Abstract
Problem-based learning (PBL) is an instructional design approach designed to facilitate student learning in context-rich settings. GlobalEd2 (GE2) is a PBL curriculum intervention that combines face-to-face and online learning environments into a 14-week multi-player (N > 400) simulation of international negotiations among students in the roles of science delegates on global socio-scientific issues. Although GE2 focuses on science and written argumentation, it is implemented within social science classes that can span time zones, geographic and social boundaries while engaging 400+ middle-grade students in an authentically rich and engaging learning environment. This chapter describes the structural components that have made GE2 successful in promoting student learning across middle school grades, high school, college, and professional education. Further, the GE2 provides a multiyear set of data revealing GE2’s impact on students’ knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors (KABs). Implications are discussed regarding the instructional framework that has enabled GE2 to successfully evolve over the past 15 years and the future plans for development.
The authors wish to acknowledge the US Department of Education’s Institute for Education Sciences support through grants #R305A080622; #R305A1391895 and #R305A170588. The opinions expressed here are those of the authors and do not represent the position of the United States Department of Education.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 1–12.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Barton, K. C., & Levstik, L. S. (2004). Teaching history for the common good. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bednar, A. K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T. M., & Perry, J. D. (1992). Theory into practice: How do we link? In T. M. Duffy & D. J. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Boyer, M. A., Brown, S. W., Butler, M., Florea, N., Hernandez, M., Johnson, P. R. … Lima, C. O. (2004). Educating for global awareness: Implications for governance and generational change. Global Change, Peace & Security, 16(1), 73–77.
Boyer, M. A., Brown, S. W., Butler, M. J., Niv-Solomon, A., Urlacher, B., Hudson, N. F. ... Lima, C. O. (2007). Experimenting with global governance: Understanding the potential for generational change. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 5(2), 153–180.
Boyer, M. A., Florea, N., Butler, M., Brown, S. W., Meng, L., Johnson, P. R., & Lima, C., (2005). Understanding security through the eyes of the young, in The IPE yearbook published by Lynne Reinner Press.
Brown, S. W. (2007, January). The GlobalEd project goes international: The Cyprus Project. Presentation at The Doves Olympic Movement Leadership Conference, Agros, Cyprus.
Brown, S. W., Boyer, M. A., Johnson, P. R., Lima, C. O., Butler, M., Florea, N., & Rich, J. (2004). The GlobalEd Project: Problem-solving and decision making in a web-based PBL. In Conference Proceedings of Edu-Media, June 24, 2004. Lugano, Switzerland.
Brown, S. W., Boyer, M. A., Mayall, H. J., Johnson, P. R., Meng, L., Butler, M. J., ... Reis, S. (2003). The GlobalEd project: Gender differences in a problem-based learning environment of international negotiations. Instructional Science, 31(4–5), 255–276.
Brown, S. W., & Lawless, K. A. (2014). Promoting students’ writing skills in science through an educational simulation: The GlobalEd 2 project. In P. Zaphiris (Ed.) Human-computer interaction, Part I, HCII 2014, LNCS 8523 (pp. 371–379). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Brown, S. W., Lawless, K. A., & Boyer, M. A., (2009, October). The GlobalEd 2 Project: Expanding the science and literacy curricular space. In T. Bastiaens et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2009 (pp. 160–164). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/32449.
Brown, S. W., Lawless, K. A., & Boyer, M. A. (2013). Promoting positive academic dispositions using a web-based PBL environment: The GlobalEd 2 Project. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 7(1), 67–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1389.
Brown, S. W., Lawless, K. A., & Boyer, M. A. (2015). The GlobalEd 2 simulations: Promoting positive academic dispositions in middle school students in a web-based PBL environment (pp. 147–159). In A. Walker, H. Leary, C. Hmelo-Silver, & P. Ertmer (Eds.), Essential readings in problem-based learning. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
Brown, S. W., Lawless, K. A., Rhoads, C., Newton, S. D., & Lynn, L. (2016, October). Increasing students’ science writing skills through a PBL simulation. In D. Sampson, J. M. Spector, D. Ifenthaler, & P. Isaias (Eds.), Proceedings of The 13th IADIS International Conference Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA) (pp. 86–94). Mannheim, Germany: International Association for Development of the Information Society.
