This article was downloaded by: [Universiti Sains Malaysia]

On: 28 February 2014, At: 03:10

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Biological Education

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjbe20

Implementing Project Work in Biology through

Problem-based Learning
a

Christine Chin & Li-Gek Chia

a

National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University , Singapore

Paya Lebar Methodist Girls' Secondary School , Singapore

Published online: 13 Dec 2010.

To cite this article: Christine Chin & Li-Gek Chia (2004) Implementing Project Work in Biology through Problem-based
Learning, Journal of Biological Education, 38:2, 69-75, DOI: 10.1080/00219266.2004.9655904
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2004.9655904

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Educational
Educational Research
research
Implementing Project
Work in Biology through
Problem-based Learning

Downloaded by [Universiti Sains Malaysia] at 03:10 28 February 2014

Christine Chin1, Li-Gek Chia2

National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore1
Paya Lebar Methodist Girls Secondary School, Singapore2
This study employed problem-based learning (PBL) for project work in a Year 9 biology class. The purpose of
the study was to investigate (a) how self-generated problems and questions directed students in their learning,
(b) how students reacted to this instructional approach, and (c) the problems that they encountered. Students
formulated problems that they were interested in investigating and posed questions to which they wanted
answers. These became the focus of subsequent inquiry and served to direct student learning in collaborative
groups. Data sources included observation and field notes, students written documents, audiotapes and
videotapes of students working in groups, and student interviews. Issues relating to the design, management,
and implementation of PBL in project work are discussed.
Key words: Problem-based learning, Project work, Nutrition, Secondary level, Students reactions.

Introduction
One of the recent initiatives implemented in Singaporean
schools is collaborative project work. The rationale for this is
that project work offers possibilities to develop qualities like
curiosity, creativity and resourcefulness . nurture critical
process skills for the information age . [and] forge teamwork
and interpersonal skills (Ministry of Education, 1999). In the
past, project work tended to be rather structured. Studies of
structured activities have found that students become so caught
up in carrying out prescribed procedures that they fail to think
deeply about the underlying science concepts. Little
construction of knowledge is attained when groups engage in
project work which merely compiles and presents information
that they have copied from books, other media resources, or
teachers notes (Marx et al, 1997).
One way to address this concern is to model projects on reallife problems. Such problems are ill-structured and provide
opportunities for students to apply thinking and problemsolving skills. The search for solutions begins with specifying the
problem space which is an initial phase of problem-solving
involving the construction of an internal, mental representation
of the problem using existing schemata perceived as relevant by
the problem solver (Appleton, 1995, p 383).
During the process of exploring the problem space, students
engage in many search strategies such as asking questions and
seeking answers to them. The thrust of such learning is
problem-based learning where students identify their own
problems which are often realistic and precede learning.
Problem-based learning
Problem-based learning (PBL) is an instructional model originally
developed in medical school programmes (Barrows and Tamblyn,
Journal of Biological Education (2004) 38(2)

1980). A problem acts as the stimulus and focus for student

activity and learning (Boud and Feletti, 1991). Learning in this way
is purposeful as students learn while searching for solutions to
problems and they learn in the context in which knowledge is to
be used. The traditional learning order which introduces problems
only after students have learnt the necessary body of knowledge
is reversed. The problem-first approach in PBL ensures that
students know why theyre learning what they are learning.
Features of PBL include: initiating learning with an illstructured problem; using the problem to structure the learning
agenda; working in collaborative groups; and using the
instructor as a meta-cognitive coach.
Ill-structured problems are those where (a) the initial situations
lack all the information necessary to develop a solution, (b)
there is no single right way to approach the task of problemsolving, (c) the problem definition changes as new information
is gathered, and (d) students will never be completely sure that
they have made the correct selection of solution options
(Gallagher et al, 1995). Ill-structured problems can elicit more
creative responses, facilitate learning by making connections
and help the students see the big picture, thus promoting
long-term retention of information (Boud and Feletti, 1991).
The first step in PBL is problem identification. Students
formulate a problem that is grounded in their experience. As
the problem is defined by interest and situated in real-life
contexts, motivation is high. Students are actively engaged in
learning and they are better able to form connections between
the science they encounter in their textbooks and the science
that is required to solve real-world problems (Yager, 1989;
Yager and McCormack, 1989). Students identify their own
ideas and learning issues pertinent to their problem and ask
focused questions related to these issues.
69

