This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

EFFICACY OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING IN A HIGH
SCHOOL SCIENCE CLASSROOM

presented by

JAMES RYAN RISSI

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

degree In Interdepartmental Biological
Science

 

 

N's/Z //L\4W,~

Major Professor’ s Signature

35 /M/4 /0

Date

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer

¥

. LIBRARY

M'Chlgan State
University

 

..¢-0-O-O-I-.--l-l-O-I-I---o-I-U-o-I-O--h--n-n_

— 0‘.-

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5108 K:lProj/Acc&Pres/CIRC/DaIeDue,indd

 

EFFICACY OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING IN A HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE
CLASSROOM

By

James Ryan Rissi

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE
Biological Sciences Interdepartmental

2010

ABSTRACT

EFFICACY OF PROBLEM BASED LEARNING IN A HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE
CLASSROOM.

By

James Ryan Rissi

At the high school level, the maturity of the students, as well as constraints of the
traditional high school (both in terms of class time, and number of students), impedes the
use of the Problem-based instruction. But with more coaching, guidance, and planning,
Problem-based Learning may be an effective teaching technique with secondary students.

In recent years, the State of Michigan High School Content Expectations have
emphasized the importance of inquiry and problem solving in the high school science
classroom. In order to help students gain inquiry and problem solving skills, a move
towards a problem-based curriculum and away from the didactic approach may lead to
favorable results.

In this study, the problem-based-learning framework was implemented in a high
school Anatomy and Physiology classroom. Using pre-tests and post-tests over the
material presented using the Problem-based technique, student comprehension and long-
term retention of the material was monitored. It was found that Problem-based Learning
produced comparable test performance when compared to traditional lecture, note-taking,
and enrichment activities. In addition, students showed evidence of gaining research and

team-working skills.

 

To Betsy, Jenna, and Jackson. I love you and I can’t thank you enough for your

understanding. You inspire me.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am thankful to the people that have helped me develop this thesis and who have
contributed to my education for the last four years. Merle Heidemann and Ken Nadler
deserve recognition for their guidance and for inspiring the Problem-based theme of this
thesis. It was their Cell and Molecular Biology class that gave me experience and student

perspective with PBL.

I also need to acknowledge and thank Chuck Elzinga. His Field Ecology class
reignited my passion for teaching. I’m not sure I would still be in education without his
example of what a great educator can do for someone. He made me rediscover the
outdoors and added joy to my life. If I ever accomplish the same as an educator, I will

always be satisfied with my work.

Finally I would like to thank my wife and children. I would have never finished

this without your patience and support.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES _____ __vi
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................. xii
TEXT
Introduction ............................................... 1
Implementation ...................................... 24
Results / Evaluation, 36
Discussion and Conclusion .............................................................................. 56
APPENDICES
Appendix I _ ,,,,, 65
Appendix II ................................................ 69
Appendix III ...................................................................... 82
Appendix IV ............ _ - _ _ 103
Appendix V ............................................. _. 115
Appendix VI ........................................................ 119
BIBLIOGRAPHY 122

 

LIST OF TABLES

 

 

Table 1: PBL Process ............................................................................... 9
Table 21 Implementation Timeline ........................................................... 26
Table 3: Muscular System Pre-test and Post-test Item Analysis ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 38
Table 4: Skeletal System Pre-test and Post-test Item Analysis ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 40
Table 5: Neuromuscular Junction Pre-test and Post-test Item Analysis ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 41
Table 6: Percent Gain (Differences in Student Scores) Pre-Test to Post-Test ,,,,,,,,,,, 43
Table 7: Muscular System Written Test Section Student Scores ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 45
Table 8: Skeletal System Written Test Section Student Scores ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 46
Table 9: End of Unit Student Survey Item Analysis ................................................... 53
Table 10: Muscular system test student scores ............................................................ 66
Table l 1: Skeletal system test student scores .............................................................. 67
Table 12: Neuromuscular Junction system test student scores ___________________________________ 68
Table 13: Controlled Muscle Contraction and Fatigue Results Grid _________________________ 106

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

F igure 11 Muscle Test Diagram .................................................................................... 88
Figure 2: Skeletal Test Diagram ................................................................................... 97
Figure 3: Muscle Contraction Lab Isolation Box Instructions ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 110

vii

I. Introduction:

What problems does a High School Science Teacher Face?

We live in a rapidly changing world. For educators, this truth presents new and
frustrating problems. The infiltration of the intemet and dynamic ways in which humans
share information are changing the nature of the workforce for which educators are
preparing students. Economies that were formerly industrial and demanded a hands-on
“skills based” workforce are now morphing into information-based economies that
demand higher levels of education, and more fundamentally, a greater degree of problem
solving skills. And public school teachers are being asked to get all students to this
higher degree of problem solving skills than ever before with the same basic system that
has been used traditionally since the industrial revolution. Schools are still set up to
produce students that can memorize facts, can absorb information and regurgitate
factoids, but have no real skills when it comes to applying their knowledge to real world
problems.

The problem facing science educators was neatly surmised by the popular

scientist Carl Sagan when he quipped

“We've arranged a civilization in which the most crucial elements profoundly
depend on science and technology. We have also arranged things so that almost no
one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster. We
might get away with it for a while, but sooner or later this combustible mixture of

ignorance and power is going to blow up in our faces” (Sagan 1995).

Sagan frames the central problem that should motivate all secondary high school
teachers, but unfortunately the motivation for both student and teacher in the modern
science classroom has become increasingly based on performance on standardized tests
and meeting state standards. That is to say, public schools are motivated by standardized
test score data. The focus is placed on the memorization of science mostly in the form of
unrelated facts, and not the process of science.

For example, the administration of Western School District (where this study was
performed), has embraced a popular school management program called Professonal
Learning Communities (or PLCs) (DuF our 2005). The impetus for this PLC movement
is to place the focus on student learning rather than on what is being presented in the
classroom. The idea is that you can improve student comprehension with a systematic
cycle in place. A learning cycle is implemented under PLC where a lesson is presented,
the students are assessed to determine what was learned, and then based on assessment
data, students are remediated‘or moved ahead in a systematic way (ibid).

The problem with this approach is the assessment piece of the learning cycle. The
PLC method is based on accepted research (eg. Bratt 2010) and what is currently
accepted as educational best practice (cg. Bransford 2000). However, assuming a student
has learned or not learned a scientific concept based on performance on a standardized
test is not giving a full picture of the student’s ability to use the science. DuFour’s PLC
program is just one example of school reform philosophies that have gained acceptance
as educational best-practice in recent years.

Similarly, in the book Classroom Instruction That Works. Marzano et al. (2001)

showed that traditional teaching techniques such as lecture and note taking result in

student achievement according to their metrics. They point out that techniques such as
having students identify similarities and differences between concepts and home work
practice show an increase in student achievement between pre- and post-tests of 45% and
28% respectively.

While these findings are impressive and are no doubt a critical part of educational
best-practice, the problem for the science teacher is the definition of “student
achievement”. Does that mean the student has memorized the definition of various
scientific theories and terms? Does that count as an understanding of science? Does it
mean the student could use the knowledge to design future experiments or solve future
problems? The unique problem the high school science teacher faces that other
secondary teachers do not grapple with (at least not in the same way) is the definition of
student achievement. Increase in student learning (DuF our 2005) or a classroom policy
that “Works” (Marzano 2001) are measuring efficacy based on tests that measure
students’ acquisition of knowledge. But science is more than acquisition of knowledge or
memorization of factoids. It is a process and a way of thinking. Although Marzano is
very thorough in presenting analysis of his findings, the definition of exactly what
“student achievement” means is a little hazy. Classroom Instruction That Works defines
student achievement based on performance on “Higher Level Questioning Strategies”.

Marzano’s (1998) research gives examples of these higher level questioning
strategies. The assessment strategies Marzano uses to back up his research are indeed
deeper probing questions and would take a level of sophistication and synthesis on the
student’s part in order to answer effectively. However, after reviewing these assessment

strategies, a science teacher is still lefi feeling that the student has not “done science”

after successfully addressing the assessment questions. Few researchers argue that
acquisition of rote knowledge is not important in the science classroom (and
consequently philosophies like DuFour’s PLC program, or Marzano, Pickering, &
Pollock’s Classroom Instruction Th_at Works should be a part of best-practice when
teaching science), but research and opinion support that increased scores on assessments
do not give a complete picture of student understanding in a high school science
classroom. For example, Tchudi and Lafer (1996) describe traditional assessment as “a
game that engages the student in guessing what the teacher wants rather than
demonstrating the best they can do”, and Pigliucci (2007) states that a science classroom
that is expected to conform completely with traditional accepted educational paradigms

(such as Marzano’s or DuFour’s);

“conveys the message that science is as boring as reading the yellow pages (which
it is, if one simply enumerates all the factoids that are contained in the typical
textbook); second, it unfortunately reinforces the idea that science is all about
results that are somehow — and without discussion of scientific methodology
might as well be magically — generated by people who dress in white coats and
engage in mysterious activities. Little appreciation for the process of science is
developed, and with each generation, we are directly responsible for rearing and
educating citizens who will have no idea, for example, why global warming might
be a threat and, most importantly, how we know that it is (or is not)” (Pigliucci

2007)

Pigliucci’s opinion reflects the lack of connectedness of classroom content to
what students observe every day. This is very frustrating to the high school science
teacher. Many teachers attempt to use hands-on activities and labs to show students that
science is a process and not a memorization of facts.

Hands-on lab activities are a more engaging way of teaching science, but still do
not encourage the students to think through scientific problems. Most often, the
laboratory experience in a high school science classroom involves students following a
written set of directions in order to arrive at a predestined conclusion. These types of
hands-on activities are really iust another method of delivering wrote-memorization of
material. They may have value, but again, like Marzano’s and DuFour’s strategies, they
fall short of having students experience the process of doing science. Pigliucci (2007)

continues;

“a shift in emphasis from traditional classroom lectures to “hands-on” activities in
which students manipulate objects and perform experiments. Moving away from
lectures and getting students to actually do things is an excellent idea, but the way
the hands-on approach is often implemented, especially at the pre-college level,

may actually produce worse results than the traditional lecture approach”

The hands-on laboratory exercises have a part in the science classroom, but they
should be recognized for what they are: practice with research techniques, but not
actually acquiring new information though observation and testing of hypotheses — not

doing science.

Secondary students often express frustration, saying that both laboratory exercises
and lecture material are reviews of already understood phenomenon. The combination of
this with inadequate measures of student understanding leads to boredom in the
classroom. Controversial writer, researcher, and New York Teacher of the Year John

Taylor Gatto (2001) commented that in his 30+ years of classroom experience;

“Boredom was everywhere in my world, and if you asked the kids, as I often did,
why they felt so bored, they always gave the same answers: they said the work
was stupid, that it made no sense, that they already knew it. They said they
wanted to be doing something real, not just sitting around. They said teachers
didn’t seem to know much about their subjects and clearly weren’t interested in
learning more. And the kids were right: their teachers were every bit as bored as

they were”

The good news is that science is naturally engaging to students... if they are
allowed to do real science. The system of education has just tried to place constraints on
the exploration of science. These constraints have grown out of good research and good
reasoning. But the current secondary educational system neglects the fact that science is
a process, not an acquisition of factoids.

The problem a science teacher then faces is: how can one teach using research-
based best-practice (e. g., Bransford 2000) while still allowing students to see science as
an engaging, systematic way to answer questions about the unknown phenomenon that

surround the students (and are going on inside their own bodies) every day? My analysis

of what has been described above leads to the following summary of the shortcomings of
the current secondary high school classroom:
From the policy rn_akers / curriculum developers pegective:

l. A logical system of traditional teaching techniques exists that is research based
and produces results. It is difficult to argue that these traditional techniques should not be
used.

2. The results (student performance) from these traditional techniques are
quantifiable and easily assessable using standardized tests. This makes the traditional
system attractive to school administrators and government policy makers that need to
gage performance in order to make funding decisions. The simplicity of the traditional
science classroom make policy and curriculum designers resistant to new means of
engaging students in science.

From the leamer/student perspective:

1. Under these traditional parameters, science becomes stagnant and boring for
the student. The emphasis is taken away from creative problem solving and the focus is
on memorization and performance on standardized tests.

2. The student entering the professional world does not understand the problem-
solving aspect of science because secondary education places no emphasis on it.

3. As a society, we are at a critical moment in history where we need more
students leaving high school interested in science and talented at problem solving.

Traditional public school science classrooms are producing the opposite.

Rationale: Description of Problem Based Learning at the secondary level

Based on this information and my analysis, is there a solution to this multi-faceted
problem that benefits the teacher, student, and policy makers? Can we keep students
interested in science while still allowing them to perform adequately on standardized
tests? And, perhaps most importantly, can we prepare students to do authentic science
and acquire new skills on their own in our quickly changing economy?

It is expected an educational approach called Problem-based Learning (or PBL)
may hold some of the answers. PBL is a “learner-centered approach that empowers
learners to conduct research, integrate theory and practice, and apply knowledge and
skills to develop a viable solution to a defined problem” (Savery 2006). The focus is
placed on the learner and the learner is expected to explore a complex problem.

Gallagher & Stepien (1993) hit many key points that make up a PBL.

“Through Problem-Based Learning, students learn how to use an
interactive process of assessing what they know, identifying what they need to
know, gathering information, and collaborating on the evaluation of hypothesis in
light of the data they have collected. Their teachers act as coaches and tutors:
probing findings, hypotheses, and conclusions: sharing their thinking when
students need a model: and attending to metacognitive growth by way of “time

out” discussions and how thinking is progressing”

The general structure of a PBL technique can be summarized from work done by
John Savery (2006), MacDonald (2004), and Margaret Waterman (1997). This step by

step process (Table 1) formed the backbone for the PBL process used in this study.

Table 1: PBL Process

 

Students are presented with an ill-
structured problem

Students collaborate and share previous
knowledge of the topic. They may

Step 2 develop testable hypotheses at this stage,
or may just brainstorm ideas to learn
more about.

Students determine what they already
know, and what they need to find out in
order to make a more educated
hypothesis.

Students research the unknown (research
published information or experiment)
Students bring newly acquired
knowledge back to the collaborative
group. The group identifies what is now
known and refines the hypothesis.
Students go back to step 3 and continue
Step 6 the process (which becomes cyclical at
this point).

The teacher plays a complex role in the PBL cycle. They coach the collaborative

Step 1

 

 

Step 3

 

Step 4

 

Step 5

 

 

 

 

 

interplay, direct the discussion towards the goals of the curriculum, and sometime offer
expertise to speed the progress of the students (although this requires caution on the
teachers part. PBL is ineffective if the process is not student directed). The teacher also
needs to assess progress of all students and make adjustments accordingly.

The process ends with a well developed hypothesis regarding the initial problem.
Unlike similar approaches such as case-studies or inquiry problems in a didactic

classroom, the PBL conclusion does not end with a “solution” to the original problem,

but rather a more refined and educated understanding of the parts that make up the
theories and postulates (Savery 2006). The goal of the process is a refined and logic
based hypothesis — possibly more than one hypothesis — developed by the students and
their collaborative work.

Developing the PBL problem is challenging. This problem “must be ill—structured
and allow free inquiry” (Savery 2006). The term “ill-structured” seems odd to one that is
not familiar with PBL, but it means a good PBL problem should be inconclusive. It
should be a problem that may have more than one explanation. It should also be an
actual problem; one that has not been sufficiently explained completely by current

scientific understanding (ibid).

