Clearinghouse on Educational Policy and Management College of Education · University of Oregon

		Implementing Problem-Based Learning in Leadership Development Ordering information      Pricing and Availability Chapter 1: Problem-Based Learning: A Promising Approach to Professional Development You are the new principal of a middle school where one-third of the 950 students are Latino; 100 of those students are limited in their English proficiency. Ethnic tensions are mounting; the school is considered "a tinder box." You receive a letter from Mrs. Olsen, president of the "Concerned Parents Group": Year after year, these same people continue to expect the United States to support their lack of language acquisition.... Our concern is with the large numbers of such people who bleed all sorts of funding agencies and, generation after generation, never do learn English. The parents never read English books, never watch English television, and never attempt to speak English. Their children are cut from the same cloth; the only place they try to speak English is at school.... Before long these kids from across the border will be classified as "learning disabled" and receive more attention than kids who are serious about their education.... We want you to put these kids in separate classes. A Latino community leader has a different point of view: Latino students don't like coming to school. They feel unwelcome. They sense that the teachers don't understand them and are not making much of an effort to help the students adjust to a foreign environment or succeed in school.... The Anglo students resent the presence of Hispanics and harass, tease, and intimidate them daily. Overt racial conflict will break out any day if racial relations don't improve. What do you do? Messy, real-life problems like these provide the starting point for learning in a radically transformed instructional environment that we refer to as problem-based learning, or PBL. The "students," prospective and current principals, jointly decide how to deal with these problems. In the process of grappling with these real-world challenges, the students acquire the knowledge and skills needed by principals who lead by facilitating collaboration and building consensus rather than by exerting formal authority. Problem-based learning, though a newcomer to the field of educational administration, has been used for more than a decade to prepare future physicians and other professionals (Boud and Feletti 1991). As one reads about how PBL has been used in these other fields, one discovers that it comes in various forms. This variety stems in part from the differences inherent in the various professional roles for which the students are being prepared. Accordingly, the version of PBL discussed in this paper reflects the nature of the role that students enact when they complete their professional training in the field of educational administration. This future role, as the reader will discover, influences a host of instructional decisions--decisions about goals, content, instructional process, and evaluation. In discussing this version of PBL for preparing educational administrators, we elaborate the model, illustrate how it has been used to prepare school leaders, contrast this approach with the case method, and foreshadow what researchers may learn as they study the implementation of this model. PBL: The Model Underlying Assumptions The assumptions underlying traditional preparation in educational administration contrast sharply with those in PBL. Traditional preparatory programs view teaching as transmission of knowledge and learning as acquisition of that knowledge. Program designers for traditional programs make four assumptions about this knowledge: (1) the knowledge is relevant to the students' future professional role; (2) learners will be able to recognize when it is appropriate to use their newly acquired knowledge; (3) application of this knowledge is relatively simple and straightforward; and (4) the context in which knowledge is learned has little or no bearing on subsequent recall or use. Program designers further assume that knowledge is learned most effectively when it is organized around the disciplines (for example, the legal basis for education and educational finance) and taught through lecture and discussion. Finally, those responsible for the professional development of administrators assume that the central purpose of student evaluation is to ascertain whether students recall the knowledge to which they have been exposed. PBL rests on an entirely different set of assumptions. PBL proponents assume that learning involves both knowing and doing. Knowledge and the ability to use that knowledge are of equal importance. Program designers also assume that students bring knowledge to each learning experience. Moreover, PBL adherents assume that students are more likely to learn new knowledge when the following conditions are met: (1) their prior knowledge is activated and they are encouraged to incorporate new knowledge into their preexisting knowledge; (2) they are given numerous opportunities to apply it; and (3) they encode the new knowledge in a context that resembles the context in which it subsequently will be used. PBL teachers further assume that the problems students are likely to encounter in their future professional practice provide a meaningful learning context for acquiring and using new knowledge. These problems supply cues that facilitate future