Downloaded by [Universiti Sains Malaysia] at 03:10 28 February 2014

Implementing project work in biology

Questions raised by students while exploring the problem

space serve several purposes (Schmidt, 1993). First, they activate
students prior knowledge, focus the learning effort, and
facilitate the understanding of new concepts to be mastered.
Second, questions help students elaborate on their knowledge
and lead to enrichment of their cognitive structures. Third, the
knowledge that students possess becomes tuned to the specific
problem-solving context provided. Fourth, questions arouse
epistemic curiosity in students to find out more details about
which processes are responsible for the phenomenon described.
Students questions can drive their learning and direct their
inquiry. The questions can stimulate the students themselves or
their peers to hypothesise, predict, generate explanations for
things which puzzle them, and reflect on their own ideas. This
can engender productive discussion, thereby leading to
meaningful knowledge construction (Chin et al, 2002).
In PBL, students make their own decisions about the
directions to take in their investigations, what information to
collect, and how to analyse and evaluate this information. PBL
can accommodate a variety of learning styles as there may be
alternative ways of reaching a solution to the problem. The
problem can promote a range of activities that allow students of
different levels to contribute to the solution (Delisle, 1997).
Working in groups promotes collaborative learning which is
consistent with the theory of social constructivism (Hennessy,
1993). Students are involved in a knowledge-building
community (Bereiter, 1994) where its members invest their
resources in the collective pursuit of understanding and a
common knowledge product.
In PBL, the teacher takes on a facilitating and supporting role
(Arambula-Greenfield, 1996), and acts as a meta-cognitive
coach and tutor instead of an expert who has the right answers
to the problem (Gallagher et al, 1995). The teachers role is to
acquaint learners with new ideas or cultural tools, to support
and guide students as they make sense of these (Driver et al,
1994), and to scaffold students ideas in the zone of proximal
development (Vygotsky, 1978).
Purpose of the study
As an instructional model, PBL has much potential in
promoting authentic inquiry in biology project work. Although
it has been used at tertiary level, this approach is relatively new
in schools and not much research has been documented. Thus,
it is of interest to study how PBL can be implemented in a
biology class at the secondary school level, and to find out how
students respond when they are asked to formulate their own
problems, pose their own questions, and design investigations to
answer these questions.
Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to investigate
students problem-based project work in a Year 9 biology class.
The focus was on how students carried out their investigative
projects through PBL, how the teacher mediated these
activities, and how the students responded to this mode of
learning. The specific research questions were:
1. How do self-generated problems and questions direct
students learning through problem-based project work?
2. How do students react to the problem-based learning
approach in project work?
3. What are some problems that students encounter? How
do these problems, as exemplified in this case study,
70

Chin and Chia

provide us with insights regarding the design, management,

and implementation of project work through problembased learning?
This case study of students carrying out project work via PBL
focuses mainly on implementation and management issues.
Information regarding other aspects of the larger study (of
which the present study forms a part) involving students
learning and knowledge construction are in the process of being
published elsewhere (Chin and Chia, in press).