How PBL addresses the shortcomings of the traditional classroom.

Unlike traditional teaching methods that segment secondary educational content
into disciplines, PBL encourages the student to use information from multiple areas. Lee
and Ward (2002) note that “few problems facing our society are aligned within
disciplines” and their research goes on to find that Problem Based Learning at the
secondary level produces students with critical thinking skills. The PBL student sees
science as an interdisciplinary method of solving problems. This is a contrast to the
traditional method commonly consisting of notes, lecture, textbook readings and
reinforcement assignments that perpetuate the impression that science is a memorization
of compartmentalized factoids (ibid).

PBL moves student learning in the secondary classroom away from rote

memorization and towards critical thinking and problem solving skills, but a reality of the

10

traditional school settings is student achievement measured by standardized tests. From a
school administrators perspective, any educational tactic implemented in a classroom
must produce favorable student performance on standardized tests. Some researchers
suggest that PBL students may not perform as well on these traditional forms of
assessment. Examples include Lee and Ward (2002) and more recently, Clark et al.
(2006) in which the conclusion is reached that PBL produces no benefit to students. But
in a direct response to Clark et al. (2006), Hmelo-Silver et al. (2007) states “evidence
suggests that these approaches [PBL] can foster deep and meaningful learning as well as
significant gains in student achievement on standardized tests.” and goes on to site PBL
studies at the secondary level that support her opinion and invalidate Clark’s et a1. (2006)
findings. Still more research shows little difference in student performance on traditional
tests between groups receiving PBL instruction and groups receiving traditional, lecture-
based instruction. Examples at the post-secondary level include Albanese & Mitchell
(1993). Even more relevant to this study, Burris (2005) also found very little difference
in test scores between groups of secondary PBL-treatment students and secondary
students receiving more traditional treatments. In a study comparing traditional and
problem-based instruction in high school economics, Mergendoller, Maxwell, and
Bellisimo (2006) found that across multiple teachers and schools, students in the PBL
course gained more knowledge than the students in a traditional course.

Contrary to the findings of PBL’s detractors (eg. Clark et al. 2006), PBL students
do perform comparably, and in some cases even favorably, with non-PBL students.
These findings are not surprising when one starts to compare PBL methodology to other

popular educational paradigms such as DuFour’s Professional Learning Communities or

11

Marzano’s Classroom Strjtegies That Work because, like those philosophies, PBL is
learner-centered and the learners will need to research and become fluent with basic
scientific principals in order to solve a problem. This allows PBL to fit into a traditional
curriculum framework, use some traditional methods, and still make progress towards the
standardized test goals of administrators and government policy makers.

Another difference between PBL and the traditional didactic approach is the
student perception of the content being presented. From the student perspective, PBL
allows students to do science. Hmelo-Silver et al. (2007) and Burris (2005) both
concluded that PBL students showed more interest in the material being covered likely
due to the nature of student responsibility for the material covered. In an older Hmelo
study (1994) she explains that the traditional didactic approach leads students to what she
called “data based reasoning”, while PBL produced students more fluent with
“Hypothesis based reasoning”. Data based reasoning is directional and memorization
based. If “A” is true, than “B” is the conclusion. Hypothesis-driven reasoning, on the
other hand, takes into account many factors and observations and then leads the student
to explore these possibilities. A hypothesis-driven line of reasoning may look more like;
A female cat has a tortoiseshell coat coloring pattern. This could possibly be because she
is a chimera, or she is genetically abnormal due to an environmental influence, or
different X chromosome genes are being expressed in different regions.

This increase in hypothesis-driven reasoning addresses the problems faced from
the student perspective in a traditional classroom. The PBL group in the Hmelo (1994)

study shows a fluid understanding of scientific problems, not a stagnate memorization of

12

factoids. The hypothesis-driven knowledge is considered more flexible and useful in a
changing world.

While Hmelo (1994) does not elaborate on student enthusiasm, it is hard to
imagine that students in a PBL setting would not be more pleased and engaged in
learning. This assumption is confirmed by several studies. For example, Savery and
Duffy (1995) found that “learner motivation increases when responsibility for the
solution to the problem and the process rests with the learner”. Ward and Lee (2002) also
found increased student enthusiasm based on student attendance comparisons between
PBL and non-PBL classes. PBL groups showed attendance rates consistently over 80%
and traditional classes covering the same material consistently at attendance levels below
80%. Student apathy is alleviated in a PBL setting because students are not memorizing
science, they are approaching problems as a scientist would.

In addition to more flexible knowledge and more motivation to gain that
knowledge, some research suggests that learners in a PBL environment benefit from
unintended effects of the PBL method. For example, many state standards (including the
Michigan High School Content Expectations) include inquiry skills as one of the
benchmarks all students are expected to master. Students in a PBL environment would
be very familiar with inquiry based skills. Inquiry involves students generating
hypotheses and using observation and experimental design to test them. These inquiry
skills are a necessary imbedded part of a PBL.

Another unintended bonus for students in a PBL classroom would be team
working skills. Collaboration is a key part of the PBL process. In a traditional

classroom, progress is made when an assignment is completed. In a PBL classroom,

13

progress is made when a new idea is proposed and can then be researched, manipulated,
and debated by the other members of the group. The PBL model of team work is more
reflective of the workforce students are supposedly preparing for (Savery 2006).

Comparable (and perhaps superior) standardized test performance, critical
thinking skills, more motivation, and team working skills are goals most secondary
teachers strive for. The research mentioned above shows that a PBL unit has the
potential to produce all of these outcomes at the secondary level. PBL has the capacity to
solve the shortcomings that exist in the traditional secondary science classroom. The
research suggests that PBL will be a win-win situation for public school science

classrooms.

Adapting PBL to the High School Classroom

Problem-based learning is an attractive technique to use in a high school science
classroom because it can appease many of the parties involved in secondary education.
However, there are some complications in using PBL at the high school level. These
need to be addressed when using PBL at the secondary level and will be a primary
concern in the implementation of this study.

One large problem is motivating the high school student to engage in the process.
“If teaching with PBL were as simple as presenting the learners with a “problem” and
students could be relied upon to work consistently at a high level of cognitive self-
monitoring and self-regulation, then many teachers would be taking early retirement”

(Savery 2006). In a medical school or even undergraduate classroom, the student is

14

typically highly motivated and invested in their education. This may not be the case with
a high school student.

Historically, PBL was not developed with the high school classroom in mind.
Problem-based learning was developed by several medical schools and colleges over the

last several decades. It is described by Boud and Feletti (1997) as having:

“Evolved from innovative health sciences curricula introduced in North
America over 30 years ago. Medical education, with its intensive pattern of basic
science lectures followed by an equally exhaustive clinical teaching programme,
was rapidly becoming an ineffective and inhumane way to prepare students, given
the explosion in medical information and new technology and the rapidly

changing demands of future practice.” (Boud & Feletti 1997).

Like modern day high schools, medical schools were seeing that traditional
techniques were preparing students for memorizing how to use current technology and
not how to dynamically incorporate and use new technology and information as it
became available. Because the PBL was developed for medical students, the target
audience in much of the PBL literature is highly motivated, highly educated, mature
students. The high school teacher is dealing with a different target audience that often
lacks motivation.

Another complication may present itself because PBL also relies heavily on
literature and experimental research. Because traditional educational techniques do not

emphasize research and student synthesis of knowledge, it is expected that a high school

15

student will need to be instructed how to do scholarly research. This will require some
prerequisite instruction time. Fortunately, some difficulties concerning students’ research
skills may be alleviated due to progress in information technology. Now is the time to re-
examine the feasibility of PBL in the high school classroom. Access to high speed
intemet is becoming more and more ubiquitous. We live in “interesting times- students
can now access massive amounts of information that was unheard of a decade ago”
(Savery 2006).

One worry is that with so much information at their disposal, and the limited
research skills of high school students, it will be difficult to get students to focus on the
major goals of the PBL unit without getting lost in miniscule details of the problem or
wandering away from the focus problem entirely. An article in the Journal of
Educational Leadership suggest using “post hole” problems as a way to course correct. A
post hole problem is described as smaller questions that can be put into the collaborative
problem solving effort by the instructor. These post hole problems serve to redirect the
flow of information without putting the teacher back in the role of “information giver”,
ensuring that the PBL unit still focuses on student learning rather than the teacher
supplying all of the information to araive at the conclusion.

A final major concern facing an educator wishing to implement PBL at the
secondary level may be the constraints of the typical high school schedule and classroom.
PBL requires time to do research, time to collaborate, and time to compile information.
This is difficult to do in a fifty-four minute period and requires careful planning in the
implementation of this study or with any effort to place a PBL curriculum in a traditional

secondary setting.

16

Class size may also be a problem. Lohman and Finkelstein (2000) suggest that

collaborative PBL groups larger than eight individuals show a dramatic drop in self-
motivated learning. Their research also found that student reflections on the PBL

experience was far more favorable when in small and medium sized collaborative groups.

In a typical high school classroom approaching 30 (or more) students, group size will

need to be a consideration.

Rationale for implementing PBL in a high school anatomy class as a way to teach bone

and muscle physiology:
In order to ease some of the complications that can arise from implementing PBL

at the secondary level, this study will use a class that has some parallels with medical
school classes were the PBL concept was developed. Biological science lends itself to
developing ill-structured problems, and a class with a focus on human Anatomy and

Physiology will help make a compelling problem to frame student learning.

Al SO, it was given much consideration that the selected class for this study gave the
t"E'ElCI‘Ier the flexibility to use extra class time and a more motivated segment of the student
bodY. For these reasons, an elective Anatomy and Physiology class at Western High

S cl71()ol in Parma, Michigan was selected for the site of this study. The curriculum for this

<: l as S is flexible and set by the teacher. It covers all of human anatomy over the course of

a
fill 1 school year. There are no state content expectations to meet.
It is expected that the increased flexibility and time afforded by the structure of

111
e Ahatomy and Physiology class will make the adoption of a PBL approach go

17

smoothly. It should also be noted that PBL takes some talent and adjustment on the
teacher’s part. As discussed earlier, the teacher’s role changes from presenter of
information to facilitator of learning. It is more of a coaching role than a teaching role
and will no doubt take some adjustment (Waterman 1997 & Savery 2006). For this
reason, a course the teacher was comfortable with and had taught for many years was

selected so that knowledge of the material would not be an issue and the teacher could

focus on developing his PBL facilitator skills.
Bone and muscle physiology was the specific unit chosen for this study for

several reasons. First, it contains some of the most complex physiology covered in
comse. For example, students have a difficult time understanding the role of calcium
ions as both a structural element in bone physiology and a chemical component of the
muscle contraction process. Homeostasis of calcium ion concentration in the body is one
continuous process involving bones and muscles, but students often have a difficult time
making this connection because a traditional approach in an Anatomy and Physiology
C l ass often teaches the two systems (bones and muscle) as two separate chapters or units.
A PBL approach to the same unit will break down these divisions and encourage students
to gather information from sources other than the specific “unit” they are covering. By
i ts nature, PBL approaches Anatomy and Physiology in a fundamentally different way

that?! the traditional compartmentalized body systems presented in the chapters of a text

1: 0k. The interconnected nature of the entire body can be emphasized by this approach.
Another reason bone and muscle physiology was the focus of this study was the

a t t I o
empt to address the issue of student motivation. As discussed earlier, PBL orrgrnated

in
lliedical schools and the target audience was highly-motivated medical students. PBL

18

fosters more student interest, but also requires some level of interest to get the

collaboration and research started. High school students may lack the drive and interest
to explore the ill-structured problem with any depth and drive unless they see relevance
to their lives. Since Western High School’s Anatomy and Physiology class typically
attracts a high percentage of student athletes (specifically many members of the cross-

country team), it is expected that a unit on bone and muscle physiology may intrigue

athletes who use, and consequently frequently injure, their bones and muscles.

Another reason the relationship between the skeletal and muscular systems is the
focus of this study is because of the many fundamental physiological and biological
concepts and ideas that the students may be exposed to during the course of the PBL unit.

The fundamental factors include cellular respiration, cell growth and repair, hormone

signaling, water chemistry, and osmosis & diffusion. An understanding of these concepts

Wi l I carry over to the other body systems that will be covered throughout the remainder

o f the year.
Lastly, bone and muscle anatomy and physiology was chosen because some

aspects of these systems are still mysteries to the scientific community. The basic
anatomy and physiology of bones and muscles is well documented and fairly simple, but
i nj lilies and homeostatic mechanisms of bones and muscle may involve cell signaling,

transduction pathways, transcription factors, cell cycle control, and cellular nutrient and

aSte management that are still somewhat mysterious in medical science (eg. McCabe
2 O O 7). Basing a PBL unit on truly as-of-yet unknown or unclear phenomenon is key to

making a good PBL ill-structured problem. One of the cornerstones of the PBL method

19

is that students are able to do actual research on topics that are of current interest to the

scientific community.

The science and the goals of the unit
At the end of the PBL skeletal and muscle anatomy and physiology unit, students
should be able to describe that bones are made of a matrix composed of living cells,
protein filaments, and calcium carbonate. These bones are not static and change in
response to stress placed on them. This change in bone physiology is due to active cells
Ii ving in the osteon of all bones known as osteoblasts and osteoclasts. These cells are
responsible for laying down new bone matrix in areas receving more stress and breaking
down bone matrix (releasing Ca2+ ions into the blood) in areas of low stress respectively.
The action of the osteoblasts results in new bone tissue that form an organized structure
known as an osteon that makes up the basic physiology of all bones. Students should
a1 so know that on the macroscopic scale, long bones have distinctive regions with
Vat’ying densities and different functions. The epiphysis of the bones are made of low
density spongy bone that serves as a fat storage tissue as well as being a large surface
fac i litating articulation of joints. The diaphysis of bones are made of dense compact
bone and contain a cavity filled with bone marrow where blood stem cells are produced.
At the end of this unit, students should also be able to identify the different types
0 f l"Iliascle present in the human body, with an emphasis on the skeletal muscle that pulls
on the skeletal levers (bones). Students will need to know that the muscle tissue is made
Of bundled bundles of muscle fibers (cells) that are held together with connective proteins

e extra—cellular matrix. These connective tissues are contlnuous With the tendon at

20

the ends of skeletal muscle units, which are continuous with the periosteum that
surrounds bones. Students should know that an electrical impulse from the nervous
system triggers the release of a neurotransmitter at the neuro-muscular junction which
diffuses into the t-tubule of the muscle fiber. The t-tubule allows diffusion of the
neurotransmitter to the calcium ion pumps of the sarcoplasmic reticulum. Calcium ions

diffuse from the sarcoplasmic reticulum into the sarcoplasm where it causes a

configuration change between tropomyosin and actin fibers allowing myosin to ratchet up

the actin filaments pulling z-lines together. This results in muscle fiber contraction and

movement of the body. Energy for the ratchet mechanism (as well as for active transport

of Ca2+ ions and other cell functions) is supplied by ATP produced during cellular

respiration.
This is the minimum amount of material students will be expected to know upon

the conclusion of the PBL unit. It is expected that most students will go above and
beyond the basic nuts and bolts of how these two systems work and interact. It is the job
of the teacher to make sure these basics are covered within the parameters of the PBL

unit and that students do not spend too much time and effort exploring non-essential parts

0 f bone and muscle physiology.
The hypothesis of this study is that PBL can be successfully implemented in a

hlgh school classroom, leading to an increase in student understanding that can be
Le“"5i-Sllred with traditional forms of assessment. Use of PBL will reflect other benefits to

Student learning (such as critical thinking and team-working skills discussed above) that

3.1- .
e l'ess tangible than test scores.

