–12 education · Literature

In this review of the literature conducted, problem-based learning (PBL) in elemen-

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 9

Search Processes and Criteria

Synthesis of the Literature

Compared with PjBL

such as presentations or performances, logs, diaries, maps, puzzles, illustrations,

PBL in Medicine: Howard Barrows’s Influence

PBL in Education: John Dewey’s Influence

Dewey’s (1859–1952) innovations were also steeped in experiential learning (i.e.,

PBL and Constructivism

Learning by doing, advocated by both Barrows and Dewey, is common to

instruction and curriculum design, and current educational approaches; constructivist

PBL in K–12 Public Education

Dispositions and aptitudes occurring in informal settings translate in formal

1. Choose a concept (“big idea”/universal theme summarized in one word like

PBL and STEM

No “single definition or conceptualization of what STEM (Science, Technology,

Importantly, PBL is heavily utilized in STEM education, which integrates knowl-

Other Research on Elementary Students’ Engagement. A grade 4 classroom

• Students demonstrate understanding of the pertinent disciplines (e.g., science) in

Closely Related Instructional Practices

Instructional practices closely related to PBL—case-based, design-based, and

Fig. 2.1 Virginia’s 5Cs:

Impact of PBL on Student Achievement

PBL in secondary classrooms and the 5Cs competency-based Profile of a Virginia

PBL—main barriers to investigation include constraints of classroom organization

Profile of a Virginia Graduate—The 5Cs

Engaging Qualities Present in PBL Tasks

The PBL-related literature reviewed in this chapter considered elementary student

inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://www.tandfonline.com/

Keywords 5cs · Interview methodology · Project-based learning · Qualitative

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 37