Methods
The 18-week study took place in a Year 9 biology class (15year-olds) at an all-girl secondary school. The second author
was the science teacher. The class of 39 girls worked in nine
groups of four or five members each. Each group worked on a
self-selected project topic related to the theme Food and
Nutrition. The teacher integrated students project work ideas
and findings into her lessons which focused on enzymes, nutrients
and classes of food, a balanced diet, nutritional deficiency
diseases, animal nutrition, and plant nutrition. For example, at
different points in the lessons, teams of expert researchers
the students who investigated the different aspects of Food and
Nutrition were asked to share their expert knowledge of the
topics and issues that were being raised.
Procedure
In Stage 1 (Identifying the problem to be investigated), each group
read one of nine case studies and newspaper articles on topics
such as peoples diets, weight loss, health issues, dietary and
herbal supplements. They discussed their views and shared
them with the class. This activity gave the students an idea of
some issues related to Nutrition.
The students then individually constructed a mind map
based on issues that were of interest to them. They brought
their problem logs home and wrote down their ideas and
questions throughout the first week. Group members then
came together and decided on a group research topic. The
teacher showed the class examples of how to frame topics as illstructured problems. Each group then formulated a problem
and generated a problem statement. In writing their problems,
the students were encouraged to take on real-life problemsolving roles.
In Stage 2 (Exploring the problem space), the students designed
their own project tasks based on their identified problem. The
teacher helped them to establish a learning agenda by
organising the discussion around three focus questions
(Gallagher et al, 1995) using a Need-to-Know worksheet. The
questions were: (a) What do you know? (b) What do you need
to know? (c) How can you find out what you need to know? As
a group, the students regularly recorded their ideas and
questions on this worksheet. They also identified the resources
that they had to use, and the type of tasks they had to engage
in, to solve their problem.
In Stage 3 (Carrying out scientific inquiry), the students
gathered data to answer their questions. The teacher set up an
Internet forum page (e-circle) for students to consult a doctor,
a dentist, a nurse and a medical research worker. Students used
this platform to ask questions related to their research. They
also conducted library research and surfed the Internet. Some
groups used the science laboratory to carry out their
Journal of Biological Education (2004) 38(2)

Downloaded by [Universiti Sains Malaysia] at 03:10 28 February 2014

Implementing project work in biology

investigations, while others went on field investigations or

carried out surveys. Students who conducted interviews
planned and wrote their questions first.
In Stage 4 (Putting the information together), group members
reported on what they had done, completed further Need-toKnow worksheets and planned for further tasks. Each group
kept a small notebook which tracked the progress of their
inquiry. At the end of each meeting or investigation, the groups
filled in Learning Log and Project Tasks Allocation forms
where they recorded what they had found out and learnt, and
they also planned the next steps in their inquiry. This helped
them to review and consolidate the information gathered.
In Stage 5 (Presenting the findings, teacher evaluation and selfreflection), each group gave a 15-minute oral presentation and
answered questions posed by the rest of the class and the
teacher. All groups used technology-based multimedia modes of
delivery and submitted artefacts. The students also submitted a
group project file which documented the groups findings and
details of the inquiry process.
Each student also completed a self-evaluation How Did I Do?
form and a Project Work Feedback questionnaire. The How Did
I Do? form consisted of 13 items on a four-point Likert scale
where pupils assessed themselves on their knowledge application,
communication, and independent learning skills. There were also
open-ended questions which sought to find out the problems
that pupils encountered while carrying out the project.
The Project Work Feedback questionnaire comprised eight
Likert-scale items with anchor points ranging from strongly
disagree to strongly agree. There were also open-ended
questions that asked students how this project differed from
those that they had previously encountered, what they liked
and disliked about the project approach, what difficulties they
faced, and how doing this project helped in their learning about
Food and Nutrition.
Data collection and analysis
Planning forms and reflection logs (e.g. problem logs and Needto-Know worksheets) were used to guide students knowledge
construction and capture their thinking. Together with the
project files, these documents served as data sources for
subsequent analyses. The students were observed during project
work sessions and field notes were taken. Groups were selected,
in turn, for audiotaping and videotaping during interactive
discussions and hands-on activities. Students from each group
were also interviewed to find out what they had learnt and how
they felt about using problem-based learning in carrying out
project work. Data from multiple sources was content-analysed
in relation to each other. This triangulation process helped to
enhance the credibility of the findings and the assertions made
about students experiences. For example, data from videotapes
showing group interactions and discussions that corresponded
to segments of students verbal responses from interviews or
written responses on the questionnaire were checked for
congruence. Observation field notes provided a context for the
interpretation of data.
To study how students self-generated problems and
questions directed their learning activities, data from classroom
observations, field notes, interviews, students written work, and
oral presentations were analysed. To determine students
reactions to the use of a problem-based learning approach,
Journal of Biological Education (2004) 38(2)

Chin and Chia

responses from both student interviews as well as the How Did

I Do? and Project Work Feedback forms were analysed.
Excerpts of students written responses on the feedback
questionnaire and verbal responses from the audiotaped
interviews are given in quotes. Finally, to identify the problems
that students encountered during project work through
problem-based learning, data were obtained from classroom
observation of students at work, audiotapes and videotapes of
group interactions, student interviews, and the open-ended
responses recorded on the Project Work Feedback forms.