21

Relating rational to research work on-campus.

Research at Michigan State University during the Summer of 2009 included
investigation of possible solutions to frustrations experienced in the traditional science
classroom. Once it was established the PBL may be an effective method of modifying

the traditional techniques to alleviate student and teacher frustration, much time was
spent learning how to construct an effective PBL unit.

Expert advice on how to effectively administer a PBL unit was sought from
members of the Michigan State University faculty. I met with Jan Eberhardt and Dr.
Mc Cabe. Their expertise dealing with PBL and Anatomy and Physiology respectively,

showed methods and pitfalls to be aware of in order to successfully implement the PBL
unit.

Time was also spent in the Summer of 2009 developing the goals of the unit, the

PB L ill-constructed problems to guide the unit, and hands on activities that allowed
Students to do more than base all of their research on published articles. It was important
to have activities that allowed students to explore their own questions and gather and
analyze data that they produced.

Exploring efficacy of traditional methods such as lecture, note taking, and popular

reCent educational philosophies and comparing those methods with PBL methods made

up the remainder of the time spent researching this study.

esearch Setting

P
Ct'T'T'za/Spring Arbor MI and Western School District

22

Parma and Spring Arbor are small, neighboring towns in Mid-Michigan on the
we st side of Jackson County. At the time of the 2000 census, 907 people lived within the
town of Parma with 8% of people having attainment of a Bachelor of Arts or higher, per
cap ita income of $16,483, and a poverty status of 1.8%. Median home value in Parma
was $85,500 (census.gov). The town of Parma is a farming community that is
experiencing financial distress as family farming becomes a less viable source of income.
At the time of the 2000 census, 3110 people lived within the town of Spring Arbor with
24% of people having attainment of a Bachelor of Arts or higher, per capita income of
$2 1 , 5 87, and a poverty status of 9.2%. Median home value in Spring Arbor was
$ 1 20,200 (census.gov). Spring Arbor is home to a small liberal arts college (Spring
Arbor University). Western School District serves these two communities providing K-
1 2 education. There are three elementary schools, one middle school, and one traditional
high school and one alternative high school. Today the district provides educational
SerVices for nearly 2800 students, employs approximately 325 people within the district,
and is supported by an annual budget of approximately $23,000,000. Western High

School houses grades 9-12 and has a student body of approximately 900 students

( We Stern School District 2010).

This study was conducted in an Anatomy and Physiology class at Western High
S(31-3001. This class is offered to eleventh and twelfth grade students who attained a grade
of 8 7% or higher in 10th grade Biology and have taken or are concurrently taking

Q1Fletnistry. 24 students participated in the study. 19 students were female and 5 were

tale. Grade point averages ranged from 2.3 to 4.0 for these students (Western School

District 2010).

23

1m plementation
This study was implemented in the fall of the 2009-2010 school year. Before
implementation of the bones and muscles PBL unit, students had experienced two units

taught using traditional methods including lecture, note taking, textbook reading
assignments, and reinforcement homework assignments. These units included an
introduction to human anatomy and physiology and anatomical terminology, and a short
review of cellular biology. It was important that students have experience with

traditional methods leading into the PBL unit so comparisons could be made by students

when answering survey questions.
Immediately preceding implementation of the PBL unit, students required

instruction on how to do library and intemet research by the school’s librarian. She

helped students with researching intemet academic journal articles and showed students

how to use resources for accessing primary research sources through the high school
I ibrary. This mini-unit took three days.

Th e Muscle, Bones, and Neuromuscular Junction PBL Unit

All students (n = 24) in the Anatomy and Physiology class participated in the
Study. Students were put into three collaborative groups of eight students each. Effort
as made to evenly distribute males and females, student athletes, and grade point

verages Wlthln these collaborative groups in order to end up Wlth heterogeneous groups

The largest grOUps that would still allow effective PBL (8 students according to Lohman

Id Finkelstein, 2000) were used in order to cut down on the number of groups the

i
rlStI'uctor would need to meet with in a class period.

24

The unit was split into three sections. Each section began with a pre-test, and
concluded with a post-test. Within each section, there were two PBL problems for a total
0 f six PBL discussions. Each discussion began with “4-W time”. This process involved

the class reading the problem all together, then they would collaborate in their groups of

8 students, and then they listed as a class on a large white board:

1 . What is the problem(s) we are trying to solve?

2. What information is in the problem?
3 . What do we bring as prior knowledge?
4. What do we need to find out?

At the conclusion of 4-W time, the students decided what groups would research
Which topics, and within the groups, each individual would then be assigned specific
Parts of the topic to research and bring back to the group the next day. The following
day, students brought their research back to their group, the group would confer,
c()ITlImre, and debate their findings and sources, and then add their information to the
Ori ginal list on the white board. The day after 4-w time generally involved a lot of

d1 Seussion and generated new questions. A second research and discussion day was

1110 luded for a total of three class days and two nights of research completed for each

Que Stion.
Within each of the three problems was one hands-on activity. These activities
ere designed to supplement the PBL unit and were implemented at different times
(1
epending on the goal of the activity. The muscle lab was implemented at the end of the

I11“"Scle PBL as a summary of what the students were expected to learn, the bone lab was

25

used as an introduction to basic bone anatomy and physiology and was implemented at
the beginning of the bone section, and the neuromuscular junction lab was used as a part
of the 4-W research and occurred in the middle of the research and discussion of Problem

#3.

Once the problem had been sufficiently explored, students were required to write
a summary of each two-part problem. Table 2 outlines the specific sequence used to

implement this new unit:

Table 2: Implementation Timeline

 

Time Activity in Class

 

Day 1 and oWhat is PBL Lecture

2 oPre-Test Muscles

 

Day 3 oProblem #1 Part a: 4-W time

 

Day 4 and oStudents report what they found out to their group

5 oStudents generate new questions about Problem #1 Part a

 

eStudents summarize their findings reguarding Problem #1 Part a

 

eBegin Muscle Contraction Lab in order to experience their findings

 

[ Day 7 OFinish Muscle Contraction Lab

 

/ Day 8 oProblern #1 Part b: 4-W time

 

 

OStudents report what they found out to their group

OStudents generate new questions about Problem #1 Part b

 

 

 

26

Table 2 Continued

OStudents summarize their findings reguarding Problem #1 Part b

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Day 10
oAssign summary writing assignment for Problem #1
ORecap and summarize group findings in preperation for muscle section
Day 11
test
Day 12 OPost-Test muscles
Day 13 ePre-Test Bones
and 14 oProblem #2 part a: 4-w time
Day 15
oBone lab and discuss what it means to Problem #2 part a
and 16
Day 17 OStudents report what they found out reguarding Problem #2 part a
and 18 OStudents generate new questions about Problem #2 part a
OStudents summarize their findings reguarding Problem #2 part a
Day 19
oProblem #2 part b 4-w time
Day 20 OContinue Problem #2 part b 4-w time
OStudents report what they found out reguarding Problem #2 part b
Day 21
oStudents generate new questions about Problem #2 part b
oStudents summarize their findings reguarding Problem #2 part b
Day 22
OAssign summary writing assignment for Problem #2
ORecap and summarize group findings in preperation for bone section
Day 23

test

 

27

 

Table 2 Continued

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Day 24 0Post-Test Bone
OPre-Test Neuromuscular Juction
Day 25
OProblem #3 part a: 4-w time
OStudents report what they found out to their group
Day 26
oStudents generate new questions about Problem #3 Part a
OStudents summarize their findings reguarding Problem #3 part a
Day 27
oProblem #3 part b 4-w time
OContinue problem #3 part b 4-w time
Day 28 OBegin Neuromuscular Junction Lab
OAssign summary writing assignment for Problem #3
oFinish Neuromuscular Junction Lab
Day 29
oStudents report what they found out to their group
oRecap and summarize group findings in preperation for neromuscular
Day 30
junction section test
Day 31 oPost-test Neuromuscular Junction
Assessments

As indicated in the implementation timeline, the PBL unit was split into three

different problems. (See Appendices II-A through II-F). Within each of the three PBL

pro blems, student comprehension was assessed in three different ways. These

asse Ssment techniques will be used as the measure of the effectiveness of the PBL unit.

28

 

1. Mdent PBL discyssion and in-class participation

Students were assessed based on what they brought to the discussion. This was
not a formal graded assignment, but during the discussion and collaboration time,
students were asked to participate and add ideas to the board. The teacher / facilitator

involved students in the discussion by calling on them. Because each of the groups was
working on separate parts of the overall problem, there was plenty of information for
each individual to contribute. The teacher / facilitator made suggestions as to how to
gather more and better information based on strength and relevance of what students
were bringing to the discussion. In this manner, the in-class discussion acted as a fluid
process of assessment and immediate feedback. A rubric was implemented in an attempt
to quantify student discourse and participation. The rubric was filled out by the teacher
in his notes as he facilitated and guided the discussions. For each of the six PBL

problems, the 4-W time was evaluated using the following rubric:

Students were disinterested. The teacher needed to call on individuals to

1:.

facilitate any sort of discussion.

2 = Students were somewhat interested in researching and discussing the topic. The
teacher needed to call on some individuals to get them to speak or step in to quiet

Some individuals so all students may have a chance to speak.

3 §
Students were very engaged and motivated to speak. The teacher played a small

r
ole in the student-directed discussion and collaboration.

29

2. Tests and quizzes: Appendices III-A through III-F

The second form of assessment was formal tests and quizzes (Appendices III-A
through III-F). Both pre-test and post-test versions of these questions were given at the

beginning and end of each problem-framed section of the PBL unit.

Because part of this project was to gauge students’ performance on traditional
form of testing when using a PBL process, these quizzes were crafted to assess student’s
comprehension of factoids. The tests and quizzes attempted to reflect the kinds of
questions that might be seen on a standardized test. Many of the questions were the same
or similar to questions that have been used in this class in years past, where traditional,
no n-PBL methods were used to deliver the information. The hypothesis is that PBL will

yi eld the same or similar outcomes to traditional methods on standard forms of

as se ssment.

The pre-tests for all three sections (muscular system, skeletal system, and
l“let—Iromuscular junction) were multiple choice tests. The first two sections had ten
mUItiple choice questions each. The neuromuscular junction section pre-test consisted of
five multiple choice questions. The post-tests consisted of identical multiple choice
qUeStions to the pre-test and also included additional questions and short answer
re Spouses. Students gain in comprehension was measured by comparing pre and post
PBL unit scores. Multiple choice questions were assigning a pass / fail (I /0) grade for

ach Item. The essay responses 1n the post tests were graded usmg the followmg rubric:

30

0 = Student did not attempt to answer or shows absolutely no knowledge of the
topic.
1 = Student used some appropriate vocabulary, but failed to make logical

connections and showed very little understanding of the subject.

2 = Student had a partially correct or logical answer, but still maintained some
misconceptions.

3 = Student answered correctly, but more support or information could have been

given to show complete understanding of the topic.

= Student answered correctly and completely supported their reasoning.

3- Hands-0n Laboratory Explorations: Appendices IV-A through IV-D

The third form of assessment was homework questions the students were to
com plete using information they gathered during laboratory exploration activities.
Questions associated with the lab activities were designed to assess higher order thinking.
The Se assessments aim at a student’s hypothesis-based thinking skills. These questions

are included in the Lab packets (Appendices IV-A through IV-C).

The three laboratory activities were revised and designed to be inquiry-based allowing

udents to dlscover information pertaining to their PBL problem. It was expected that

31

these activities would supplement student research and lead to a deeper understanding of

the PBL problem the students were working through.

Laboratory A: Controlled Muscle Fatigue: Appendix IV— A

Laboratory 1 (Appendix IV — A) was an adaptation of a traditional muscle
contraction lab. In this exercise, students fatigued small muscle groups and analyzed

what happed to on over-worked muscle group in terms of ability to repeat the contraction

repeatedly. The major foci of this lab included:

# l : Students were to generate a hypothesis concerning trends they observed in their data.
It 'was expected this experience would help students better understand what factors play a

part in muscle fatigue and aid them in forming a hypothesis concerning their part-one

P B L problem.
# 2 : Students were expected to understand what a controlled experiment means. By using

an elaborate “muscle isolation box” and two-fingered glove, students movements were
r e Stricted and only the focus muscle group were fatigued. In previous years, a less
controlled lab procedure was used. Students used just a clothes pin and opened and
cl Osed the pin repeatedly. When the students would experience fatigue, they would
c"'lja-t‘lge the position of their arm or finger position, or use more fingers to overcome the

meOmfortable feeling associated with muscle fatigue. This would change the results and

no .
useful data were obtained.

32

By constructing an isolation box and glove (see Apendix IV — B), only two small
muscles in the palm and forearm were used. Western High School’s shop class helped

construct 12 muscle isolation boxes so that teams of two students could perform the lab.

Laboratory B: Bone Anatomy and Density: Appendix I V— C

The bone anatomy and density lab was a new activity developed for this unit. The
focus of this lab is to have students generate an understanding of a long bone’s general
anatomy. Students helped with the preparation of the bone sample. The most
challenging part of this activity was obtaining a long bone. They can be purchased from
biological supply catalogs, but for the size we were after, they were prohibitively
expensive. We considered using a cat forelimb (this Anatomy class concludes the year

with a cat dissection), but we did not want to open a dissection specimen, and the cat

bones would have been too small to produce useful data.

Time was running out and we considered not doing the activity, but then a student
ki 1 led a deer during bow hunting season and brought a forelimb in for the class to use.
We Stripped the limb down to the bone and prepared the Humorous, Radius, and Ulna for
use in the laboratory activity. The size of the bones was perfect and produced fine
r e Sults.

The activity involved analyzing the entire bone and identifying different parts by

colTlparing it to diagrams from their book. The students drew and numbered sections
a .
long the length of the bone and cut the bone into pieces. Each piece of the bone was

a . .
11"11yzed paying attention to how the anatomy differed in dlfferent segments of the bone

33

Finally, the students measured volume of each bone segment using a displacement
method and measured mass of each segment on a triple beam balance. From this
information, density of each segment could be calculated. The anatomy and density
information could then be used in concert with their research to develop a hypothesis

regarding their part #2 PBL problems (appendix II C and D).

Laboratory C: Reaction time and physical activity: Appendix I V - C

This exercise was designed and executed by the students. For the collaborative
part of the third PBL problem (appendix II-E and II-F), the students were presented with
reaction timing equipment and they designed an experiment dealing with muscle fatigue
a11d reaction timing. The focus of this activity was to get students to work like research
scientists. They were given no directions other than the instructions on how to use the

reaction timing equipment and a prompt that they developed from the class discussion.

As a class, they decided to have three different groups do varying levels of
Physical activity and then tested their reaction times. The resulting activity was student

generated and yielded real information that further contributed to the PBL discussion.

Mam Assignment Responses: Appendix V — A through C

Upon the conclusion of each PBL problem, students were to write a response

o
Qtleeming what they had learned from the experience.

34

5. plane)»: Appendix VI

Upon completion of the entire PBL unit, students were asked a series of survey
questions in order to document their thoughts and feelings concerning the PBL technique.
The survey consisted of ten questions related to the hypothesis of this study and students

feelings about the PBL unit. The survey used a 5 point Likert scale to measure student

opinions.

