Solving

AUTHENTIC
Science
Problems
Problem-based learning connects
science to the world beyond school

Steve Uyeda, John Madden, Lindy A. Brigham,

Julie A. Luft, and Jim Washburne

S
cience teachers face the challenge of teaching sci-
ence content so that it relates to actual situations.
The National Science Education Standards (Na-
tional Research Council, 1996) provides guidelines
for teaching content and connecting it to student experi-
ences. However, in many cases, a disconnect exists be-
tween “school science” and “real science.” School science
can be defined as science taught to students in schools
while real science is science practiced by scientists. In
many schools, real science often plays a secondary role to
school science so teachers can complete their curriculum.
But it doesn’t have to be this way. Educators can use a
teaching technique called problem-based learning (PBL)
to combine both school and real science.

24 T h e S c i e n c e Te a c h e r
What is PBL?
PBL is a curricular design that centers on an
authentic problem. During a PBL activity, ac-
quiring content knowledge occurs simulta-
neously with solving the problem. This differs
from a typical science teaching approach in
which the problem is presented to students
after they learn the required content knowl-
edge. In a PBL activity, students are cast in
realistic roles and presented with an “ill-struc-
tured” problem—a complex situation that has
no single, clear-cut solution. Because the
problem is unclear and there are multiple so-
lutions to it, questions arise regarding the in-
formation and understanding needed to solve
the problem. Students control the direction of
their own learning as they decide what they
need and want to know to construct a solution
to the problem.

Problem design
The first step to designing an ill-structured
problem is deciding on the problem’s objec-
tives. These objectives should be based on lo-
cal, state, and national science education stan-
dards. Once the objectives for the problem are
determined, brainstorming of possible PBL
problems can begin.
Howard Barrows (1994), a neuroscientist
and one of the founders of PBL, states that a
problem must be authentic to maximize stu-
dent motivation and learning. An easy way to
construct a problem is to base it almost en-
tirely on a past or present event. Newspapers
and news magazines are good places to find
local science issues. For example, a local news-
paper reported that the childhood leukemia
rate in a neighboring community was twice the national www.imsa.edu/team/cpbl/problem.html. The IMSA website
rate. Students could determine why this discrepancy ex- has easy-to-use, step-by-step instructions for teachers on
ists. Another issue is the recent mandate by the federal how to develop a PBL activity as well as completed PBL
government to lower arsenic concentrations in drinking problems available for viewing and use. While the PBL
water to 10 ppb. Students could decide if this law can be teaching framework we use is a combination of IMSA,
reasonably enacted by their local water districts. Other Barrows (1994), Gallagher (1995), and the Center for
places to find events on which to base problems may in- Gifted Education at the College of William and Mary
clude web-based journals such as the Mortality and Mor- (1997), teachers we have worked with have found the
bidity Weekly Report (MMWR) on the website IMSA framework the best organized and easiest for nov-
(www.cdc.gov/mmwr/) for the Centers for Disease Control ices to understand.
(CDC). This electronic journal discusses disease outbreaks For a class activity to be a PBL problem: 1) the students
that have been reported to the CDC and lists data used by must be able to picture themselves in a role described in
physicians to diagnose the disease. the PBL problem and successfully construct a solution to
Once an event has been found, teachers can craft the the problem, and 2) the problem must be “ill-structured”
science issue into a PBL problem. One of the many differ- as previously described (Greenwald, 2001; Gallagher,
ent PBL organizing and teaching frameworks can be 1995). PBL problems should not be developed as another
found at the Center for Problem-Based Learning at the classroom assignment, such as having a single answer de-
Illinois Math and Science Academy (IMSA) website at rived from a single method of analysis (Barrows, 1994),

January 2002 25
 Determining the format
and amount of data to give
students is a difficult deci-
sion. One way to ascertain
if data is in an appropriate
format is to field test the
data set with a group of
students and note the diffi-
culties students encounter.
The instructor can assess
whether students have
trouble understanding
and using a particular
piece of data or if essential

PHOTO BY MICHAEL OLLIVER

data is missing.
The amount of content
students must have before
working with a PBL
problem is still a matter
of controversy. Some
PBL practitioners advo-
cate introducing a problem
When a student group has reached a point where they cannot proceed without more data specific to the
when students have no
problem, the instructor first questions students to assess depth of knowledge and understanding and then prior content knowledge,
gives the group the needed data. while others support vary-
ing amounts of student
rather PBL problems have several parts depending on the preparation. How much prior knowledge students should
model used to construct the problem and the objectives of have depends on the content objectives of the PBL problem.
the problem (Figure 1). For example, in the water management PBL problem
shown in Figure 2, prior knowledge about the complexity
Finding and preparing data of ground and surface water systems helped some students
In a PBL problem, data is used to design the problem and think critically about water demands, influences on water
give students clues about possible solutions. In some quality, and the behavior of surface water as groundwater
cases—especially with real events—data already exists. is used. However, students with less prior knowledge had
Data from actual events can be obtained from various more creative ideas for water conservation programs that
governmental agencies by visiting a library, browsing the met the goals of the water management plan.
Internet, or contacting the agency by phone or e-mail.
The instructor must then put the data into a usable PBL in the classroom
format. The objectives of the PBL problem should be con- PBL uses cooperative student groups to work through
sidered in determining the amount of data the instructor a problem. After the problem has been presented, stu-
should process for students. Because students should dents brainstorm to create a list of either facts, hypoth-
spend more time analyzing data for meaning and figuring eses, and what needs to be learned, or, alternatively,
out how it applies to the problem, data must be cleaned up what students know and what students need to know.
and streamlined for easier interpretation. This leads to As they become more adept at brainstorming, the
multiple methods of student analysis. teacher can decrease the amount of scaffolding re-
In some cases actual data does not exist; however, in- quired to support student work. At this point in the
formation about what the data could be is available, process, some PBL teaching models have students
which then allows data set construction. Information clarify the problem in a single, concise statement to
about data can be found in professional trade manuals or focus student work. After the initial brainstorming ses-
textbooks, for example, Harrison’s Principles of Internal sion, students gather data and information relevant to
Medicine (Isselbacher et al, 1994) or the MERCK Manual the problem. When a student group has reached a point
of Diagnosis and Therapy (www.merck.com/pubs/mmanual). where they cannot proceed without more data specific
In a medical PBL problem, these references help the in- to the problem, the instructor first questions students to
structor construct a data set by providing information that assess depth of knowledge and understanding and then
is essential to diagnose the disease. gives the group the needed data.