Brown, S. W., Lawless, K. A., Newton, S. D., Lynn, L., Riel, J., Song, S., & Oren, J. (2018, February 9). Increasing students’ engagement with STEM through a PBL simulation. In Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association, Clearwater, FL.
Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175–218.
Dede, C. (2009). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved December 7, 2018, from http://sttechnology.pbworks.com/f/Dede_(2010)_Comparing%20Frameworks%20for%2021st%20Century%20Skills.pdf.
Fadel, C. (2008). 21st century skills: How can you prepare students for the new global economy? Paper presented at the OECD/CERI Conference in Paris, France in May 2008.
Florea, N., Boyer, M. A., Brown, S. W., Butler, M. J., Hernandez, M., Weir, K. ... Lima, C. (2003). Negotiating from Mars to Venus: Some findings on gender’s impact in simulated international negotiations. Simulation and Games, 34(2), 226–248.
Gehlbach, H., Brown, S.W., Ioannou, A., Boyer, M.A., Hudson, N., Niv-Solomon, A., … Janik, L. (2008). Increasing interest in social studies: Social perspective-taking and self-efficacy in stimulating simulations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 894–914.
Goodnough, K. C., & Hung, W. (2008). Engaging teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge: Adopting a nine-step problem-based learning model. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 2(2), 61–90.
Graham, S. (2015, April 26). Preparing for the 21st century: Soft skills matter. Huffington Post. Retrieved December 8, 2018, from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/stedman-graham/preparing-for-the-21st-ce_b_6738538.html.
Greening, T. (1998). Scaffolding for success in problem-based learning. Medical Education Online, 3(4), 1–15.
Hand, B., Yore, L. D., Jagger, S., & Prain, V. (2010). Connecting research in science literacy and classroom practice: A review of science teaching journals in Australia, the UK and the United States, 1998–2008. Studies in Science Education, 46(1), 45–68.
Hurd, P. (1998). Science literacy: New minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82, 407–418.
Jonassen, D. H. (2009). Assembling and analyzing the building blocks of problem-based learning environments. In K. H. Silber & W. R. Foshay (Eds.), Handbook of improving performance in the workplace, volume one: Instructional design and training delivery. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Koschmann, T. D., Kelson, A. C., Feltovich, P. J., & Barrows, H. S. (1996). Computer-supported problem-based learning: A principled approach to the use of computers in collaborative learning. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 83–124). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (2015). Developing scientific literacy skills through interdisciplinary, technology-based Global simulations: GlobalEd 2. The Curriculum Journal, 1, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2015.1009133.
Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (in press). Promoting global citizenship and STEM literacies with a GlobalEd simulation. In C. Wright-Maley (Ed.), Teaching life itself: Simulations as powerful and purposeful social studies. Information Age Publishing; Palgrave.
Lawless, K. A., Brown, S. W., & Boyer, M. A. (2016). Educating students for STEM literacy: GlobalEd 2. In R. D. Lansiquot (Ed.), Technology, theory and practice in interdisciplinary STEM programs: Connecting STEM and non-STEM approaches (pp. 53–82). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-1-137-56738-3. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56739-0.
Lawless, K. A., Brown, S. W., Rhoads, C., Lynn, L., Newton, S. D., Brodowiska, K. B., … Song, S. (2017). Promoting students’ science literacy skills through a simulation of international negotiations: The GlobalEd 2 project. Computers in Human Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.08.027.
Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 75–614. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307309921.
Mansilla, V. B., Jackson, A., & Jacobs, I. H. (2013). Educating for global competence: Learning redefined for an interconnected world. In Mastering global literacy (pp. 5–27). New York: Solution Tree.