retrieval and use of knowledge acquired during their formal education. Finally, PBL instructors assume that evaluation can play a major role in fostering the ability to apply knowledge if evaluation serves learning (that is, if it is formative) and is based on performance of tasks that correspond to the professional tasks students will face after completing their training. Major Components Designing a professional-development program based on PBL requires one to consider five interrelated issues: (1) the realities of the workplace, (2) the goals, (3) the content, (4) the process by which the content is taught and learned, and (5) student evaluation. By attending to these five issues simultaneously, the program designer increases the likelihood that students will be able to transfer their newly acquired knowledge and skills to the work context. Let us examine each of these issues more closely. Realities of the Workplace Crafting a program rooted in the principles of PBL involves making a number of assumptions about the realities of the workplace. By way of example, we have adopted several key assumptions in designing Stanford University's Prospective Principals' Program. Local school districts are granting each school more latitude in dealing with the problems and challenges it faces. The principal of the school is expected to collaborate with teachers and parents in solving these problems and in creating an educational environment that effectively and humanely responds to the needs of an increasingly diverse student population. Moreover, the problems and the knowledge base relevant to these needs and problems will continually change. Goals In light of the workplace realities that we have assumed, the following professional-development goals for principals seem appropriate: Familiarize prospective principals with the problems they are likely to face in the future. Such problems should be those with high impact; that is, they affect a large number of individuals for a relatively long period. Acquaint students with the knowledge that is relevant to these high-impact problems. Such knowledge likely comes from a variety of disciplines, rather than from a single one. Foster skills in applying this knowledge. Since PBL assumes that knowing and doing are equally important, students should be provided with opportunities to use their knowledge and to test its utility in dealing with real-life professional problems. In the process of applying the knowledge, students discover gaps in their understanding and in their ability to use the knowledge. This awareness stimulates them to revisit the conceptual material and to solidify their understanding. Develop problem-solving skills. Since the character of future problems is somewhat unpredictable, attention must be paid to promoting skills in finding, framing, analyzing, and solving problems. Moreover, future principals need to learn how to distinguish between problems and dilemmas and to acquire strategies for addressing both. While problems generally contain no value conflicts, dilemmas do. Since dilemmas usually arise from competing values, they resist solution and are likely to surface again and again. Develop skills in implementing solutions. Consistent with the emphasis on doing as well as on knowing, students should implement their proposed solutions. Simply discussing what one would or should do to solve a problem is insufficient. Implementation of a solution to a problem often proves more difficult than anticipated; moreover, the solution may bring additional problems. Consequently, principals need to acquire skills in anticipating potential problems, assessing their seriousness, and developing preventive or contingency actions for dealing with potentially serious problems. Develop leadership skills that facilitate collaboration. Critical to collaboration are skills in the following: planning and organizing projects, running meetings, achieving consensus, resolving conflict, and listening. Develop an array of affective capacities. Unless principals acquire a strong commitment to collaboration and the patience to use this kind of leadership style, they are unlikely to use their skills in working with others. Moreover, when things go awry, principals need to know how to deal constructively with frustration, anger, and disappointment. Above all, they need to acquire confidence in their ability to handle the many facets of this demanding professional role. Develop self-directed learning skills. With an exploding knowledge base and ever-changing problems, principals need to acquire skills in identifying gaps in their own knowledge, in locating relevant resources, and in evaluating the suitability and appropriateness of the resources for the issues confronting them. Content Knowledge (content) in a PBL curriculum is organized around high-impact problems of professional practice. PBL adherents follow this maxim: first the problem, then the content. Problems are used as the stimulus for learning new content instead of the context for applying previously learned material. One major criterion guides the selection of content. The content should be functional in fostering understanding of the problem, possible causes for the problem, constraints that must be taken into account when considering solutions, and/or possible solutions. Problem-relevant knowledge comes from a variety of sources: the disciplines, the relevant expertise and practical wisdom of practitioners, the policies and practices