3S

Results I Evaluation

LBL discussion / student generated PBL ideas

The student performance in their discussions was above and beyond what was
expected. The general reaction of the students was overwhelmingly positive. While
these observations are completely subjective, the students’ enthusiasm for the format was
undeniable. During the first 4-W time, students were a little reluctant to discuss the
problem for the first few minutes. But once discussion got started, the problem became
using up class time too quickly. The students wanted more time to discuss and sort out
ideas and information. Students that had not participated in any sort of class discussion

up to this point in the year began to offer information and take part in the collaboration

without the need for teacher prompting.

As discussed in the implementation section, a rubric was developed for assessing

the effectiveness of the 4-W time. However, I found my rubric to be inadequate because
of the overwhelming success of this format. 1’s and 2’s would indicate some reluctance
to participate and teacher intervention would be required to prompt discussion. I
expected to have at least some 1’s and 2’s. But what I found was that as students got
more comfortable with doing research and anticipating how the discussion would
progress, they became more and more tenacious about digging for information and

Coming up with more obscure bits of information to add to the discussion.

As a result of the student’s enthusiasm for the PBL 4-W format, the rubric for this

form of assessment came up with 3’s across the board. A more specific rubric would

have giVen more meaningful results, But the straight 3 ranking for all six problem sets

36

llltl
of 0
the 1
mg

Prol

nee:
“215
it
in
elec
I631

dis

he

does show that the problem, discussion, and student synthesis of information resulted in a
lively discussion with high student participation in all six problem discussions. Examples
of exchanges during the discussions included a rather long and interesting debate about
the importance of magnesium in muscle contraction. Student 3 considered the role of
magnesium ions the most crucial factor in muscle contraction during the discussion of
Problem #1 part b (Appendix II-B). She engaged in a debate with several other students
i n the class and used her research to support her case. This debate continued for nearly a
half hour and touched on nearly every molecule necessary for muscle contraction. In the
end, student 3 conceded that, although she believed (correctly) that magnesium ions are
necessary for normal muscle contractions, it was not likely that a magnesium deficiency
was the culprit of our PBL Problem. Other similar exchanges ensued over the role water
plays in physiology (initiated by student 1), the importance of protein in compact bone
Structure (initiated by student 9), and whether or not sugar was a diuretic or an
electrolyte... or both... or neither (nearly all students had an opinion with some sort of
research to support their view). It was discovered that the most information-dense
discussions usually involved one student feeling ownership of their piece of information

they Were contributing to the discussion and other students showing why that piece was

i nSignificant or less significant to the PBL problem.

WI Assessment Pre and Post Tests and Quizzes

Item Analysis

37

Muscular System Pre-test and Post-test multiple choice assessment: Appendix III-A and

III-B

Students’ gains in performance from pre-test to post-test were impressive.

Students showed a gain in performance on all test items. Table 3 shows the multiple-

choice questions and average student scores on each test item. The data in table 3 were

analyzed comparing the pre-unit and post-unit averages via a paired t-test analysis (two

tailed, df=23) for each item. The t-test showed significant differences in student

responses after completion of the unit, indicated by p-values less than 0.05. The only

question that did not show a significant change in student understanding was question 8

(p—value 0.103), which shows that students missed some information pertaining to the

basic physics of skeletal levers. This makes sense because no one had brought up

skeletal levers yet in the PBL discussiOn time. In past years, multiplication of muscle

contraction distance would have been discussed by this point, but the student-led PBL

unit had not made it to this topic yet. Performance on question 8 shows one limitation to

the PBL format; the pace of the class is controlled by the student led discussion, making

timing of assessment during the unit difficult.

Table 3: Muscular System Pre-test and Post-test Item Analysis (n = 24)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pre-test Post-test
(appendix (appendix Percent
II-C) lI-D) Gain
. Mean Mean (pre-test
Questions Average Average average — p-value

number of number of post test
correct correct average)
answers answers

1. What is ATP? 62.50% 91.67% 29.17% 0.005324572

 

38

Table 3 Continued

2. What is glucose? 54.17% 95.83% 41.66% 0.000492867

 

3. What process is
your body using to
make ATP
molecules from
glucose right now
as you sit?

16.67% 83.3 3% 66.66% 6.82404E-06

 

4. What is a

. 0.00% 79.17% 79.17% 2.6813E-09
neurotransmltter?

 

5. Which is an
example of an
organ that is made
of smooth muscle?

8.33% « 91.67% 83.34% 2.01277E-10

 

6. What is fascia? 12.50% 70.83% 58.33% 6.02561E—05

 

7. Bones give

0.00% 95.83% 95.83% 2.25122E-17
skeletal muscles:

 

8. Your skeletal

,, ,, 4.17% 20.83% 16.66% 0.103462046
levers

 

9. What are the two

0 o 0 -
kinds ofmyofibrils? 45.83/o 100.00/o 54.17/o 2.75028E 05

 

10. All of these
chemicals are
necessary to muscle
contraction besides:

0.00% 62.50% 62.50% 2.56964E-06

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Skeletal Pre-test and Post-test multiple choice assessment: Appendix III-C and III-D

Table 4 shows the multiple-choice questions and average student scores on each
te St item. The data in Table 4 were analyzed comparing the pre-unit and post-unit

averages via a paired t-test analysis (two tailed, df=23) for each item.

Question 8 showed insignificant gain in student comprehension (p-value =.77).
Again, this is due to the structure of the PBL format. Because students had already

I‘eseal‘ched, discussed, and dissected the muscle PBL problem, they had already had

39

discussion regarding tendons. Because of this most students arrived at the bone section
of the unit already knowing what tendons were. There was not much room for

improvement.

Table 4: Skeletal System Pre-test and Post-test Item Analysis (I: = 24)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pre-test Post-test
(appendix (appendix Percent
II-C) II-D) Gain (pre-
Questions Mean Mean “St -value
Average Average average - p
number of number of post test
correct correct average)
answers answers
1. What are the
epiphyses of a 54.17% 91 .67% 37.50% 0.001138944
bone?
2. What is a joint? 83.33% 100.00% 16.67% 0.042765957
3: Whel ‘5 the 50.00% 91 .67% 41.67% 0.000492867
d1aphysrs?
4' What '5 the Bene 70.83% 100.00% 29.17% 0005324572
Marrow?
5' Why ‘10 we have 0.00% 75.00% 75.00% 2.23621E-08
spongy bone?
6. What does an 0 o o
_gs teoblas t do? 29.17 /0 79.17 /0 50.00 /0 7.74499E-05
7- What parts of the
bone contain living 20.83% 95.83% 75.00% 2.23621E-08
cells?
8 . What does a
tendon do? 70.83% 75.00% 4.17% 0.770094577
9. How does the
body respond to a 50.00% 100.00% 50.00% 7.74499E-05
bone fracture?
l 0. Which of the
f0110wing is true of 25.00% 83.33% 58.33% 6.0256lE-05
we anatomy?

 

40

 

Neuromuscular Junction Pre-test and Post-test multiple choice assessment: Appendix III-

E and III-F

Table 5 shows the multiple-choice questions and average student scores on each test item
for this topic. The data in table 5 were analyzed comparing the pre-unit and post-unit
averages via a paired t-test analysis (two tailed, df=23) for each item. Table 5 only shows
5 i gnificant gains in student comprehension (p-values less than 0.05) for question 3.
Again, the data are consistent with the PBL process that had played out in the class over
the month preceding this test. Much of the material on the pre-test had been covered in
the student-led research and discussion before they took the pre-test. Because the nature
of PBL is student driven, the instructor has little control over when information is

acquired.

The only question that showed significant gain was concerning the role of water
in neuromuscular function. Again, this is consistent with the PBL discussion that had
happened in class. Students spent most of the time discussing the role water played in the

last two PBL problems directly preceding the post-test.

Table 5: Neuromuscular Junction Pre-test and Post-test Item Analysis (n = 24)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pre-test Post-test
(appendix (appendix Percent
II-C) II-D) Gain (pre-
Questions Mean Mean test p-value
Average Average average —
number of number of post test
correct correct average)
\ answers answers
11"“ A “e“"m '3 “'3“ 91.67% 100.00% 8.33% 0.161668056
own as:

 

 

41

 

Table 5 Continued

2. A
neurotransmitter 95.83% 100.00% 4.17% 0.327715806
IS:

3. Water plays an
important part in 25.00% 79.17% 54.17% 2.75028E-05
biology because:
4. Tissues
throughout the
body respond to 91 .67% 95.83% 4.16% 0.574763999

 

 

 

signals

5. How fast do
signals travel from
your brain to your
leg muscles?

 

87.50% 95.83% 8.33% 0.327715806

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Student Scores

Student test scores for the three PBL section multiple choice tests are shown in
appendix I-A through I-C. Percent gain for each multiple-choice test is shown in Table 6.
The scores show all students performing better pre-test to post-test. The class average
percent gains show the most gain pre-test to post test during the Muscle section (58.8%),
less gain pre-test to post-test during the Bone section (43.3%), and least gain pre-test to
pOSt-test during the neuromuscular junction section (15.8%). At first glance, these data

Seem to indicate student comprehension decreasing during the progression of the unit, but
in reality, the pre-test scores increasing account for the decreasing gain in pre-test to post-
teSt differences (See Appendices I-A through I-C). This shows that the PBL process is
allowing students to make connections across different topics. For example, during the
m‘JSCle discussion, students learned about tendons and calcium ion storage in bones,

1‘esulting in more prior knowledge being brought to the bone pre-test. Similarly, the

42

muscle and bone discussions had already included many of the topics on the

neuromuscular junction pre-test resulting in higher scores there.

Table 6: Percent Gain (Differences in Student Scores)

Pre-Test to Post-Test

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Difference Difference (Pililtftls‘teicf’re
(Post test - Pre (Post test —
Student test)
test) Muscular Pre test)
Neuromuscular
Test Skeletal Test .
Junction Test
81 40 20 0
82 50 30 40
S3 60 40 20
S4 70 50 20
SS 50 50 40
S6 70 60 0
S7 50 50 0
S8 70 30 20
S9 60 30 20
810 60 50 0
811 70 40 20
812 80 50 20
__ 813 80 50 20
814 60 50 20
x 815 40 50 20
x 816 30 60 20
\ S17 50 50 20
x 818 50 20 0
\ 819 60 50 0
X 820 50 10 40
\ 821 70 40 20
\ $22 60 60 0
\ 823 60 50 20
$24 70 50 0
E33 average 58.8 43.3 15.8

 

 

P - .
as ’93! written responses

43

Written responses on post-tests also showed a generally high level of
comprehension. A common problem in Anatomy and Physiology is breaking down the
divisions between systems and getting students to see the human body as one system.
The long answer responses showed thinking that demonstrated this. The PBL method
allows students to make connections between seemingly unrelated systems and problems.
For example, in a response to question 21 on the muscular test student 7 said, “Botox
could also screw up your bones because once your muscles are paralyzed, they won’t use
calcium from your bones anymore”. While her conclusion is incorrect, the statement
shows logical reasoning across topics that would be compartmentalized in a non-PBL
setting. In response to question 22 on the muscular system test, student 17 gave a
detailed description of ATP synthesis including the statement “glycogen is produced in
the liver and can be quickly changed into glucose, which is a molecule that contains
energy to make ATP”. In the past, this anatomy class did not cover glycogen or the
live!" 8 role in cellular respiration. The PBL unit did not limit students to information
presented by the teacher. Several students had interesting responses to question 37 on the
Skel(ital system test. Eight of the 24 students responded that osteoblasts and osteoclasts
contl‘Olled calcium ion concentration in the blood in addition to sculpting bone. Student
22 Said “Osteoclasts are responsible for adding calcium to the blood. Calcium is used by

many different organs and the homeostasis of calcium needs to be controlled”.

44

Table 7: Muscular System Written Test Section Student Scores

5-point rubric

Muscular System Post-test Written Response Assessment: Appendix III-B

 

Student

Question
19

Question
20

Question
21

Question
22

 

SI

.5

A

4

 

$2

 

S3

 

S4

 

SS

 

S6

 

S7

 

SS

 

S9

 

SlO

 

Sll

 

812

 

Sl3

 

Sl4

 

SIS

 

Sl6

 

Sl7

 

818

 

Sl9

 

820

 

821

 

$22

 

$23

 

824

wwwwwww—‘wwwehwwhwwwwwww

A-RW-b-BAwW-h-RW-h-bANAWA-bbA-bw

hb-BAhAhNAAhhAhWhAA-hA-bAN-k

##Ahhhhwhhhbhawwwhhwwww

 

Class
average

 

 

L»)
_d

S"
\)

 

 

b)
00

 

S"
\l

 

45

 

Table 8: Skeletal System Written Test Section Student Scores

5-point rubric

Skeletal System Post-test Written Response Assessment: Appendix III-D

 

Student

Question
36

Question
37

Question
38

Question
39

 

S]

4:

.b

 

SZ

 

S3

 

S4

 

SS

 

S6

 

S7

 

S8

 

S9

 

SlO

 

Sll

 

$12

 

Sl3

 

Sl4

 

SIS

 

Sl6

 

Sl7

 

Sl8

 

Sl9

 

820

 

$21

 

822

 

S23

 

$24

Abhhkbbflhhhb$$hhh$bbhh~

h-b-h-fiAhAW-h-k-fiAA-bAAW-bA-BAhN-h

AAh-fi-bNbAAbAA-bww-hb-fi-fi-fi-WAN

wwwwkewwawwwhwhhhwwwwwwh

 

Class
average

 

 

b.)
00

b)
00

 

 

9"
\1

 

DJ
DJ

 

46

 

Laboratory Activity Question Responses and Activity Outcomes
Laboratory A: Controlled Muscle Fatigue: Appendix IV— A and B

This adaptation of a previously existing lab was quite successful. In the past, data
generated from this lab led to confusion for students. The addition of muscle control
apparatus had a dramatic effect on student data. Most groups (with the exception of the
group consisting of $17 and 82) had data that showed a slight increase in number of
repetitions in the first three trials as the muscle groups warmed up, and then a drop off in

number of repetitions as the muscle groups fatigued.

These consistent data led to relevant conclusions that helped student’s better
understand the PBL problem being studied. When answering the short answer problems
associated with the lab, many students showed deep understanding of the process that had
been discussed in class during the PBL collaboration and were able to apply this
information to a hands-on situation. Some quotations from student work follow that

demonstrate this hypothesis-based thinking:

Student 4: “In order to become the Clothespin squishing champion, I could train.
Using the muscle a lot will make the muscle tissue better as storing glycogen which will

allow faster production of ATP for the muscle”.

Student 16: “Isolating the muscles makes it so you cannot use synergist muscles.

Even small changes in position can make it so you start using different muscles besides

47

the prime mover and they take over more and more of the work. This would make your

data go up and down as you used different muscle groups”.

Student 1: “I doubt water had much to do with my results, but if I were training
to become the world’s clothespin squishing champion, I would pay attention to how
much water I drink. Water plays a part in calcium ion concentration as well as rates of
diffusion of neurotransmitters. Water is critical to how nerve cells fimction and
managing heat energy. For all of those reasons, water intake would be important to

becoming the world’s clothespin squishing champion”.

Laboratory B: Bone Anatomy and Density: Appendix I V — C

The results of this lab were somewhat disappointing from the prospective of set-
up work compared to what the students got out of it. Not that the students didn’t enjoy it
or gain some insight from it, but the work that went into setup was intense. Most
students agreed that isolating the bones from the surrounding tissue and then sectioning
the bone took most of the time (four class periods) and lefi a lot of down time for many

students.