Results
Carrying Out Project Work through
Self-generated Problems and Questions
Students chosen topics included: Nutrition and hair growth;
Eating disorders; Betel nut; Nutritional value of insects;
Ginseng; Slimming centres; and Dentition. Students questions
in the Need-to-Know worksheets provided a framework to
direct their inquiry. As an example, the problem and questions
from Group 6 (Nutritional value of insects) will illustrate how
students used self-generated problems and questions to steer
their project.
The group had read an article in the local newspapers on
edible insects and were intrigued by the idea of eating insects as
an alternative food source. They took on the role of sales
persons who were considering the feasibility of starting a new
business promoting sales of edible insects. Their problem read:
May plans to start a new kind of business selling edible
insects. Before she starts, she will have to find the suitable
kinds of insects and to make sure that the insects are nontoxic. She will also need to know if her products will sell
well. In order to promote the sales, she will have to know
the nutritional/medicinal value of the insects. As
salespersons of the shop, we are given the tasks to research
on our products.
In embarking on their projects, the students documented
their prior knowledge, questions, and action plans. Sample
entries in their Need-to-Know worksheet are shown in Table 1.
The students visited a shop that sold insect snacks, tried
tasting some insect lollipops and larvets, conducted internet
searches, surveyed peoples responses to the idea of eating
insects, and tested mealworms for the presence of starch,
reducing sugars, protein, and fats. They were surprised to find
out that some tribes in South Africa eat roasted termites; poor
village farmers in some regions of Thailand eat pests such as
worms, weevils, locusts, and caterpillars; and certain shops in
America sell chocolate-coated bees and ants. Their findings
included recipes for mealworm cookies, chocolate crickets, and
ant lemonade. The students also learnt that many insects are
lower in fat content and higher in protein content than beef,
lamb, or chicken, and that the nutritional values of insects are
equal to, if not better than, traditional meat choices. Their
finding that most people had an aversion to eating insects led
them to conclude that despite the nutritional value of insects,
May (the character in their crafted problem) should not open
the insect shop.
Among the other groups, Group 2 (Eating disorders) took on
the roles of nutritional counsellors and studied anorexia and
bulimia. In pursuing answers to questions such as What
happens to those who are suffering from such illnesses? and
71

Implementing project work in biology

Chin and Chia

Table 1 Entries in Need-to-Know worksheet from Group 6 (Nutritional value of insects)

What do you know?

What do you need to know?

How can you find out what you need to know?

Tampines Mall has a shop that sells insects.

Why do some people eat insects?

Visit the shop and interview the owner.

Some insects are edible.

Some have medicinal value.

What are their nutritional and medicinal values?

Books, internet search, conduct food tests in

the lab.

What is the taste of insects?

Try tasting the insects.

Some can be more nutritious than meat.

Downloaded by [Universiti Sains Malaysia] at 03:10 28 February 2014

What are the different methods of cooking insects? Internet search.

What are the responses from consumers?
Survey, let people taste and ask for their
Will we eat insects?
responses.

What are the dangers?, the students learnt about the

characteristic symptoms, the effects on different body systems,
possible causes, and forms of treatment.
Group 3 (Betel Nut) wondered why some people enjoyed
chewing betel nut, why it caused teeth to stain black, and what
effects it had on the mouth and the body. Their questions led
them to find out that people chew the nut because it is a
stimulant, that the black discolouration is due to a chemical
reaction between the tannin in the nut and slaked lime which is
added to the nut, and that excessive chewing can lead to
tumours in the oral cavity.
Group 7 was curious about ginseng (a herb commonly used
by East Asians) and took on the role of nutritionists. The
students wanted to find out more about the ginseng plant, how
it affected the body systems, the relationship between its
constituents and perceived health benefits, and any side effects.
They visited Chinese medical halls, interviewed Chinese
physicians and family members of the older generation who
were more knowledgeable about traditional herbs, carried out
food tests on ginseng, interviewed those who took ginseng
regularly, and conducted a survey on ginseng consumption by
various people. They found out that ginseng was consumed
most frequently by senior citizens for health reasons, by
working adults to relieve stress, and by students during
examination periods.
Group 8 (Slimming centres) assumed the roles of friends of an
obese character, Miss Piggy, who wanted to help her lose
weight. In seeking answers to questions such as Where are fats
stored in our bodies? and Does drinking alcohol contribute to
pot bellies?, they learnt about the composition, distribution,
and metabolism of fat in the body. In response to their question
of How efficient are the different ways of slimming down?,
they compared the advantages and disadvantages of different
methods such as treatments at slimming centres, exercising,
dieting, and taking slimming pills or slimming biscuits. They
concluded that sensible eating and exercising were still the best
methods of losing weight.
The above findings show that the actual course of learning
and nature of learning activities in which students engaged
were determined by the kinds of questions that they asked.
Also, the ill-structured nature of the problems led students to
investigate several other disciplinary elements and concepts
outside the typical school biology syllabus. This allowed
students to integrate their other interests with biology, thus
making the subject come more alive for them. Furthermore,
requiring students to think about how they could find out what
they wanted to know led them to varied information-gathering
72