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers’ instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 53–78.
Midgette, E., Haria, P., & MacArthur, C. (2008). The effects of content and audience awareness goals for revision on the persuasive essays of fifth- and eighth-grade students. Reading and Writing, 21(1–2), 131–151.
Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (Eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: King’s College, School of Education. Retrieved from http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/Beyond%202000.pdf.
Monk, M., & Osborne, J. (1997). Placing the history and philosophy of science on the curriculum: A model for the development of pedagogy. Science Education, 81, 405–424.
National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). (2011). Retrieved June 15, 2012, from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_idD13165.
Newcombe, N. S., Ambady, N., Eccles, J., Gomez, L., Klahr, D., Linn, M., Miller, K., & Mix, K. (2009). Psychology’s role in mathematics and science education. American Psychologist, 64(6), 538–550.
Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). (2013). Retrieved January 12, 2018, from https://www.nextgenscience.org/.
Osborne, J. F., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Ideas, evidence and argument in science: In-service training pack, resource pack and video. London: Nuffield Foundation.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 56, 543–578.
Picho, K., & Brown, S. W. (2011). Can stereotype threat be measured? A validation of the social identities and attitudes scale (SIAS). Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(3), 374–411.
Riel, J., Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (2016). Listening to the teachers: Using weekly online teacher logs for ROPD to identify teachers’ persistent challenges when implementing a blended learning curriculum. Journal of Online Learning Research, 2(2), 169–200.
Riel, J., Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (2017). Defining and designing responsive online professional development (ROPD): A framework to support curriculum implementation. In T. Kidd & L.R. Morris, Jr. (Eds.), Handbook of research on instructional systems and technology (Chapter 10, pp. 104–115). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. ISBN 9781522523994.
Riel, J., Lawless, K., & Brown, S. W. (2018). Timing matters: Approaches for measuring and visualizing behaviours of timing and spacing of work in self-paced online teacher professional development courses. Journal of Learning Analytics, 5(1), 25–40. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2018.51.3.
Rose, S. L., & Barton, A. C. (2012). Should Great Lakes city build a new power plant? How youth navigate socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(5), 541–567.
Sadler, T. D. (2009). Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice. Studies in Science Education, 45, 1–42.
Sadler, T. D., Romine, W. L., & Topçu, M. S. (2016). Learning science content through socio-scientific issues-based instruction: a multi-level assessment study. International Journal of Science Education, 38(10), 1622–1635.
Savery, J., & Duffy, T. (1996). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design educational technology (2nd printing ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Educational Technology Publications.
Scheiner, S., & Willig, M. R. (2008). A general theory of ecology. Theoretical Ecology, 1(1), 21–28.
Schrader, P. G., & Lawless, K. A. (2004). The knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors approach: How to evaluate performance and learning in complex environments. Journal of Performance Improvement Quarterly, 43(9), 8–15.
Schwarz, B. B., Neuman, Y., Gil, J., & Ilya, M. (2003). Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity: An empirical study. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 221–258.
Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., & Crawford, B. A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 610–645.
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52, 613–629.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. Published in The Systems Thinker. Retrieved from https://thesystemsthinker.com/communities-of-practice-learning-as-a-social-system/.
Yukhymenko, M. (2011). Students’ interest in social studies and negotiation self-efficacy: A meta-analysis of the GlobalEd project. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19(3), 369–392.
Zhao, Y. (2009). Catching up or leading the way: American education in the age of globalization. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 329–339.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brown, S.W., Lawless, K.A. (2019). The GlobalEd 2 Project: Interdisciplinary Simulations Promoting Students’ Socio-scientific Literacy. In: Díaz, P., Ioannou, A., Bhagat, K., Spector, J. (eds) Learning in a Digital World. Smart Computing and Intelligence. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8265-9_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8265-9_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-8264-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-8265-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)