of the local district, and the students themselves. Although the instructor may suggest pertinent reading material, students exploit an array of sources that may assist them in understanding and dealing with the focal problem--a practice that is consistent with the type of on-the-job learning that PBL seeks to develop. Instructional Process In a PBL curriculum, students assume major responsibility for their own learning. The process by which they learn the content mirrors the realities of the workplace and the instructional goals. Accordingly, the process affords students repeated opportunities to practice and refine the skills needed to lead today's schools-skills in promoting collaboration, cooperative problem-solving, and implementation of change. Unlike traditional educational administration programs, the basic unit of classroom instruction in PBL is a project. Embedded in each project are a high-impact problem, a set of learning objectives, and a collection of reading materials that illuminate different facets of the problem. The problems are usually messy, ill defined, and representative of the problems the students will face as principals. Students are assigned to project teams that are responsible for framing the problem and deciding how to use the knowledge gleaned from the readings and other resources to deal with it. Each team usually has five to seven members and a fixed period of time-nine to fifteen hours spread over a period of two to three weeks-to complete the project. One of the students is designated as the project team leader; other team members take turns acting as process facilitators and recorders. Class sessions are treated as meetings of the project team, and the leader in consultation with the facilitator develops a tentative agenda for each meeting. The agenda for each session reflects what the team intends to accomplish and how it plans to proceed. Following each class session, the recorder prepares minutes of the meeting and distributes them to other team members. (See the Because Wisdom Cannot Be Told project in Appendix A for an abbreviated description of the leader, facilitator, and recorder roles.) During each meeting (class session), the instructor acts as "an unobtrusive guide on the side, rather than as a sage on the stage." At times the instructor may raise questions, answer questions, engage the students in reflecting on their process, or provide feedback to students about their use or understanding of the problem-relevant knowledge. If instructors sense that the team is headed in the wrong direction, they do not intervene. Missteps or mistakes represent occasions for learning and often provide valuable insights into the problem, the problem-solving process, the solution, the implementation, the group's functioning, or the students' own sense of self. Evaluation Student evaluation, like the goals, content, and instructional process, reflects the realities of the workplace. As part of each PBL project, students are expected to perform tasks and to create products that approximate what they would do while solving the problem on the job. The students' performances during a project, as well as their products, provide the basis for formative evaluation. Accordingly, students receive feedback from peers, the instructor, and practitioners about their performances. When providing feedback to the students, everyone underscores what they have done especially well and raises questions for them to ponder in relation to their performances. Given the nature of the PBL projects, students may receive feedback on their performance relative to any of the eight goals described earlier. As a way of encouraging students to consolidate what they have learned and to think about transferring their newly acquired knowledge to their future roles, each student prepares a reflective essay at the end of each project. This essay details what they learned and how they intend to use the insights, knowledge, and skills in the future. PBL: Examples To illustrate how some of the major components of PBL operate in the classroom, we have chosen two projects, one related to the opening vignette and the other related to teacher selection. The instructional materials for these two PBL projects appear in Bridges with Hallinger (1992, pp. 144-59). A case study detailing what happened during the teacher-selection project also appears in Bridges with Hallinger (1992, pp. 29-57). Example 1: In English, Please This PBL project centers on a middle school undergoing transition from a monolingual to a multilingual student population. The vignette at the beginning of this paper highlights several of the numerous subproblems embedded in the problematic situation featured in the project. In addition to the description of this messy, real-world problem, students receive information about the school district, a fact sheet distributed by the school leaders to parents and pupils, and a description of the district's proposed newcomer center for Hispanic students. Students also receive a set of readings that cover such topics as theory and research on bilingual education, translating language-acquisition theory into educational practice, historical accounts of how language minorities have been treated in this country, the legal requirements for limited-English-proficient students, and the needs of recent immigrants. Members of the project team are responsible for developing a packet of materials to be circulated to the school's Bilingual Advisory