methods and different modes of inquiry (e.g. field studies,

interviews, surveys) beyond the traditional hypothesis-testing
approach that is common in school science. This made students
aware that answers to some questions could be obtained via
other appropriate and valid methods, and that there is no one
scientific method.

Students reactions
Student feedback on PBL experiences was reflected in two
survey forms. The self-evaluation of their own learning, based
on their responses on the How Did I Do? survey, are given in
Table 2. Responses to all 13 items were positive in that more
than half of the class rated a 3 or 4 (most or all of the time). For
knowledge application skills, 89.7% of the students were able to
search for information from various sources (Item 1), and
74.4% felt that what they had learnt in their project was
applicable to their lives (Item 2). In the area of communication,
84.6% felt that they were able to share their ideas with their
group members (Item 3), and 82.1% were also willing to
consider different opinions (Item 7).
However, they were less confident in their oral presentation
(62.5% to 56.4% for Items 4 to 6). This was probably because
students were not used to standing in front of the class to
deliver a presentation. In evaluating their independent learning
skills, 74.4% were able to think of questions that helped to
drive the progress of the project (Item 8), all felt they learnt
new things (Item 11), and 82.1% indicated they were able to
sustain their interest in solving their problems (Item 13).
Students views about their PBL-based project experiences,
derived from their responses in the Project Work Feedback
survey, are given in Table 3. Of the 39 students, 94.9% enjoyed
working on the project (Item 1) and 97.4% were also able to
relate the topic to the theme Food and Nutrition (Item 2).
Most students (94.8%) agreed that they could not have done
this project alone (Item 3) and 97.5% liked the idea of coming
up with their own topic (Item 4). Only about half the students
(48.7%) spoke to their friends and other people about their
project (Item 5) and 38.4% consulted family members (Item
6). Most of the students (76.9%) agreed that they were
inspired to do the project because of some related daily life
experiences (Item 7) and 89.7% perceived that the information
they had learnt was going to be helpful to them (Item 8).
Open-ended comments from students were also obtained
from the two survey forms and audiotaped interviews. In
response to how students found this project different from
previous ones, the following quote is representative: I was not
able to just cut-and-paste the information I found on the
Journal of Biological Education (2004) 38(2)

Implementing project work in biology

Chin and Chia

Table 2 Students self-evaluation responses on the How did I do? form.

Item

Knowledge application
1. I was able to search for and access information from various sources.
2. I was able to recognise the relevance of what is learnt to my daily life.

0.0
5.1

10.3
20.5

89.7
46.2

0.0
28.2

2.9
3.0

0.0
2.6
2.6
2.6

15.4
34.9
41.0
41.0

53.8
56.3
53.8
53.8

30.8
6.2
2.6
2.6

3.2
2.6
2.6
2.5

5.1

12.8

59.0

23.1

3.0

0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

25.6
7.8
23.1
0.0

64.1
53.7
61.5
43.6

10.3
38.5
15.4
56.4

2.9
3.3
2.9
3.6

0.0
5.1

5.1
12.8

79.5
74.4

15.4
7.7

3.1
2.9

4
Strongly
Agree

Mean

Communication
3. I was able to share my ideas clearly with the group during group discussions.
4. During the oral presentation, I was able to communicate ideas clearly.
5. During the oral presentation, I was able to speak fluently.
6. During the oral presentation, I was able to engage the audiences attention.
7. I was willing to consider the opinions of others,
even though I dont quite agree with them.