Once the bones were sectioned and density readings were taken, not much
variation was observed in density from one end of the bone to the other. It was expected
that the compact bone would have a noticeable density difference from the spongy bone
regions. Unfortunately, the density was found to be fairly uniform across the sections of
the bone (most samples were slightly above lg/cc). The preparation of the bones

involved a bleach treatment and many hours of boiling to remove tissue from the

48

specimens. The students concluded that this treatment likely removed most of the
proteins and fats from the bones, leaving mostly calcium carbonate behind. So density
readings were fairly uniform because fat tissue (which would make up the majority of the
variation in bone density) was no longer present in their samples. The lack of density
information ended up being a learning opportunity for the students and caused them to
develop various hypotheses as to why their findings differed from the information they
had generated during our PBL collaborative time. For example, student 9 stated
“proteins and fats are not stable in bleach and under boiling conditions, so it makes sense
that our densities are all the same [between groups with different bone sample regions]

because we are all measuring the density of the same substance”.

Even though the density readings did not turn out, the students still got a hands-on
look at bone anatomy. Student writings showed analytical thinking linked to the PBL
discussion on bones. Student 20, for example, pondered “Under the stereoscope I see a
rough surface that surrounds the marrow cavity. I’m not sure why the marrow cavity
would not be smooth like I was expecting, but I wonder if it has to do with ostoclasts and

osteoblasts reshaping the bone responding to stress inside the bone”.

Laboratory C: Reaction time and physical activity: Appendix IV- D

The students generated an activity that explored the relationship (if any) between
physical activity and reaction time. During discussion of PBL problem #3 part b
(Appendix II-F), students hypothesized that high levels of physical exertion would

decrease reaction time. The runner in the PBL problem experienced neurological

49

problems of some sort and the students already knew that exercise uses up energy stores,
water, and ions fi'om their findings in previous sections. They hypothesized that exercise
would also impair neurological function and result in slower reaction time. To explore

this hypothesis the students designed a lab activity.

They divided the class into three test groups. One group of 8 students ran the
trails behind the school for twenty minutes, one group walked at a slow pace around the
track for twenty minutes, and one group rested at their desk for 20 minutes. At the end of
the 20 minute period of activity, reaction times were measured using electronic reaction

time devices.

The results showed that the high-level-activity group (the runners) had slightly
better reaction times than the resting group. The resting and walking group had
essentially identical reaction times. From this study’s perspective, the lab showed some
of the less tangible benefits of the PBL format. First of all, students had to agree on what
the lab protocol would be. This took surprisingly little time. Within 15 minutes, students
developed a procedure and split themselves into groups first by volunteers and then by

drawing straws to end up with three equally divided groups.

This group effort highlights the collaboration encouraged by PBL. Traditional
classroom techniques would not have fostered this kind of interaction. In the journal
write following the activity several students made comments like “I didn’t want to be in
the walking group. I wanted to rest. But drawing straws was the only fair way to do it”.

(Student 21)

50

Another benefit of PBL highlighted by this activity was the rejection of a student-
formed hypothesis. They had predicted that the high-activity group would have slower
reaction times than both the rest and walking group. The results showed the opposite
(although the data were only different by hundredths of a seconds). The students had to
reject their original hypothesis. Student #1 commented “I found it interesting that our
hypothesis was wrong. We made the hypothesis because the research we were doing [in
reference to the PBL problem] was leading us to believe that exercise would slow down

reaction time, but our own experiment showed that this was false”.

Written Assignment Responses

Students did a formal writing response to the three sections of the PBL unit
(Appendix V A-C). These assignments revealed a lot of student thinking and showed a

wide range of understanding similar to the post-test written responses and lab responses.

Some students still had misconceptions. For example the muscle problem led one
student to write “The marathon runner ran low on ATP, an energy chemical that helps
muscles contract smoothly” (Student 5). Another example of a misconception is
demonstrated when Student 17 concluded that “stress fractures in the leg bones let

calcium out into the muscles and that caused muscle cramping”.

Statements like these show that some students were hearing the language, and had
some idea of what the science behind the topic was, but had fundamental
misunderstandings. Calling ATP an “energy chemical” came up in the muscle writing

response of four students. Also, many students seemed to have the idea that ATP played

51

a small part in the overall process rather than being a key supplier of energy at multiple
steps of the process. Class discussion covered ATP production and the role of glucose in

great detail, but some students were missing this information.

Some students showed an intermediate understanding through their writing. For
example, a student wrote “When myosin reached the end [of the actin filament] there was
a buildup of myosin. This buildup led to the cramping” (Student 13). Statements like
this show more understanding and are not all together wrong, but are still not really
correct (myosin does not “buildup” at the end of the actin filament, but cannot detach due

to low levels of ATP or an overload of calcium ions).

Still other students showed deep levels of understanding. Student #1 explained
that “profuse sweating led to dehydration. The low water concentration in the blood and
tissues drove up the concentration of sodium, potassium, and calcium. Sodium and
potassium are critical ions in order to move nerve signals and calcium ions are critical in
moving tropomyosin off actin allowing muscle contraction. This explains why our
runner is having muscle cramps and is also having trouble with thought and reaction

time”.

While student #1 ’5 response was exceptional, many other students showed equal

levels of comprehension of how these systems were related.

Survey

52

Upon completion of all three sections of the PBL unit, students completed a

survey (Appendix VI-A).

Table 9: End of Unit Student Survey Item Analysis (I: = 24)

 

 

 

. Average St.
Survey Question Response Dev.
1. Traditional teaching methods help me
. . 4.3 0.7
learn sc1ent1fic concepts
2. PBL teaching methods help me learn 4 4 0 8

scientific concepts
3. Traditional methods are more effective
than PBL methods in helping me learn 3.1 0.8
scientific information
4. I prefer developing my own questions
to research and investigate rather than
answering a question given to me by
someone else
5. I find value in working with other
students in a team to solve a problem.
6. Problem-Based Learning was more
interesting than traditional methods
7. I feel that Problem-Based Learning
will help information from this unit stay
in my memory longer than traditional
methods.

8. I feel that my understanding of bone
and muscle anatomy and physiology is
more complete than if I had read the
information from a text book.

9. I think the lab activities in this unit

aided in my understanding of the 4.1 0.8
concepts covered in this unit
10. I prefer PBL to traditional classroom
methods

 

 

2.8 0.6

 

3.3 0.6

 

4.4 0.8

 

3.8 0.7

 

 

 

3.4 0.7

 

 

 

 

 

Questions I, 2, and 3 of the survey show that overall the students felt that PBL
was an acceptable way to learn, but was not necessarily more effective (or less) than

traditional methods.

53

Students found the process of developing their own questions to research difficult.
The negative response to survey question 4 (A neutral response would have ranked a 3
and question 4 averaged a 2.8) was no surprise after having mediated the PBL 4-W
sessions. Students would often get frustrated and would ask me to “just tell me what to

research!” (Comment from student 10 during 4-W)

Survey questions 5 and 6 show an acceptance of the group collaboration format. Again,
the results are not surprising after mediating the collaborative discussions. The students
seemed to really enjoy bouncing ideas off one another. The only thing that frustrated
them was deciding what questions should be researched and what questions were not

relevant to the problem.

Survey questions 7 and 8 revealed students’ feelings about retention of
information. They seemed to be invested in the information they researched and

retention was apparent as we continued the class.

Question 9 showed that students perceived the lab activities to be useful and
relevant, although observing students in the lab environment would lead one to the
opposite conclusion. As the lab activities stepped down in instructions, the students
seemed less and less engaged. The muscle lab had all groups engaged all the time (and
had step-by-step directions), the bone lab had more individuals sitting idle during the
hour, (and had less direction from the instructor), and the nervous system lab had the
most students seemingly disengaged (and had virtually no instructor directions). But, as

discussed in the lab assessments, the students’ lab writing did show good comprehension.

54

Question 10 showed that students did prefer the PBL method. The small degree
of agreement may just be attributable to PBL being something new and different. It is
difficult to say if the students actually preferred learning this way in comparison to

traditional methods.

55

Discussion and Conclusion

This study sought to determine if PBL could be successfully implemented in a
high school classroom, if PBL would show an increase in student understanding that can
be measured with traditional forms of assessment, and if PBL would reflect other benefits
to student learning that are less tangible than test scores.

All three foci of this study showed intriguing and promising results. With further
study and analysis, it is believed that PBL may be an effective tool to add to secondary

science education best-practice.

Can PBL work in a High School Classroom?

The limitations of a traditional high school classroom both in terms of time and
number of students makes PBL a difficult fit. Consistent with the findings of
Margaret Lohman and Michael F inkelstein, class size was one of the biggest challenges
(Lohman and Finkelstein 2000). By dividing the class, it was possible to make
collaborative groups that worked independently and then compiled information together
at the end of the 4-W sessions. Their participation and intrest in the discussion was
excellent as reflected by the results of the discussion participation rubric. While PBL
would have an ideal student number of around eight students total, a large divided

classroom was found to be manageable.

Time was the biggest factor. Western High School runs 55 minute class periods.

Typically collaboration sessions would last nearly two full class hours resulting in an

56

interrupted discussion. While students still had lively and engaging discussion, it took a

few minutes at the beginning of each discussion hour to get back up to speed.

Student performance both in terms of grades and subjective observations were
comparable to traditional units taught to the same group of students throughout the year.
For example, the blood unit using non-PBL techniques immediately following this PBL
unit resulted in a class test average of 82.2% and the circulatory non-PBL unit had a class
test average of 78.6%. This is similar to test scores achieved during the three sections of
the PBL unit (79.2%, 88.8%, and 94% being the class averages on the multipule choice
sections of the PBL unit tests). Student performance on this PBL unit was also
comparable to the performance of students in years past who were taught the same
information with a traditional approach. However, the PBL unit required 37 days total,
whereas the traditional versions of the same units in years past took 17 days. In order to
make the PBL unit fit into the Anatomy and Physiology curriculum, some content was
cut from a cellular biology unit earlier in the year. Since the curriculum for Anatomy and
Physiology at Western High School is set by the teacher, this rearrangement of the course
schedule was not a problem, but if PBL were to be incorporated into a course with a

state-mandated curriculum, time management would be the largest obstacle.

Students were capable of finding legitimate scholarly articles. The issue was
being able to sort relevant information from minutia. The instructor spent much of his
time helping students sort and interpret the information they found. The students in this
study had a very difficult time with scientific language in scholarly articles. This was
apparent because the instructor could not move between groups fast enough to help fill in

information students were struggling with.

57

Can a PBL unit result in adequate performance in traditional testing?

The objective data show that student understanding did increase due to
implementation of this unit. Rote memorization was apparent from the increase in mean
average of 58.8%, 43.3%, and 15.8% on the multiple choice portions of the three section
tests within the PBL unit (see table 6). The average post-test scores during the PBL unit
was 87.4% and showed little variation from test scores achieved by this group of students
on non-PBL units. An issue to be considered, however, is the amount of time PBL takes
to get to the same or similar test results when compared to more traditional methods. The
PBL unit took twice as long to implement as the same content delivered using notes and
lecture (31 days using PBL for a section that took only 17 days in years past using a
didactic approach). If the only objective of high school education is to produce students
who can perform adequately on standardized tests, this study shows that PBL is not a
very efficient way to meet that goal. These findings are consistent with the findings of

other studies (eg. Colliver’s 2000) in which he writes:

“The results are disappointing, providing no convincing evidence for the
effectiveness of PBL, at least not the magnitude of effectiveness that would be
hoped for with a major curriculum intervention. The results are also surprising,
because the rationale for PBL is said to be based on educational theory and that
theory is said to be supported by basic research. That is, PBL in contrast to the
traditional lecture-based approach is thought to incorporate basic educational

principles and to involve theoretical learning mechanisms, which presumably

58

should have a positive and sizable effect on the acquisition of basic knowledge

and clinical skills.” (Colliver 2000)

But my findings show gains in other areas besides performance on multiple
choice test questions. In contrast to Colliver’s findings, my study shows student gains in
other respects. For example, average student scores on long answer test items during the
PBL were high. The class average was above a 3 (on a 0-4 point scale) for all written
response questions (see tables 7 and 8). These written responses show critical thinking
skills in a way that is not apparent from multiple-choice, standardized test questions (see
student quotes in post-test written response section) and point to some of the benefits to a

PBL approach. Hmelo-Silver et al. (2007) arrives at a similar conclusion stating:

“It is important to consider learning outcomes as multifaceted. The goals of
learning should include not only conceptual and procedural knowledge but also
the flexible thinking skills and the epistemic practices of the domain that prepare

students to be lifelong learners and adaptive experts”

and she continues

“students constructed more integrative explanatory essays for the concepts that

they had learned using a PBL approach”.

Hemlo-Silver (2007) refutes the findings of Colliver (2000) showing that PBL is

more than a time consuming way of arriving at the same outcome, and parallels the

59

findings of this study. PBL produces students that are not only prepared to perform on
standardized tests, but are prepared to use new information and team-working skills

throughout their lives.

Does PBL in a high school classroom have any benefits for student learning that

traditional techniques do not address?

The results of this study show two major benefits that are not measurable by
traditional means. First, students participating in the PBL unit were engaged in social
interaction as a part of the problem solving process. This is a skill, and like any skill, it is
strengthened with practice. The PBL forced students to compromise, negotiate, delegate,
empathize with one another, and use decorum. The PBL unit more accurately mirrors
how problem solving occurs in the workplace. While student performance measured
with test scores is important, most educators would argue that preparation for the

workplace is as important if not more important to education.

Another benefit of PBL was the practice students received with acquisition of
primary source information. High school students typically have many scientific
misconceptions gained from movies, television, and rumor. Educators can address some
of these misconceptions using traditional teaching methods, but PBL gives students the
tools to analyze information on their own. By the end of my PBL unit, I began to see
scientific articles they found discussed with more skepticism. Students began to question
source reliability. PBL makes students more interested in research and evidence to back

up scientific information. My survey results showed students experienced frustration

60

with determining what to research, but they were able to find valid scientific research.
Once the students found information, they had pride in their findings and it fueled
discussion (as was apparent from discussion observation rubric scores of straight 3 out of

3’s).

Suggestions for future research: What went well

Future studies involving the implementation of a PBL unit may benefit from
incorporating some of the ideas present in this study. One part of this study that went
well was the running-themed PBL problems. Eight of the subjects in this study were
cross-country runners and eighteen of the subjects were student—athletes. Because the
topic was relevant to something the students experiences, they showed enthusiasm for the
research and discussion. Oftentimes my students would relate findings to personal
experience during discussion. My survey results (Table 9) showed students enjoyed the
PBL format. Finding a subject that connects with students’ personal experience was a

key part to bringing PBL to the secondary level where motivation can be lacking.

The topic of athletic injury also led to great PBL problems. By their nature, a
PBL problem should be ill-structured, meaning that there is no obvious solution and the
research surrounding the problem may be conflicting or unclear forcing exploration and
collaborative inquiry. Athletic injuries as part of a PBL led students towards many
different avenues of research. Some student-generated research came from physicians
and universities, some research came from corporate interests such as athletic shoe

companies, sports drink companies, and medical equipment companies, and still other

61

research supported holistic and non-traditional medicine. The wide range of bias and

conflict present in the research helped build skepticism and lead to vigorous discussion in

the PBL unit.