Committee prior to its first meeting. The team is expected to include the following materials in this packet: a statement that describes the committee's charge a tentative plan for how the committee should proceed to accomplish its charge an agenda for the meeting that clarifies what the content and the process will be for the meeting a two-page statement that attempts to provide committee members with pertinent background information about bilingual education At the end of this fifteen-hour project, the team presents its packet of materials to a group of bilingual program coordinators and principals of linguistically diverse schools. This group of practitioners reads the same problem and background material that the team did, reviews the materials prepared by the project team, and meets with team members to raise questions and to provide feedback on the contents of their packet. Team members also have an opportunity to ask questions about issues that arose during the project. Example 2: Teacher Selection In this PBL project, students serve on a teacher-selection committee. The committee has been appointed to fill a vacancy for a fourth-grade teaching position. Committee members are furnished with information about the school, the teaching position, and the district, including the teacher-evaluation system. Besides this background information, committee members receive reading materials on a range of related topics--recruitment, theory and research on employee selection, legal aspects of selection, treatment of new teachers, and misassignment. Committee members design and implement a selection process for choosing the fourth-grade teacher. Since the district requires its teacher-selection committees to interview and to observe demonstration lessons before making a recommendation, the committee must incorporate these two procedures into its selection process. During the last phase of the project, the committee interviews three "finalists" for the position and observes each of them teaching a group of twenty pupils. These students closely resemble those who will be in the teacher's fourth-grade class. Following the interviews and the demonstration lessons, the committee meets to evaluate each candidate against the criteria it established. When the committee completes its deliberations, it prepares a report to the personnel director that contains the following: (1) the recommendation of the committee, (2) an overview of its selection process, (3) a justification for its recommendation, and (4) a description of the steps to be taken to ensure that the candidate succeeds once hired. At the conclusion of the project, committee members receive feedback from two sources: the three candidates and the faculty. Unbeknownst to the committee, a faculty member has interviewed each of the three applicants immediately following the selection activity. The interview probes questions like these: If you were offered this position, would you accept it? Why? What did the committee do that you especially liked? How might the selection committee improve its process? The faculty member later shares the answers to these questions with the members of the selection committee. During this feedback session, committee members learn whether their preferred candidate will accept the job offer. This information stimulates the committee to reflect on its process and how it might be improved in the future. PBL and the Case Method In our discussions with professors who are unfamiliar with PBL, we are often asked how it differs from the case method. Providing a definitive answer to this important question is difficult because there are several different versions of both methods. Given the variety that exists, we have attempted to clarify the similarities and differences between these two instructional approaches by developing a matrix that highlights the features of our version of PBL and one of the most common versions of the case method. This "Defining Features Matrix" (table 1) can be used to analyze one's own classroom instruction, as well as other variations of PBL and the case method. These two methods have several features in common. Both use reality-based, problem-centered materials. In PBL these are described as problems while in the case method they are referred to as cases. The PBL problems may be presented in various ways-written cases, vignettes with limited information (additional information supplied in response to students' requests for specific data), filmed episodes, and real-time problematic situations. As with the case method, PBL places considerable emphasis on developing analytical, problem-framing, and problem-solving skills. There are numerous differences between the two methods, however, particularly in relation to goals, content, process, and student evaluation. In addition to emphasizing analytical and problem-solving skills, PBL emphasizes such goals as the following: life-long learning skills, meeting-management skills, project-management skills, and problem-relevant knowledge. The approaches to content in PBL and the case method also differ. In PBL, the problem determines the content (relevant theory and knowledge); as we stated earlier, the guiding rule is "first the problem, then the content." If content is introduced in the case method, the theory or conceptual material is presented first. Students are expected to apply these concepts to a case that has been chosen because it lends itself to analysis using the conceptual