Downloaded by [Universiti Sains Malaysia] at 03:10 28 February 2014

Percentage Distribution (%)

2
3
some
most
of the
of the
time
time

1
not
yet

Independent learning
8. I was able to think of questions that helped to drive the
progress of the project.
9. I did my fair share of work.
10. I knew what I am good at and used my talents to the fullest.
11. I was able to learn new things during the project.
12. I was able to demonstrate a positive and responsible attitude
towards learning and work.
13. I was able to sustain my interest in solving the problem.

4
all of
the
time

Mean

Note: n=39

Table 3 Students responses to the Project Work Feedback form.

1
Strongly
disagree

Item
1. I enjoyed working on the project.
2. Our group was able to relate our topic to the theme Nutrition.
3. I could not have done this project alone.
4. I do not like the idea of coming up with our own topic for the project.
Id rather the teacher give us a specific topic.
5. I spoke to my friends and other people (other than my group members)
about my project and got their help in some way.
6. I spoke to my family members about my project and got their
help in some way.
7. I was inspired to do this project because of some of my daily
life experiences with the topic chosen.
8. The information that I learnt from the project is going to be helpful for me.

Percentage Distribution (%)

2
3
Disagree
Agree

0.0
0.0
2.6

5.1
2.6
2.6

59.0
56.4
30.8

35.9
41.0
64.0

3.3
3.4
3.6

51.3

46.2

2.5

0.0

1.5

2.6

48.7

33.3

15.4

2.6

15.4

46.2

33.3

5.1

2.3

2.6
2.6

20.5
7.7

61.5
69.2

15.4
20.5

2.9
3.1

Note: n=39

Internet. Instead, the students had to read, synthesise, and

reword the information gathered to answer their questions.
They also had to ask a lot of questions which helped to direct
them in their inquiry. All the students liked the idea of coming
up with their own topic as they could work on something that
they were interested in. They noted that they were not
constrained by topics in the GCE O-level syllabus but were
allowed to research into others beyond these.
Many students also liked the ill-structured nature of their
problems. One student commented that she enjoyed the
freedom to come up with our own questions and answers and
Journal of Biological Education (2004) 38(2)

found the process of inquiry fun. She added, We never knew

where the research would lead to and what our next steps
were. Other students mentioned that they liked having to
learn new things on our own, learning things outside the
classroom, and that they found working together as a team
helped them become better friends.
Interestingly, another group liked the idea of recording
answers to their questions in a project file. They said, as each
part of the project was noted down, we could see our progress.
In doing so, the students acquired a sense of fulfilment and
accomplishment. Several students were also excited about
73

Downloaded by [Universiti Sains Malaysia] at 03:10 28 February 2014

Implementing project work in biology

taking on roles as characters in their problems and enjoyed this

game of make-believe.
However, there were also some students who were
uncomfortable with the PBL approach and the move away
from teacher-centred lessons. These students felt that project
work was a waste of time and effort. Some students faced
initial difficulties in formulating a problem and posing their
own questions. They were not used to thinking hard and deeply
about such issues and were unwilling to try. Four students
resisted the problem-first approach in PBL and felt that the
teacher should teach the contents of the chapter on Food and
Nutrition first before giving them a project to do.
Responses concerned with the way this project helped them
learn about Food and Nutrition revealed that the students
actually applied some of the ideas learnt into their own lives.
Examples included: I learnt that insects are actually high in
protein and low in fats. In times of war or famine, I will be able
to eat insects as an alternative source of food, I was able to use
the techniques of conducting food tests on the betel nut to
investigate what it contained, and Different types of teeth in
our mouths are there for a different reason.
Problems encountered
The problems that students faced related to: unhealthy group
dynamics; difficulties in getting group members to meet often
enough because of different schedules outside curriculum
hours; the narrow scope of the topic; lack of ownership of the
topic; a lack of time; lack of focus and off-task behaviour; and
encountering people who were reluctant to provide information.
Problems pertaining to group dynamics included disagreements
over the next steps of the research, what information to include
in the presentation, and the type and amount of work to be
delegated to individual members. Occasionally, there was also a
lack of commitment and co-operation from group members
who found their leader too bossy.
Some groups limited their research area too narrowly, did not
consider other aspects relevant to their problem, and this
restricted the scope of their learning. One groups members felt
that they did not own the topic: only one student was interested

Chin and Chia

in the topic but managed to convince the others to take it on.

