Whose learning is it anyway? Problem-based learning in language teacher development

Abstract

This article describes the piloting of a problem-based learning (PBL) approach in a teacher education context. Originating in medical education in the 1980s, PBL is now applied in the teaching of a broad range of disciplines. While increasingly used in teacher education, however, PBL has not been applied, to the author's knowledge, in the area reported on in this paper – language learning materials development. Problem-based learning is rooted in constructivist philosophy, which holds that knowledge is actively constructed within the mind of the learner and influenced by his/her interactions with peers and with the environment. Furthermore, constructivism holds that learning is spurred by ‘the problematic’ (i.e. cognitive conflict). In PBL, cognitive conflict is ‘concretised’, in that a real problem is used to trigger the learning process. This article reports on the piloting of PBL on a materials development module in a Masters in English Language Teaching programme in Ireland. It presents the students’ and tutor's reflections on the approach. These are largely positive as regards the development of professional skills especially teamwork, leadership and achieving compromise. It concludes with recommendations for further research on the use of PBL in language teacher education programmes.

Keywords:

• problem-based learning
• teacher education
• constructivist approaches
• language teaching
• learner centredness
• teaching materials

Notes

1. Reference should be made here to Bloom's Taxonomy (1956), which is classically used to categorise thinking skills on a level from one (knowledge memorisation, recall, etc.) to six (evaluation).

2. This is currently being revised as some materials development programmes are now open to students with less teaching experience.

3. These were adapted from self- and peer-reflection forms produced by Helelä and Fagerholm (2008), freely accessible online at http://myy.haaga-helia.fi/~liibba/assessment (specifically pblweb-self-assessment.doc and pblweb-group-member-assessment.doc).

4. Percentage figures given here and below are based on analysis of the four assessment instruments (two self- and two peer-assessments) plus the data gathered from the overall anonymous feedback (see Appendix 4), where relevant.

5. Participants’ names have been replaced by letters on a random basis.

6. His/her, etc. used throughout to disguise gender in the interests of anonymity.

7. The L2 acquisition rationale can be seen at: http://maeltteachersresouce.yolasite.com/rationale.php

8. This was provided on Surveymonkey.com in the interests of anonymity as recommended by the University of Limerick Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences Ethics Committee (FAHSSREC).