material introduced earlier. Perhaps the most dramatic difference between PBL and the case method is the process of instruction. In the case method, the basic unit of instruction is the case. The instructor typically leads the class in a discussion of the case and asks probing questions students are expected to answer. In PBL, the basic unit of instruction is the project. One of the students serves as project leader; the team sets its own agenda for each class session and schedules how the time will be used. The instructor serves as a resource and remains unobtrusive during most of the class session. Students, not the instructor, direct the discussion. Another important difference between the two methods is the nature of student evaluation. In PBL, as we have noted, the evaluation serves learning and centers on performances like the ones students will encounter in their future professional roles. Students in a PBL classroom do more than analyze and say what they intend to do to solve the problem. They actually implement their solution in a realistic, though usually contrived, situation and experience the consequences associated with their preferred course of action. Throughout the process, they receive feedback from their peers and practitioners, as well as the instructor. Under the case method, students typically prepare a written analysis and statement of how they would deal with the situation. They ordinarily do not put their solution into effect and experience the consequences associated with implementing it. The instructor evaluates the student's analysis and solution. PBL: Foreshadowed Outcomes Since PBL represents a radical departure from the traditional way in which school administrators have been prepared, one question often arises: How does this innovative instructional strategy impact the content of instruction, the learner, the teacher, and the classroom climate? To provide a partial answer to this important question, we draw primarily, though not exclusively, on our own experiences with this approach. Thus far, most of the research on PBL has been conducted in the field of medical education, not educational administration. The most comprehensive review of research on using PBL to train future physicians appears in Albanese and Mitchell (1993). Classroom Environment Our rendering of PBL creates a more intense learning environment than in traditional educational administration programs. This intensity stems in large part from the project nature of the PBL curriculum. Project teams work without the active facilitation of an instructor; the facilitator, as we mentioned earlier, is one of the team members. Moreover, teams must reach consensus on how to deal with the problem and are required to implement their problem in a context similar to the one they will encounter later as administrators. Although the context is contrived, the vast majority of participants do not experience it as such. Rather, the context has the "feel" of the real thing and that "feel" produces a rather high level of performance anxiety. Learner Despite the more intense and stressful PBL classroom environment, participants report high levels of satisfaction. They also view their leadership preparation as much more realistic, practical, and meaningful than their counterparts in traditional programs. However, when asked, "Would you like the portion of the curriculum that is taught using PBL to increase, decrease, or remain the same?", students consistently answer, "Remain the same." According to them, PBL is too intense to be increased and too valuable to be decreased. (PBL occupies roughy 40 percent of the curriculum at Stanford.)* In a PBL environment, students often learn more than formal knowledge, the kind of knowledge emphasized in traditional leadership preparatory programs. Some adopt or adapt new perspectives on leadership. For example, following a project, one student wrote: At the beginning of the project I had little confidence in participative leadership. I doubted that a group could efficiently produce a product in a timely manner using consensus. . . . I gained a new perspective on the role of the leader. Midway through the project I realized I was feeling very stressed about the project. I felt I must determine the "right" answer and then sell it to the group. Reflecting on this, I concluded that wasn't my responsibility as the leader. Problem-solving was the group's responsibility. . . . I can improve (as a leader) by continuing the participative style I tried in this experience-an agenda open to revision by the group, decision-making through a mixture of consensus and majority-rule, equal participation of group members, meeting closure with a review of accomplishments, and followup actions. (Bridges with Hallinger 1992, p. 70) Still other students learn how to deal with disappointment and the importance of balancing the demands in one's life. By way of illustration, one project leader wrote: As to pressure and priorities, I give too much authority to external authorities-bosses, assignments, and so forth-and so lose sight of people priorities outside of the job. To be specific, during this experience I sacrificed my family relationships at a crucial time (for them). This was irresponsible. . . . I have to learn how to put the job in better perspective with the rest of my life and with the world context. Furthermore, by making the assignment and my responsibility for it too big a deal in my own mind, I also limited my creativity in