Suggestions for future research: What needs to be changed in future PBL units

There are difficulties in implementing a PBL unit at the secondary level. These
problems would need to be addressed in future implementation of PBL in a high school.
The first major problem was the number of students in my class. Dividing the students
into small groups was effective to facilitate rich discussion within the groups, but it made
it so the teacher was trying to direct three separate discussions, interpret research that the
students were struggling with, take notes on student progress, and handle the day-to-day
classroom routines at the same time. The teacher was exhausted by the end of every 4-W

discussion. Managing twenty four students in a PBL is possible, but very challenging for

the teacher.

Another interesting problem that occurred in the PBL unit was the issue of
absences. In a traditional format, absent students miss an assignment or notes that can
easily be acquired outside of class, but in a PBL format, absent students miss the
collaboration that produces the class content. It is virtually impossible to re—create the
diSCUSSion for absent students. Also, the rest of the class did not get the part of the

infOUHation the absent student was supposed to bring back to the discussion. Fortunately,

there Were few student absences during this study, but every absence did require the

62

teacher to spend time outside of class with the absent student in an attempt to get them up

to speed on what they missed.

Both of these problems may be alleviated with more practice with PBL
techniques. The teacher found that more practice implementing the technique quickly
made a difference to his comfort level. Much like traditional teaching techniques, there is
a learning curve to implementation of PBL and the only way to gain confidence is to use

PBL with students in a classroom setting.

63

APPENDICES

64

Appendix 1:

Student Scores

A- Muscular System Test Student Scores .................................................................... 66
B- Skeletal System Test Student Scores ....................................................................... 67
C- Neuromuscular Junction Test Student Scores ........................................................ 68

65

APPENDIX I-A

Muscular System Test Student Scores (n = 24)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 10

Pre-test Post- Difference

Student % test % (Post test

Correct Correct - Pre-test)
SI 60 100 40
S2 10 60 50
S3 10 70 60
S4 20 90 70
SS 30 80 50
S6 20 90 70
S7 10 60 50
SS 20 90 70
S9 30 90 60
$10 0 60 60
811 0 70 70
$12 10 9O 80
813 10 90 80
814 20 80 60
SIS 40 80 40
816 10 40 30
S 1 7 20 70 50
818 40 90 50
819 20 80 60
820 30 80 50
S21 20 90 70
S22 20 80 60
823 20 80 60
S24 20 90 70

Class 20.4 79.2 58.8
average

 

 

 

 

66

 

APPENDIX I-B

Skeletal System Test Student Scores (n = 24)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 11

Pre-test Post- Difference

Student % test % (Post test

Correct Correct - Pre-test)
SI 80 100 20
82 30 60 30
S3 50 90 40
S4 50 100 50
SS 50 100 50
S6 30 90 60
S7 20 70 50
S8 60 90 30
S9 60 90 30
810 50 100 50
$11 40 80 40
812 50 100 50
S l 3 50 100 50
814 50 100 50
$15 50 100 50
816 10 70 60
817 30 80 50
818 70 90 20
S19 50 100 50
$20 60 70 10
$21 30 70 40
S22 20 80 60
S23 50 100 50
S24 50 100 50

Class 45.4 88.8 43.3
average

 

 

 

 

 

 

67

APPENDIX I-C

Neuromuscular Junction Test Student Scores (n = 24)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 12

Pre- Post- Difference

Student test test (Post test

% % - Pre-test)
S] 100 100 0
S2 40 SO 40
S3 80 100 20
S4 80 100 20
SS 60 100 40
S6 80 80 0
S7 80 80 0
SS 80 100 20
S9 80 100 20
810 100 100 0
811 60 80 20
812 80 100 20
813 80 100 20
814 80 100 20
SIS 80 100 20
816 40 60 20
$17 60 80 20
$18 100 100 0
$19 100 100 0
820 60 100 40
S21 80 100 20
822 100 100 0
823 80 100 20
S24 100 100 0

Class 78.3 94.2 15.8
average

 

 

 

 

 

 

68

A-

B-

C

D

E

Appendix II:

PBL Problems

Muscle Problem Part I ..............................................................................................
Muscle Problem Part II ............................................................................................
Bone Problem Part I .................................................................................................
Bone Problem Part II ................................................................................................

Neuromuscular Problem Part I ................................................................................

F - Neuromuscular Problem Part ll ...............................................................................

69

70
72
74
76
78

SO

APPENDIX II-A

Froblcm #1 part A

 

Jack is running his first marathon in New York City. He is excited to
be running in the race and he feels pretty good as he passes mile
marker 4 and grabs a cup of water from the volunteer standing by the
side of the road. Jack's months of training are paying off. The
conditions heading into this race were less than ideal and Jack was
worried that he may not be able to finish.

As Jack makes his way through Brooklyn and passes into
Queens, he begins to get an uncomfortable feeling in his
gastrocnemius. He has felt this sensation before during his 18 week

training regiment and he knows what it means.

As Jack passes the 14 mile mark, he grabs another water. He
is breaking with his pre-race plan to take water only every four miles
and decides to start taking water every two miles instead. He also
chokes down another gu pack six miles ahead of schedule. He
knows that the feeling in his gastrocnemius means race-ending
muscle cramps are on the way. He hopes he can take some action to
prevent them, but as he hits mile marker 16 on the bridge into
Manhattan the muscles cramp and he is forced to stop.

70

Problem 1 part A for instrufictor:

Muscle sub-unit: Focus: Understand the sliding filament model of
muscle contraction

fldents will need to identify the four w's as | write them on the boa_rg_;
1. What problem are we trying to solve?
2. What information is in the problem I have presented?
3. What do we already know about the subject from prior experience?
4. What do we need to find out?

#4 guestions the instructor wants students to generate (perhafi some “leading”

may be necessary!)

. What is a muscle cramp?

What does water do for muscle cramps?

What is a gu pack and what might it do for muscle cramps?
What causes muscle cramps

What is a gastrocnemius?

Does training more reduce muscle cramping?

How do muscles work?

somewwa

71

APPENDIX II-B

Froblcm #1 part 5

 

Jack is standing on the 59th Street Bridge in agonizing pain. He tries
to massage the tightened muscles, but the pain is all over his legs.
It's as if all the muscles in his legs are contracting at once. Even his

arm muscles are cramping.

He wishes he had taken the salt packet a volunteer had offered
him back at the pre-race starting area. He is also regretting walking
five miles the night before to get to a great pasta restaurant his sister
wanted to go to. Speaking of his sister, he also wishes that she had
brought the blankets she had said she would bring to the starting
area so that he wouldn't have stood in the freezing cold shivering for

two hours before the race started.

Jack knows he can't blame the cramps all on his sister. He also
has a new baby at home and has not been sleeping well for the past
few months. On top of that, he is pretty sure the months of training
have given him a bone injury which may be a contributing factor to his
muscle problem.

A race medic asks Jack if he is all right and gives him some

Gatorade. After a few minutes of stretching and massaging, Jack
thinks he can go on and begins running again.

72

Problem 1 part B for instructor:

Muscle sub-unit: Focus: Understand the sliding filament model of
muscle contraction

Students will need to identify the four w's as I write them on the board:
1. What problem are we trying to solve?
2. What information is in the problem I have presented?
3. What do we already know about the subject from prior experience?
4. What do we need to find out?

L4 questions the instructor wants students to generate (perhaps some “Ieadin ”
may be necessamt!)

Why is the pain all over?

What do muscles run out of as you use them?

What part does salt, water, Gatorade play?

What part did cold and shivering play?

What does sleeping have to do with muscle cramping?
Do bones and muscles have any relationship?

QQPP’N.‘

73

APPENDIX II-C

[problem #2 part: A

 

Jack has recovered from his muscle cramps for the time being, but as
he heads into mile 20 of the marathon he feels a new problem
developing. Athrobbing pain in his tibia is getting worse. Jack knows
he may have a stress fracture. He has felt it for many months leading
up to this race, but he chose to ignore the pain rather than go to the
doctor.

Now it's starting to feel like that was a bad decision. Perhaps the
doctor could have done something to prevent the problem. Jack is

certainly learning a lot about how NOT to run a marathon.

Jack wonders what the worst case scenario might be if he continues
running and finishes the race. He has been running for three hours
and he probably has at least another hour to go at this pace. The
thought of dropping out of the race with only six miles to go is
unbearable... but so is the pain coming from his tibia...

74

Problem 2 part A for instructor:

Bone sub-unit:

Focus: Understand bone deposition and reabsorption and bone physiology.

§tLdent§ will need to identify the four w's as I write thjem on the mg;
1. What problem are we trying to solve?
2. What information is in the problem I have presented?
3. What do we already know about the subject from prior experience?
4. What do we need to find out?

#4 questions the instructor wants students to generate (perhaps some “leading”
may be necegam!)

What is a stress fracture?
What can be done to prevent it?
What are bones made of?

PPN.‘

What can happen if you run on a stress fracture (displaced
fractures)

9‘

How do bones respond to stress?
6. What is the treatment for fractures? Why does it work?

75

APPENDIX II-D

Froblcm #2 Eartf;

Jack is very frustrated! This is not how he wanted this race to go. He
is mad at himself for not taking some action to prevent stress
fractures when he was training.

 

Jack's mom has always told him that calcium builds strong bones.
Perhaps he should have been drinking more milk. Or Popeye was
always eating spinach. That is supposed to be good for you. Could
that help with bone strength?

Or maybe the bone is breaking because Jack is rather heavy for a
runner. At 185 pounds, he is not chubby, but as he looks around at
the other runners (who all look very happy and like their bones are
NOT breaking), he notices that most of them are built small and light.
Jack, on the other hand, is a little beefy for a runner. Jack wonders if
it would have made a difference if he had dropped five or ten pounds
before the race.

Or, Jack thinks, maybe he trained too much. Too much ground-
pounding and the bone just couldn't take it any more... Or maybe he
didn't train enough and the bone did not build itself up enough to deal
with the stress. He followed a training regiment set up by a
professional marathon runner. He was running about 40 miles per
week near the end of his training.

Jack is worried about what this pain means. On the short term, he
wonders if the bone problem might somehow be causing the muscle
cramps (which he feels returning again). He remembered hearing
that there is some sort of interplay between bones and muscles in his
high school anatomy class... but he was too busy text messaging in
class to remember much.

On the long term, Jack is worried about what might happen if the
bone breaks all the way through. He knows that there is marrow in
the bone that does some important stuff. Could a bad bone break
screw up the rest of his body somehow?

All this worrying has made the miles seem to pass a little faster. Jack
passes the 23 mile mark...

76

Problem 2 art B for instrgctor:

Bone sub-unit:

Focus: Understand bone deposition and reabsorption and bone physiology.

Students will need to identify the fogr w's as l writefithem on the boafi

1.
2.
3.
4.

What problem are we trying to solve?

What information is in the problem I have presented?

What do we already know about the subject from prior experience?
What do we need to find out?

#4 questions:the instructor wants stu_dents to generate (perhaps some “leadin ”
maybe necessarv!)

1.

N999?!”

What role does calcium play in a bone?

What role does general nutrition play (what is needed to make bone)?
What is the bone made of?

What effect does body weight have on bone?

What does repeated stress do to a bone?

How are bones and muscles related? Does one affect the other?
What is marrow? What does it do?

77

APPENDIX II-E

Froblcm #5 part A

 

Jack is ready to be done. Now at mile 24 of the marathon, his left
tibia is screaming with pain and he has to stop every five minutes to
massage his leg muscles to make the cramps go away. But he's so
close! He can't stop now!

As Jack approaches another water station he begins to get a new
sensation. He is finding it difficult to think clearly. He feels foggy in
his head and he can't remember if he took water at the last station
even though it was only fifteen minutes ago.

Suddenly, Jacks legs go completely out from under him. He
manages to half fall, half sit down at the side of the road. His legs
have stopped responding correctly. He can make his brain tell them
to go, but the legs seem not to be getting the message.

This is a new problem. Jack sits for a minute and drinks some
water...

78

Problem 3 art A for instructor:

Neuromuscular junction sub-unit:

Focus: Understanding how the nervous system communicates with muscles and

the electro-chemical nature of nerve stimuli

Students will need to identify the four w's as I write them on the board
1. What problem are we trying to solve?
2. What information is in the problem I have presented?
3. What do we already know about the subject from prior experience?
4. What do we need to find out?

#4 gdestions the instructor wants students «generate (perhaps some “leading”
may be necessarv!)

1. What does the brain need to function?

2. How do messages get from the brain to the muscles?
3. Will water help?

79

APPENDIX II-F

 

Froblcm #5 part b

After resting for several minutes, Jack is able to walk again. He eats

some more gu and soon he is able to run again. At first it feels like it

takes a moment for his brain to make his legs take each step. There

is a noticeable lag between thinking about taking a stride and actually
doing it.

He only has one mile to go now. That was a little scary. Bones and
muscles are one thing, but when your brain gets screwy, you know
you ran too much.

Jack wonders what caused his partial loss of consciousness and
what he could have done to prevent it. He had been drinking plenty
of water. The sugar gu seemed to help a little.

Resting for a moment also seemed to help. The end is so close now.
He passes the half-mile to go sign. He gets a rush of adrenaline and
suddenly feels much more clear-headed. His brain seems to be
talking to his muscles instantaneously and normally again.

Finally, in just under 4 hours and 27 minutes, Jack crosses the finish
line. And unlike the first guy that ran a marathon, it did not kill him!

80

Problem 3 part B for instructor:

Neuromuscular junction sub-unit:

Focus: Understanding how the nervous system communicates with muscles and

the electro-chemical nature of nerve stimuli

Students will need to identify the four w's as I write them on the board:
1. What problem are we trying to solve?
2. What information is in the problem I have presented?
3. What do we already know about the subject from prior experience?
4. What do we need to find out?

#4 questions the instructor wants students to generate (Lamps some “leadipg:
may be necessagy!)

1. Why did water, sugar, and rest have an effect?

2. Why does the signal seem to be instantaneously getting from his head
to his muscles and why wasn't it before? (chemical-electrical)

3. What does adrenaline do to the nervous system?

81

Appendix III:

Section Tests

A- Muscles Pre-test ......................................................................................................... 83
B- Muscles Post-test ....................................................................................................... 85
0 Bones Pre-test ............................................................................................................ 92
D- Bones Post-test .......................................................................................................... 94
E- Neuromuscular Pre-test ............................................................................................. 99
F- Neuromuscular Post-test ............................................................................................ 101

82

APPENDIX III-A

Name: Date: Hour:

 

 

Anatomy/Physiolofl Pre-Test: Muscles

__1. What is ATP?

A type of muscle that contracts slowly.

A molecule used store energy in a quick, usable form in the body.
A long term energy storage molecule.

Adenosine tri-phosphate.

Both b and c

ab. Both b and d

eeeeel-

_2. What is glucose?

a. A type of muscle that contracts slowly.

b. A molecule used store energy in a quick, usable form in the body.
0. A long term energy storage molecule.

(1. Adenosine tri-phosphate.

e. Both b and c

ab. Both b and d

3. What process is your body using to make ATP molecules from glucose
right now as you sit?
Lactic acid fermentation
Photosynthesis
Chemosynthesis
Aerobic Respiration
Anaerobic respiration
ah. Because I am sitting, I do not need ATP right now.

PP—PP‘P

4. What is a neurotransmitter?

A chemical your nerve cells use to communicate across a synapse.
Protease

Acetylcholine

All of the above are neurotransmitters

Both a and b are correct

ah. Both a and c are correct.

9999‘s».

5. Which is an example of an organ that is made of smooth muscle?
The intestine.

The heart

The bicep muscle

All of the above

None of the above

ah. both a and c are correct

99.09:!»