Poor time management also stood in the way of this group
which worked on the project only at the very last minute.
Researching via the Internet was also extremely time
consuming. The overwhelming amount of information
distracted some students from focussing on areas relevant to
their problems. The students had to sift through a large number
of web sites, constantly thinking about whether the available
information matched the questions asked, and they then had to
select what was relevant.
The audiotaped discourse during group discussions and scenes
from videotapes revealed that some students engaged in off-task
behaviours and unrelated discourse, and wasted time fooling
around during discussion sessions. The students who conducted
field studies also encountered people who were unhelpful and
who refused to allow them into their professional fields such as
shops and slimming centres. Some professionals were too busy
to help the students, having to attend to businesses. Others were
simply not interested or were suspicious of the students
intent, and did not want to be filmed or tape-recorded. They were
guarded and were worried that their words would be wrongly
used in one way or another. Such obstacles led to waning of
students enthusiasm in pursuing answers to their questions.

Discussion and educational implications

The PBL approach to project work adopted in this study differs
from typical project work in several ways. These differences are
given in Table 4.
A major aim of project work is to help students acquire
competence in identifying, accessing, and processing relevant
information and in using this information to solve authentic
problems and construct new knowledge. Implementing project
work via PBL based on student-generated questions affords this
opportunity. Because students questions help steer the
direction of their inquiry, they drive learning in a focused way.
Furthermore, if students feel a sense of ownership to the
problems they are working on, they go to great lengths to seek
answers to their questions. Having students think about how
they could find out what they want to know leads them to

Table 4 Differences between PBL project work in this study and typical project work
PBL project work

Typical project work

1. Problems are identified by students themselves, and inspired by real

life experiences.

1. Problems are identified by students or given by the teacher.

Sometimes, problems are contrived.

2. Problems are ill-structured, with sub-problems embedded in a

multifaceted, overarching problem statement that presents a scenario.
Questions emerge along the way.

2. Problems may be well-defined if given by teacher. The problem is

usually encapsulated in a clear and focused investigative question or
topic at the outset.

3. Students role-play a character in the problem statement with whom

they can identify.

3. No role-playing is usually involved. If the problem is given, students

may feel detached from it, and see their role as merely fulfilling the
requirements of a task set by the teacher.

4. Students are required to generate questions and identify learning

issues (based on the problem statement) which then act as
springboards for their inquiry and learning.

4. Students are usually not explicitly required to pose questions and

identify learning issues. However, questions may arise incidentally
during the course of the investigation.

5. Because students are required to offer a solution to a multifaceted, illdefined problem, they are unable to use copy-and-paste strategies in
the written report.

5. Some projects allow descriptive reporting on specific topics. This may

lead students to resort to copy-and-paste strategies in the written
report.

74

Journal of Biological Education (2004) 38(2)

