Skip to main content
Log in

Catalysing student autonomy through action research in a problem centred learning environment

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This autobiographical article describes action research, utilising a hermeneutic dialectic methodology, on the efficacy of problem-based learning. In the emergent research design, the research focus for the teacher evolved as: “Can I, as an instructor, teach science in such a way that: the use of science in real life is emphasised; an interdisciplinary approach is utilised; assessment is an integral part of instruction; and learning is student-driven, not teacher directed?” To answer this research question, the article focuses on the emergence of students' critical thinking skills, the relevance of science concepts taught, the interdisciplinary nature of the problems addressed, the use of alternative methods of assessment, and the changing roles of the teacher and the students. One significant finding reported in the article is the development of student autonomy, as the problem-based learning format allowed students freedom to pursure diverse research agendas and to accept increasing responsibility for their own learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Boud, D. (Ed.), (1985).Problem-based learning in education for the professions. Kensington, Australia: Higher Education Research an Development Society of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridges, E. M., & Hallinger, P. (1991).Problem-based learning in medical and managerial education. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University, School of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 343 265)

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, N. T., McCarty, B. J., Shaw, K. L., & Sidani-Tabbaa, A. (1993). Transitions from objectivism to constructivism in science education.International Journal of Science Education, 15, 627–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.),Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1–17). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, S. A., Stepien, W. J., & Rosenthal, H. (1992). The effects of problem-based learning on problem solving.Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 195–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundy, S. (1987).Curriculum: Product or praxis. London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989).Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.),Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970).The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorsbach, A. W., Tobin, K., Briscoe, C., & LaMaster, S. U. (1992). An interpretation of assessment methods in middle school science.International Journal of Science Education, 14(3), 305–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, J. (1994). Problem-based learning with database systems.Computers and Education, 22, 257–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Middleton, H. (1994).Problem-based learning in workshops. Adelaide, Australia: Griffith University, National Centre for Vocational Education Research. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 380 542)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieber, L. P. (1993). A pragmatic view of instructional technology. In K. Tobin (Ed.),The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 193–212). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W-M. (1993). Construction sites: Science labs and classrooms. In K. Tobin (Ed.),The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 145–170). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tippins, D. J., Tobin, K. G., & Hook, K. (1993). Ethical decisions at the heart of teaching: Making sense from a constructivist perspective.Journal of Moral Education, 22(3), 221–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning.School Science and Mathematics, 90(5), 403–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K. (1993a). Referents for making sense of science teaching.International Journal of Science Education, 15, 241–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K. (Ed.) (1993b).The practice of constructivism in science education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K., Briscoe, C., & Holman, J. (1990). Overcoming constraints to effective elementary science teaching.Science Education, 74(4), 409–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Tassel-Baska, J., Bailey, J., Gallagher, S., & Fettig, M. (1992).A conceptual overview of science education for high ability learners. Williamsburg, VA: The College of William and Mary, School of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 354 709)

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager, R. E., & Lutz, M. V. (1994). Integrated science: The importance of “how” versus “what”.School Science and Mathematics, 94(7), 338–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan Butler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Butler, S. Catalysing student autonomy through action research in a problem centred learning environment. Research in Science Education 29, 127–140 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461184

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461184

Keywords

Navigation