83

a.
b.
c.
d.

C.

6. What is fascia?

Connective tissue

This tissue surrounds the muscle fiber bundle and becomes a tendon near
the end of the muscle.

It is tough and offers some protection to the muscle.

All of the above

None of the above

ab. b and c are correct.

___.7
a.
b.
c
d
e.

Bones give skeletal muscles:

A mechanical advantage by working like levers.

A hard surface for your muscles to push against.
Protection from the outside world.

A source of calcium ions that are important in contraction.
Both b and a are correct

ab. Both a and d are correct

8. Your skeletal “levers” :

roe-99‘s»

Never multiply the strength of your muscle contractions.

May multiply the distance of you muscle contractions.

Only allow your bones to move the distance that your muscle contracts.
Allows your muscle to use all of its energy to make force.

None of the above

__9. What are the two kinds of myofibrils?

see-peel-

Tendon and ligament

Aponeurosis and tendon
Periostium and Fascia

Actin and myosin

Motor neuron and motor end plate

ab. Z line and Nucleus

10. All of these chemicals are necessary to muscle contraction besides:

a. Oxygen

b. Glucose

c. Calcium

(1. Acetylcholine
e. Cholinesterase
ab. Myosin

84

APPENDIX III-B

Name: Date: Hour:

 

 

Anatomy/Physiology Test: Muscles

- 1. What is ATP?
a. A type of muscle that contracts slowly.
b. A molecule used store energy in a quick, usable form in the body.
c. A long term energy storage molecule.
d. Adenosine tri-phosphate.
e. Both b and c
ab. Both b and d

2. What is glucose?
. A type of muscle that contracts slowly.
. A molecule used store energy in a quick, usable form in the body.
. A long term energy storage molecule.
. Adenosine tri-phosphate.
e. Both b and c
ab. Both b and d

0—0 0‘93

3. What process is your body using to make ATP molecules from glucose

right now as you sit?

a. Lactic acid fermentation

b. Photosynthesis

c. Chemosynthesis

d. Aerobic Respiration

e. Anaerobic respiration

ab. Because I am sitting, I do not need ATP right now.

4. What is a neurotransmitter?
a. A chemical your nerve cells use to communicate across a synapse.
b. Protease
c. Acetylcholine
d. All of the above are neurotransmitters
e. Both a and b are correct
ab. Both a and c are correct.

5. Which is an example of an organ that is made of smooth muscle?
a. The intestine.
b. The heart
c. The bicep muscle
d. All of the above
e. None of the above
ab. both a and c are correct

85

6. What is fascia?

a. Connective tissue

b. This tissue surrounds the muscle fiber bundle and becomes a tendon
near the end of the muscle.

c. It is tough and offers some protection to the muscle.

(1. All of the above

e. None of the above

ab. b and c are correct.

7. Bones give skeletal muscles:

a. A mechanical advantage by working like levers.

b. A hard surface for your muscles to push against.

c. Protection from the outside world.

d. A source of calcium ions that are important in contraction.
e. Both b and a are correct

ab. Both a and d are correct

8. Your skeletal “levers”:
a. Never multiply the strength of your muscle contractions.
b. May multiply the distance of you muscle contractions.
c. Only allow your bones to move the distance that your muscle contracts.
d. Allows your muscle to use all of its energy to make force.
e. None of the above

9. What are the two kinds of myofibrils?
a. Tendon and ligament
b. Aponeurosis and tendon
c. Periostium and Fascia
d. Actin and myosin
e. Motor neuron and motor end plate
ab. Z line and Nucleus

10. All of these chemicals are necessary to muscle contraction besides:

“Cl-00"!»

a. Oxygen
b. Glucose
c. Calcium
d. Acetylcholine
e. Cholinesterase
ab. Myosin

11. What doe the term “intercellular” mean?
. Inside cell
. Outside cell
. Near the center
. Without cells
. None of the above

86

12. Actin is
a. A muscle group
b. A protein
c. A myofibril
(1. Another name for a muscle cell
c. Both B and C are correct
ab. All of the above are correct

13. A muscle fiber is
a. A muscle group
b. A protein
c. A myofibril
(1. Another name for a muscle cell
e. Both B and C are correct
ab. All of the above are correct

14. When a muscle cell is relaxed, where are the calcium ion's found in
the highest concentration?
. Outside the muscle cell
b. Bonded to tropomyosin
c. In the sarcoplasmic reticum
d. In the blood
e. Both A and B are correct

m

15. Which of the following will NOT have an effect on the concentration of
calcium ions in a muscle cell?
a. More calcium is added to the cell
b. Calcium ions are removed from the cell
c. Water molecules are added to the cell
(1. Water molecules are removed from the cell
e. Calcium ions move from inside the sarcoplasmic reticulum to the cytosol
ab. Options “c”, “d”, and “e” will not change calcium ion concentration in a cell
ac. Options “a” thorough “e” will all change calcium ion concentration in the cell

87

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

88

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

922:5?”eeae9092

 

Short Answer:
16. Write the basic chemical equation for respiration. (3 points)

17. List the three general types of muscles. Next to each, tell me where you might find
these muscles. (3 points)

89

18. How do the three types of muscles differ in appearance? (3 points)

Essay
19. Describe the relationship between the prime mover, the synergist and the antagonist.

(5 points)

20. Let’s say you are lifting a dumbbell using your bicep muscle. Describe how the
bicep muscle gets the message to perform the function. Start at with the message
originating in your brain. (6 points)

90

21. Botox is an Acetylcholine inhibitor. Describe what Botox does to you in terms of
the skeletal muscles of your face. (5 points)

22. Describe the process that creates usable ATP in your body. (6 points)

91

APPENDIX III-C

Chapter 7 Pre-Test: Skeletal System Name:

 

Date: Hour:

 

1. What is the epiphyses of a bone?

a) The middle or “shaft” of the bone

b) The place where muscles will attach to bone

c) The part that is covered with cartilage and is at the end of the bones
d) The place where bone meets other bones

e) The part that makes up the hard outer shell of the bone

ab) The part that makes all the blood cells

ac) None of the above

2. What is a joint?

a) the middle or “shaft” of the bone

b) The place where muscles will attach to bone

0) The part that is covered with cartilage and is at the end of the bones
d) The place where bone meets other bones

e) The part that makes up the hard outer shell of the bone

ab) The part that makes all the blood cells

ac) None of the above

3. What is the diaphysis?

a) The middle or “shaft” of the bone

b) The place where muscles will attach to bone

0) The part that is covered with cartilage and is at the end of the bones
d) The place where bone meets other bones

e) The part that makes up the hard outer shell of the bone

ab) The part that makes all the blood cells

ac) None of the above

4. What is the Bone Marrow?

a) The middle or “shafi” of the bone

b) The place where muscles will attach to bone

c) The part that is covered with cartilage and is at the end of the bones
d) The place where bone meets other bones

e) The part that makes up the hard outer shell of the bone

ab) The part that makes all the blood cells

ac) None of the above

92

5. Why do we have spongy bone?

a) The soft bone absorbs shock.

b) The holes in spongy bone store water.

0) The holes in the bone make the bones lighter
d) The soft bone allows for more flexibility.

e) None of the above

6. What does an osteoblast do?

a) Breaks down bone

b) Protects the bone

c) Adds calcium to the blood
d) Builds new bone

e) Both “a” and “c” are correct

7. What parts of the bone contain living cells?

a) The marrow

b) The compact bone

c) The ends of the bone

(1) The outer-most layer of a bone
c) All of the above

8. What does a tendon do?

a) Connects one bone to another
b) Connects one muscle to another
c) Connects a muscle to a bone

d) I holds organs in place

e) All of the above

9. How does the body respond to a bone fracture?

a) Osteoblasts begin to make new bone at the fracture site

b) The broken bone is removed by white blood cells

c) Osteoblasts break down the broken area of the bone

(I) New bone will only be laid down if the person with the broken bone
immobilizes the bone.

e) All of the above

10. Which of the following is true of bone anatomy?

a) Bones contain living cells

b) Bones are responsible for making blood stem cells

c) A process is the part of the bone where muscles attach to the bone
d) Bones are surrounded with a membrane

c) all of the above

93

APPENDIX III-D

Chapter 7 Test: Skeletal System Name:

 

Date: Hour:

 

 

_ 1. What is the epiphyses of a bone?
a) The middle or “shaft” of the bone
b) The place where muscles will attach to bone
c) The part that is covered with cartilage and is at the end of the bones
d) The place where bone meets other bones
e) The part that makes up the hard outer shell of the bone
ab) The part that makes all the blood cells
ac) None of the above

__ 2. What is a joint?
a) the middle or “shaft” of the bone
b) The place where muscles will attach to bone
0) The part that is covered with cartilage and is at the end of the bones
d) The place where bone meets other bones
e) The part that makes up the hard outer shell of the bone
ab) The part that makes all the blood cells
ac) None of the above

_ 3. What is the diaphysis?
a) The middle or “shaft” of the bone
b) The place where muscles will attach to bone
c) The part that is covered with cartilage and is at the end of the bones
d) The place where bone meets other bones
e) The part that makes up the hard outer shell of the bone
ab) The part that makes all the blood cells
ac) None of the above

_ 4. What is the Bone Marrow?
a) The middle or “shaft” of the bone
b) The place where muscles will attach to bone
c) The part that is covered with cartilage and is at the end of the bones
d) The place where bone meets other bones
e) The part that makes up the hard outer shell of the bone
ab) The part that makes all the blood cells
ac) None of the above

5. Why do we have spongy bone?

a) The soft bone absorbs shock.

b) The holes in spongy bone store water.

0) The holes in the bone make the bones lighter
d) The soft bone allows for more flexibility.

e) None of the above

94

_ 6. What does an osteoblast do?
a) Breaks down bone
b) Protects the bone
c) Adds calcium to the blood
(1) Builds new bone
e) Both “a” and “c” are correct

_ 7. What parts of the bone contain living cells?
a) The marrow
b) The compact bone
0) The ends of the bone
d) The outer-most layer of a bone
c) All of the above

_ 8. What does a tendon do?
a) Connects one bone to another
b) Connects one muscle to another
c) Connects a muscle to a bone
(1) I holds organs in place
e) All of the above

_ 9. How does the body respond to a bone fracture?
a) Osteoblasts begin to make new bone at the fracture site
b) The broken bone is removed by white blood cells
c) Osteoblasts break down the broken area of the bone
(1) New bone will only be laid down if the person with the broken bone
immobilizes the bone.
c) All of the above

_ 10. Which of the following is true of bone anatomy?
a) Bones contain living cells
b) Bones are responsible for making blood stem cells
c) A process is the part of the bone where muscles attach to the bone
d) Bones are surrounded with a membrane
c) all of the above

_ 11. What is Compact Bone?
a) The middle or “shaft” of the bone
b) The place where muscles will attach to bone
0) The part that is covered with cartilage and is at the end of the bones
d) The place where bone meets other bones
e) The part that makes up the hard outer shell of the bone
ab) The part that makes all the blood cells
ac) None of the above

95

_ 12. What is a Process?
a) The middle or “shaft” of the bone
b) The place where muscles will attach to bone
0) The part that is covered with cartilage and is at the end of the bones
d) The place where bone meets other bones
e) The part that makes up the hard outer shell of the bone
ab) The part that makes all the blood cells
ac) None of the above

_ 13. What are the joints that hold your skull together called?
a) Skulljoints
b) Sutures
c) Osteons
d) Ball and socket
e) Condyloid
ab) None of the above.

_ 14. What is the lower part of your spine (between your hip bones) called that is made of
fused together vertebrae?

a) Coccyx

b) Sacrum

c) Lumbar

d) Spinal cord

e) Calcanious

_ 15. What is heel bone called?
a) Coccyx
b) Sacrum
c) Lumbar
d) Spinal cord
e) Calcanious

__ 16. What is the “tail” bone called?
a) Coccyx
b) Sacrum
c) Lumbar
d) Spinal cord
e) Calcanious

96

For 17 - 35 , identify the parts of the skeletal system

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

26. a) Cranium
b) Patella
17' c) Phalanges
d) Scapula
27. e) Ulna
(shoulder ab) Radius
18. blade ac) Metatarsals
28.
19. ad) Femur
29 ac) Fibula
abc) Rib
30.
20.
abd) Tibia
21. 31. abe) Clavicle
32' acd) Sternum
33
ace) Metacarpals
34.
22. abcd) Carpals
abce) Tarsals
23' abcde) Humerus
24. bc) Vertebra
25 35, (mid bd) Pelvic bones
(ankl foot)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

97

Short Answer:

36. What are the three regions of the spine called and where are they found? (3 points)

37. Describe the two types of cells found in and around compact bone. What do they both
do? (2 points)

38. What are four functions of the skeletal system? (4 points)

Essay Questions:

39. Describe some common problems people have with bones. (5 points)

98

APPENDIX III-E

Name: Date:

 

Hour:

 

Neuro-muscular junction pre-test

1. A neuron is also known as:
a) A nerve cell

b) A muscle cell

c) A bone cell

d) A blood cell

e) None of the above

2. A neurotransmitter is:

a) Used in order to produce an electrical charge

b) Powers myosin filaments

c) A chemical that carries a message across a synapse
d) Another word for a calcium ion

e) All of the above

3. Water plays an important part in biology because:

a) It is a polar molecule

b) It is a solvent in which many other molecules can be dissolved
c) It plays a part in making and breaking many chemical bonds
d) It resists changes in temperature

c) All of the above

99

4. Tissues throughout the body respond to signals

 

a) Chemical

b) Electrical

c) Light

(I) “a” and “b” are correct

e) None of the above

5. How fast do signals travel from your brain to your leg muscles?

a) At the speed of light

b) Very fast, but nowhere near the speed of light.

c) Very slowly, but most of the distance is skipped thanks to electron transport chains.
(1) It can vary depending on chemicals present (or absent) in your blood.

e) “b” and “d” are correct.

100

APPENDIX III-F

Name: Date:

 

 

Hour:

 

Neuro-muscular junction post-test

1. A neuron is also known as:
a) A nerve cell

b) A muscle cell

c) A bone cell

d) A blood cell

e) None of the above

2. A neurotransmitter is:

a) Used in order to produce an electrical charge

b) Powers myosin filaments

c) A chemical that carries a message across a synapse
(1) Another word for a calcium ion

e) All of the above

3. Water plays an important part in biology because:

a) It is a polar molecule

b) It is a solvent in which many other molecules can be dissolved
c) It plays a part in making and breaking many chemical bonds
d) It resists changes in temperature

c) All of the above

101

4. Tissues throughout the body respond to signals

 

a) Chemical

b) Electrical

c) Light

(I) “a” and “b” are correct

e) None of the above

5. How fast do signals travel from your brain to your leg muscles?
a) At the speed of light

b) Very fast, but nowhere near the speed of light.

c) Very slowly, but most of the distance is skipped thanks to electron transport chains.
d) It can vary depending on chemicals present (or absent) in your blood.

e) “b” and “d” are correct.

102

Appendix IV:

Laboratory Explorations

A- Muscle Contraction Lab ........................................................................................... 104
B- Muscle Lab Isolation Box Instructions ................................................................... 109
0 Bone Dissection Lab ................................................................................................ 111
D- Neuromuscular Lab .................................................................................................. 114

103

APPENDIX IV-A

Name: Date:
Hour:

 

 

 

Controlled Muscle Contraction
and Fatigu_e

 

 

Introduction:

Any time you move, your body shortens skeletal muscles to move your bones. This
shortening is possible because of a complex series of interactions between protein
filaments, ions, enzymes, oxygen, glucose, and A TP.