Downloaded by [Universiti Sains Malaysia] at 03:10 28 February 2014

Implementing project work in biology

different modes of inquiry. The opportunity to learn from firsthand interviews with relevant individuals, to carry out field
visits and to analyse real-life data from laboratory investigations
and surveys, enables students to learn in interesting ways
outside the usual walls of the classroom, as well as to acquire
knowledge beyond the given biology syllabus.
Despite the potential for more active and student-centred
learning, there are difficulties in implementing PBL. This
instructional approach requires much time and labour for both
students and teacher. It may also not appeal to all students. As
Arambula-Greenfield (1996) noted, the students who do not
enjoy PBL are those who prefer competition to collaboration,
abstractions over applications, or passive and directed learning
over active, independent learning. Teachers may also find the
experience of not being able to control student learning
uncomfortable.
The teacher plays an important role in contributing to the
success of learning via PBL. If students face difficulties in
identifying a problem, she needs to provide seed ideas by posing
appropriate guiding questions and giving examples to help
them overcome the activation barrier. She also needs to keep
the students on the correct track by checking that the information
they gather from the media is relevant to their problems, and
that they critically evaluate the validity and reliability of the
information amassed. To help students structure and organise
their thinking, plan the next steps of action, and document
their progress, the use of graphic organisers and guide sheets
such as the problem logs, Need-to-Know worksheets, learning
logs, and project tasks allocation forms is necessary.
PBL provides many opportunities for group discussion. To
minimise poor working relationships and off-task behaviours,
and maximise effective collaboration and productive talk,
students need to be equipped with skills in co-operative
learning. They need to be taught appropriate social behaviours
in soliciting opinions and support, and in managing different
viewpoints and conflict (Barnes and Todd, 1977; Cohen, 1994).
The teacher also has to circulate among the groups to foster
small group interaction and occasionally to intervene in
redirecting students to focus on the tasks at hand. As learning is
taken beyond the confines of the classroom, members of our
society must also learn to see themselves as partners in
education and be more open in rendering assistance to student
researchers when their help is solicited.
Several issues raised here regarding the management and
implementation of this type of project work are commonly
faced by teachers who employ PBL. Thus, these teachers can
easily identify with the issues highlighted in this study. In this
respect, the implications discussed and the suggestions offered
are applicable and transferable to classrooms in similar contexts
(Erickson, 1986).
As for other teachers who have yet to use PBL but who may
be contemplating doing so in future, the portrayal of this
particular classroom context and the implications drawn from it
will provide a vicarious experience and serve to alert them to
the several management and implementation issues related to PBL.

Journal of Biological Education (2004) 38(2)

Chin and Chia

References
Appleton K (1995) Problem solving in science lessons: How students
explore the problem space. Research in Science Education, 25, 383-393.
Arambula-Greenfield T (1996) Implementing problem-based learning
in a college science class. Journal of College Science Teaching, 26, 26-30.
Barnes D and Todd F (1977) Communication and learning in small
groups. London. Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Barrows H S and Tamblyn R S (1980) Problem-based learning and
approach to medical education. New York. Springer Publishing Co.
Bereiter C (1994) Constructivism, socioculturalism, and Poppers
world. Educational Researcher, 23, 21-23.
Boud D and Feletti G (Eds) (1991) The challenge of problem-based
learning. New York. St Martins Press.
Chin C, Brown D E, and Bruce B C (2002) Student-generated
questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. International
Journal of Science Education, 24, 521-549.
Chin C and Chia L G (in press) Problem-based learning: using students
questions to drive knowledge construction. Science Education.
Cohen E G (1994) Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for
productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64, 1-35.
Delisle R (1997) How to use problem-based learning in the classroom.
Alexandria, VA. Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Driver R, Asoko H, Leach J, Mortimer E, and Scott P (1994)
Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational
Researcher, 23, 5-12.
Erickson F (1986) Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In
Handbook of research on teaching, Ed M C Witrrock, 3rd ed, pp 119161. New York. Macmillan.
Gallagher S A, Stepien W J, Sher B T and Workman D (1995)
Implementing problem-based learning in science classroom. School
Science and Mathematics, 95, 136-146.
Hennessy S (1993) Situated cognition and cognitive apprenticeship:
Implications for classroom learning. Studies in Science Education, 22,
1-41.
Marx R W, Blumenfeld P C, Krajcik J S and Soloway E (1997) Enacting
project-based science. The Elementary School Journal, 97(4) 341-358.
Ministry of Education (1999) Project Work: Information for Parents
(brochure). Singapore.
Schmidt H G (1993) Foundations of problem-based learning: Rationale
and description. Medical Education, 17, 11-16.
Vygotsky L S (1978) Mind in society. Cambridge, MA. Harvard
University Press.
Yager R E (1989) A rationale for using personal relevance as a science
curriculum focus in school. School Science and Mathematics, 89, 144156.
Yager R E and McCormack A J (1989) Assessing teaching/ learning
successes in multiple domains of science and science education.
Science Education, 73, 45-58.
Dr Christine Chin is Assistant Professor at the National Institute of
Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk,
Singapore 637616. Tel: +65 6790-3853. Email: hlcchin@nie.edu.sg.
Li-Gek Chia is now a Curriculum Planning Officer at the
Curriculum Planning and Development Division (Science), Ministry
of Education, Singapore.

75