trying to help the group to be more creative and less stressed. . . . I find it difficult to fail, but no one died, and if I can learn about making mistakes and carrying on creatively despite them, particularly in not letting difficulties get me down, that will be progress. (Bridges with Hallinger 1992, pp. 78-79) As participants' exposure to a PBL environment broadens and deepens, most become comfortable in working with adults and internalize the value of collaboration. An alumnus of the Stanford program captured these affective outcomes when she was asked to comment on the essays that students prepare following each project. These essays give a sense of what students say and feel about their performance on specific projects. They are intentionally deeply reflective and thoughtful, and so do not convey the enthusiasm of people about this program and the PBL method. . . . The affective outcomes are not emphasized-the amazing camaraderie, the sensitivity to others, the change of intolerance to tolerance to acceptance to appreciation of different viewpoints- all these are important in the operational goal of the program, and in developing a new breed of administrator who won't settle for the isolation so characteristic of the principalship. (Bridges with Hallinger 1992, p. 68) Content Given that each project confronts students with multiple goals (that is, acquire problem-relevant knowledge, reach consensus on how to deal with the focal problem, and implement their solution), less content is covered in PBL than in conventional programs. Moreover, there is the ever-present danger that students will lose sight of the learning objectives and concentrate on solving the problem. Unless instructors take steps to ensure that students grapple with the content and how it applies to the focal problem, participants may overlook the learning resources that are provided. Teacher Faculty generally find PBL a satisfying way to teach. When describing their experiences with PBL, most highlight the students' level of motivation, the quality of their work, and their engagement with the classroom tasks. However, some instructors miss lecturing and become frustrated while watching their students grope and struggle with the messy realities of the problem. A few instructors express concerns about the interpersonal problems that sometimes arise in project teams and the "free rider" problem (letting other members do the work) that occurs when individuals are not held accountable. In a PBL classroom environment that emphasizes doing, as well as knowing, some instructors make discomforting discoveries. By way of example, one professor wrote, The major discovery is how much I have learned as a professor about the quality of my instruction. The last group of students who solved a problem in my class were critiqued severely by a panel of superintendents. The students got defensive, but I realized that I did not prepare them well enough. . . . Students could write beautiful descriptions of how they would deal with problems... BUT THEY COULDN'T DO ANYTHING!!! Problem-based learning, especially with problems that require a reaction from a panel of experts, has caused me to look very carefully at my own teaching. For other professors the discoveries are similarly enlightening but less painful. Two professors who experimented with our approach described their experiences as follows: Here was where we discovered one of the fundamental requirements of an effective PBL approach-the concept of "front-loading." We realized quite early that preparation for this course would mean a significant investment of time prior to the beginning of the class. . . . We discovered as soon as the class began how valuable front loading was. . . . We found that we were able to play different roles as instructors. Instead of believing we were obligated to "perform" each day in front of the class (and thereby convince ourselves that we were giving students their money's worth), we became more relaxed and under less pressure. Our role quickly evolved into one of a "coach," although we also had to be careful not to "over-coach" or "hover" as we called it. . . . In one of our post-class sessions one day, while discussing how the class had affected each of us, one of us termed the experience as transformative. By that he meant that he had come to see that with adult learners especially, a much different approach was necessary. For years he had taught the same way that one would use to teach novitiates--that is, a heavy emphasis on content taught in a very didactic style. It became clear, however, in teaching this class that such an approach was inappropriate. (Chenoweth and Everhart 1994) Conclusion As we have argued in this opening chapter, PBL represents a bold, radical departure from the traditional way of preparing educational administrators. In our judgment, this approach can play an important, instrumental role in ensuring the success of educational reforms now under way. Administrators, like teachers, are being asked to move away from command-and-control models of leadership to "transformational" styles. Moreover, the kinds of teaching and learning advocated by reformers (teaching and learning for understanding) require administrators who act in ways consistent with these expectations and understand what active learning comprises. Problem-based learning holds promise for preparing the kind of leaders who can facilitate, rather than obstruct, these reforms. Pricing and Availability