With repeated use of a muscle group, your muscles run low on necessary components of
the contraction reaction. Fortunately, you have many muscle groups that act as
synergists. These synergist muscle groups can take over more of the work load as the
prime mover becomes less able to contract.

For example, you may notice that if you ride a bike for a long period of time, your
muscles become increasingly uncomfortable. If you shift your body position on the bike,
you are able to continue riding at roughly the same speed and your muscles are more
comfortable than they were. Slight changes in body posture and position change which
muscle groups are doing the most work.

In this lab, we will isolate one small muscle group and not allow synergistic muscles to
aid in the contraction. We will make observations and record data in order to better
understand how our muscles fatigue. We will make conclusions as to how and why the
adaptation of synergist muscles came to be.

Learning the Language:

Make sure you can use the following words. Write definition for the following terms in
your own words. Give an example where appropriate.

Skeletal Muscle:

104

Protein Filaments:

Ion:

Enzymes:
Oxygen:

math
fi“

Prime Mover:

Glucose:

ATP:

Synergist:

Lab Materials:

-Muscle Isolation Box

-Pencil

-Paper

Procedure:

Set up:

1. Assign one member of your group the record keeper and the other as the test subject
2. The test subject should be sitting comfortably in arms reach of the isolation box.

Once the test subject is seated comfortably it is important not to change the position of
the test subject or the box.

105

3. The test subject will put on the muscle isolation glove. Notice that there are dots
drawn on the isolation glove and that your fingers are restricted.

4. The test subject will put his/her hand in the muscle isolation box. Inside the box is a
switch made from a clothespin. The test subject needs to put his/her hand on this
clothespin so that the dots on their glove touch the dots on the pin. This ensures mat the
subject always has their hand in exactly the same position.

5. The record keeper will place a hand on the top of the isolation box to hold it steady.
Make sure the position of the box does not change during the entire procedure.

Experiment and data collection:

6. Both group members should wait for Mr. Rissi to say “Go”. The test subject should
squeeze the clothespin until the “at rest” light goes out and the “full contraction” light
turns on. Then the test subject should release the clothespin and repeat this motion as
many times as possible.

7. The record keeper should be focusing on the lights on the top of the box. Every time
the “full contraction” light turns on, the time keeper will need to count the contraction. In
order to be sure the test subject is performing full contractions, the record keeper needs to
ensure the “full rest” light is coming on between contractions. If it does not, the next
contraction does not count.

8. At the end of 40 seconds, Mr. Rissi will say “Stop”. The test subject can rest. The
record keeper should record the number of full contractions in table 1 below.

9. Repeat this procedure 12 times.

10. Switch roles, and repeat the procedure again.

Table 13:

 

Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial Trial

 

Test
subject
#1

 

 

Test
subject
#2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results:

106

Using graph paper, graph you and your partner’s data on one graph.

Interpreting Results:
Answer the following:

1. What trends do you see in your graph? Make a hypothesis concerning why this trend
is happening.

Conclusions:

 

2. As the numbers on your graph go down, what is happening inside each muscle fiber
(cell)?

3. During the 20 second rest between each trial, what is going on inside your body?

4. Why was so much care taken to make sure the test subject or the box did not move?
Why did we use the box? Why not just have a clothespin? Is this good science? Why or
why not?

107

 

5. Predict what would happen if you were allowed to change the position of your hand at
trial #6. Why would this happen?

6. Let’s say you want to be the world’s clothespin squishing champion. What sorts of
things could you do to increase your performance? What would happen to your muscle
physiology if you did these things?

108

APPENDIX IV-B

-In order to control muscle movement during the Controlled Muscle Contraction and
Fatigue lab, a devise was constructed that limited the test subject’s arm movement during
the lab and lit a light bulb every time a full range of motion was achieved. The light bulb
insured full contraction of the muscle group being observed and also allowed the recorder
to count light blinks to ensure more accurate data collection. The directions and diagram
below demonstrate how the devise was built:

Materials:

1. One #4 5” or 6” machine screw and nut. 5. Small gage wire

2. One spring-type clothespin. 6. AA battery

3. One board (1/2” x 4” molding strips work well) 7. Flash light bulb

cut into 4” sections (with beveled 45° joints if you 8. Wood glue

want to be fancy and have a miter saw handy) 9. Drill with 1/8” bit

4. Aluminum foil 10. One sheet of cardboard

Constructig (refer to figure 3 on next page):

1. Make a box from the cut board sections.

2. Secure the box to the center of the cardboard using glue with the open end facing the
user.

3. Drill 1/8” hole through horizontal axis of the box (a). Drill another hole in the top of
the box (b).

4. Glue aluminum foil to the ends of the clothespin (f).

5. Insert the clothespin into the box and secure by running the machine screw through
the drilled hole on the left side of the box (a), then through the clothespin spring, then
through the right side of the box (a) and use the nut to secure it in place.

6. Run wires from the alumintun covered ends of the clothespin and up through the top
of the box. One wire should contact a battery glued to the cardboard (c). The second
wire should contact one lead of the flashlight bulb (d).

7. Use a second wire to attach the remaining lead of the light bulb (d) to the other end of
the battery(c). When the clothespin is pinched, the light bulb should light if the wiring is
done correctly.

9. Draw an arrow indicating where the test subject’s wrist should rest (e).

109

 

 

Figurg 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

110

APPENDIX IV-C

Name: Date: Hour:

Bone Dissection and Density Analysis
Lab

The bone is made of living tissue. In order to better understand the anatomy of a bone, we will
be cross sectioning a bone, examining its structure, and measuring its density.

§§gp A: Bone preparation:

1. If your teacher is feeling nice, he will prepare a long leg bone from an animal. To do this, first
the bone must be boiled for several hours to remove most of the fat from inside and outside the
bone.

2. The bone will then need to be soaked in a bleach solution in order to further break down fats
and proteins. This will also sterilize the bone.

3. The bone will then need to be scrubbed with an abrasive pad to remove any remaining flesh
from the bone.

§tgp 8: Examine the gggrngl strgcture bf ghg bgng:

1. Examine the outside of the bone. Look in your book at the picture on page . Draw
your bone below as it looks right now and label the parts:

-Proximal Epiphysis

-Distal Epiphysis

111

 

-Diaphysis

-Articular cartilage

Step g: QM! and gross Segipn:

1. Draw 7 even lines on the bone with a permanent marker. Number the sections 1-8. Add
these lines to your drawing above.

2. We will now attempt to section the bones along these lines. I have no idea how challenging
this might be. We will do our best. Try your best to follow the lines drawn on the bone.

Stgp D: Examine your sectipn:

1. Examine and draw your cross section below. Label the parts:
-Compact bone
-Marrow cavity

-Spongy bone

2. Using the stereoscope examine the compact bone. Record your observations below.

112

 

gep E: Find thg density:

1. Using the triple beam balance, find the mass of your bone section.
2. Using the large graduated cylinder, find the volume of your section.
3. Find density by dividing mass by volume

m/v=

4. Record your density on the board.

figp F: lntgrprgt ppr rgsults:

1. What does our bone density map tell us about the anatomy of bones?

113

APPENDIX IV-D

Name:

 

Reaction Time Investigation

In order to better understand what sorts of factors affect the nervous system and its
communication with muscle tissue, you will design an investigation.

You may wish to use reaction timers provided. One person will need to activate the timer
with the thumb switch. The red light on top of the box will light when the timer starts.
The test subject will need to step on the foot switch the moment they see the red light
activate.

The digital readout on the box will show the test subject’s reaction time.

Journal Write After Completion

1. What was the hypothesis of your investigation and what did you do to test the
hypothesis?

2. What was the result of your investigation?

3. Did you find working in a group challenging? What did you like about working as a
class and what did you not like?

114

Appendix V:

Written Assignments
A- Muscle Section Assignment .................................................................................... 116
B- Bone Section Assignment ........................................................................................ 117
C- Neuromuscular Section Assignment ....................................................................... 118

115

APPENDIX V-A

Name: Date:
Hour:

 

 

PBL Problem 1 Write Up: Muscles

Answer the following questions in complete sentences. Please type your responses. These
responses are due

 

1. Describe what you think caused our runner’s muscle cramp? What is a cramp? Make sure to

include how a normal muscle contraction works and contrast that to how a cramped muscle is
fiinctioning.

2. What could our runner do to prevent muscle cramps in the future? Why would these
preventative measures work?

3. Did any factors in the PBL problem not play a significant role?

116

APPENDIX V-B

Name: Date:
Hour:

 

 

PBL Problem 2 Write Up: Bones

Answer the following questions in complete sentences. Please type your responses. These
responses are due

 

1. What caused our runner’s stress fracture? Make sure you describe the structure of a healthy
bone and what has gone wrong in order to produce a stress fracture.

2. What can be done to prevent stress fractures? Why would these preventative measures be
helpful?

3. What are some other bone injuries? Compare and contrast any you can think of.

4. What are at least three different jobs bones do? Explain these jobs. Show me that you
understand how bones play a part in other systems of the body.

117

APPENDIX V-C

Name: Date:
Hour:

 

 

PBL Problem 3 Write Up: Nervou_s Svstem and Muscles

Answer the following questions in complete sentences. Please type your responses. These
responses are due

 

1. Why is our runner having problems now? How does a normally functioning nerve impulse
compare to what is happening in our runner now?

2. What role does water play?

3. What ions are important when making your body move? Why?

118

 

Appendix VI:

Survey

A- Survey ....................................................................................................................... 120

119

 

APPENDIX VI-A

PBL Opinion Survey

Please take a moment to fill out this survey concerning your experience with the PBL unit we have just
completed. Your answers will be kept strictly confidential. Circle your response.

1. Traditional teaching methods help me learn scientific concepts.

5-Strongly Agree 4-Agree 3-Neither agree nor disagree 2-Disagree l-Strongly
disagree

2. PBL teaching methods help me learn scientific concepts

5-Strongly Agree 4-Agree 3-Neither agree nor disagree 2-Disagree l-Strongly
disagree

3. Traditional methods are more effective than PBL methods in helping me learn scientific information

5-Strongly Agree 4-Agree 3-Neither agree nor disagree 2-Disagree l-Strongly
disagree

4. I prefer developing my own questions to research and investigate rather than answering a question given
to me by someone else

S-Strongly Agree 4-Agree 3-Neither agree nor disagree 2-Disagree l-Strongly
disagree

5. 1 find value in working with other students in a team to solve a problem.

S-Strongly Agree 4-Agree 3-Neither agree nor disagree 2-Disagree 1-Strongly
disagree

6. Problem-Based Learning was more interesting than traditional methods

S—Strongly Agree 4wAgree 3-Neither agree nor disagree 2-Disagree l-Strongly
disagree

7. I feel that Problem-Based Learning will help information from this unit stay in my memory longer than
traditional methods.

S-Strongly Agree 4-Agree 3—Neither agree nor disagree 2-Disagree l-Strongly
disagree

120

8. I fell that my understanding of bone and muscle anatomy and physiology is more complete than if 1 had
read the information from a text book.

5-Strongly Agree 4-Agree 3-Neither agree nor disagree 2-Disagree 1-Strongly
disagree

9. I think the lab activities in this unit aided in my understanding of the concepts covered in this unit

S-Strongly Agree 4-Agree 3-Neither agree nor disagree 2-Disagree l-Strongly
disagree

10. I prefer PBL to traditional classroom methods

5-Strongly Agree 4-Agree 3-Neither agree nor disagree 2-Disagree l-Strongly
disagree

121

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

122

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Albanese, M.A., & Mitchell, 8. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of the
literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68 (1), 52-81.

Bellisimo, Y., Maxwell, N.L., and Megendoller, J .R. (2006). The Effectiveness of
Problem-based Instruction: A Comparative Study of Instructional Methods and Student
Characteristics. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1 (2), 49-69.

Boud, D., & F eletti, G. (1997). The challenge of problem-based learning (2nd ed.).
London: Kogan Page.

Bratt, K., & Elbousty, Y. (2010). Team Strategies for School Improvement: The

Ongoing Development of the Professional Learning Community. MASCD perspectives,
6-9.

Bransford, J .D. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School.
Washington DC: National Academy Press.

Burris, S. (2005). Eflect of Problem-Based Learning on Critical Thinking Ability and
Content Knowledge of Secondary Agriculture Students. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. University of Missouri-Columbia.

US. Census 2000, retrieved June 14, 2010 from Census.gov
http :// factfinder.census.gov/ servlet/ SAF F F acts

Colliver, J.A., (2000). Effectiveness of Problem-based Learning Curricula: Research
and Theory. Academic Medicine, 75(3), 259-266.

Duffy, T.M., & Savery, J .R. (1995). Problem-based learning: An instructional model
and its constructivist framework, Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in
instructional design (pp. 1 35-148). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology
Publications.

DuF our, R., Baker, R., and DuF our, R. (2005). Recurring Themes of Professional
Learning Communities and the Assumptions They Challenge. 0n Common Ground:

123

 

The Power of Professional Learning Communities. (pp. 7-29). Bloomington, IN:
National Education Service.

Eberhardt, Jan. Personal interview. North Kedzie Hall, Michigan State University
Campus July 6 2009.

Finkelstein, M., & Lohman, MC. (2004). Designing groups in problem-based learning
to promote problem-solving skill and self-directedness, Instructional Science, 28(4), 291 -
307.

Gallagher, 8., & Stepien, W. (1993). Problem-Based Learning: As Authentic as It Gets.
Educational Leadership, 50(7), 25-28.

Gatto, J.T., (2001). How public education cripples our kids, and why. Harper ’s
Magazine, (September 2003), 33-38.

Hmelo, CE, (1994). The Cognitive Effects of Problem-Based Learning: A Preliminary
Study. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, (April 4-8, 1994).

Hmelo-Silver, C.E., Duncan, R.G., and Chinn, Clark A. (2007). Scaffolding and
Achievement in Problem-Based and Inquiry Learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller,
and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107.

Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J. and Clark, RE. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During
Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery,

Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist,
41(2), 75-86.

Marzano, R.J., Pickering, D.J., and Pollock, J .E. Classroom Instruction That Works:
Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement. Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2001.

Marzano, R.J., & Kendall, J.S. Awash in a Sea of Standards. Mid-continent Research
for Education and Learning, 1998.

124

MacDonald, R., & Savin-Baden, M. (2004). A Briefing on Assessment in Problem-based
Learning Assessment Series, 13, 2-21.

McCabe, Laura. Personal interview. Biomedical and Physical Sciences Building,
Michigan State University Campus 22 June 2009.

Pigliucci, M., (2007). The Evolution-Creation Wars: Why Teaching More Science Just
Is Not Enough. McGill Journal of Education, 42 (2) 285-306.

Sagan, C. Interview with Anne Kalosh conducted 1995.

Savery, J .R. (2006). Overview of Problem-based Learning: Definitions and Distinctions.
The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning. 1 (1) 9-20.

Ward, J .D. & Lee, CL. (2002). A review of Problem-Based Learning. Journal of
Family and Consumer Sciences Education. 20(1) 16-26

Waterman, MA. (1997). Curriculum and Teacher Development in Biology via Case
Writing. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association. (March 24-28, 1997).

Western School District (2010). Western School District information. Retieved June 14,
2010 from Western School District Web site:

http://westernschools.schoolfusion.us/modules.

125

 

"1111111111111111111111111!!!”s