26 T h e S c i e n c e Te a c h e r
FIGURE 1

Common parts of a PBL problem.

■ Problem presentation or entry: Students are informed about their role, the problem to be solved, and any other
parameters that may restrict or inform the scope of the solutions. The problem entry should be as realistic as possible.
■ Problem checkpoints: Each PBL problem should have points where a group reaches an impasse and cannot go forward
without more data (which is then given to the students). For example, an environmental science problem that addresses
land-use issues may have several of these points before the resolution occurs.
■ Problem resolution: This part provides closure to the problem and should include evaluation of student knowledge and
students’ self-evaluation of how well they worked together to solve the problem.

FIGURE 2

The Tucson Active Management Area—A Water Management PBL Problem.

During the spring and summer of 2001, students learned about basic concepts in hydrology in cooperation with Sustainability
of Semi-Arid Hydrology and Riparian Areas, a National Science Foundation science and technology center at the University
of Arizona. This PBL problem was based on the formation of the Tucson Active Management Area (TAMA) as mandated by
Arizona’s Groundwater Act of 1980.
The PBL problem began by looking back in time to 1980. Students became the TAMA Governing Board and heard a formal
presentation of an “official letter” addressed to them by a “government spokesperson.” Students were charged with
developing a 20-year water management plan for TAMA. Interaction between the students and the presenter took place
to clarify any questions from the students. Students received a partial set of data, which allowed groups to have a place to
start approaching the problem. These data were gathered by the instructor from various universities and local, state, and
federal government agencies. Most of the data were found online, while some sources were contacted directly by phone
or e-mail. Collected data formed huge spreadsheets that were difficult to manipulate and interpret. These spreadsheets were
edited in such a way that students could pursue multiple avenues of analysis in trying to interpret the data. Students also
received a catalog with additional data. To obtain these data, students had to justify their request for specific data to the
“archives manager” (usually the instructor).
After a teacher-guided brainstorming session, student groups, composed of
four or five, gathered information and developed their plan. The teacher
assisted students’ thoughts and reasoning by challenging and questioning the
validity of their logic and conclusions and facilitating group discussions to
search for meaning and understanding of gathered information. These discussions
also allowed the teacher to informally evaluate the progress of the students as
they worked on the problem.
At the end of this first phase of the problem, the students’ plan was presented
to “local, state, and federal agency representatives,” who evaluated the
presentation and the water management plan (to increase the quality of students’
work, this board can be made up of parents or community members). When all
presentations and plans were completed, the second phase of the problem—
traveling back to the year 2000 and developing a Year 2000 Water Management
Plan for the next 20 years—was presented to students in a similar fashion as the
first problem. Students evaluated the first plan for accuracy by comparing it to
actual water supply and demand data and determined why there may have been
discrepancies. This part of the problem was managed and assessed in the same
way as the first part.
As a final, individual evaluation, students were asked to investigate the issues
of an unfamiliar river system that was not discussed during previous lessons. For
example, students in Tucson, Arizona, could have designed a product that
discussed management difficulties of the Rio Grande River Basin. While this
product could have been in any form, it had to reflect what the students learned
while working through the PBL problem.

January 2002 27
 FIGURE 3

PBL Content Rubric for Phase II of the TAMA Problem.

5—Student projects include clear, comprehensive, and detailed:
■ Knowledge of past plan strength and weaknesses and overall success of plan;
■ Knowledge of changes in AMA, stakeholders, water supplies, demand and wastewater treatment;
■ Presentation of past plan final results and discussion of factors for planners to consider. Statements should be extensively
supported by data and logical arguments.
■ Discussion of consulting group strengths, weaknesses, and results; main points extensively supported by conclusions and
inferences based on data.

4—Student projects include clear and detailed:

■ Knowledge of past plan strength and weaknesses of overall success of plan.
■ Knowledge of changes in AMA, stakeholders, water supplies, demand and wastewater treatment.
■ Analysis of plan successes and failures, with much use of data to support statements.
■ Presentation of past plan final results and discussion of factors for planners to consider. Statements mostly supported by
data and logical arguments.
■ Discussion of consulting group strengths, weaknesses, and their results; main points mostly supported by conclusions and
inferences based on data.

3—Student projects include clear:

■ Knowledge of past plan strengths and weaknesses and overall success of plan.
■ Knowledge of changes in AMA, stakeholders, water supplies, demand and wastewater treatment.
■ Analysis of plan successes and failures with some use of data to support statements.
■ Presentation of past plan final results and discussion of factors for planners to consider. Statements are somewhat
supported by data and logical arguments.
■ Discussion of consulting groups strengths, weaknesses, and their results; main points somewhat supported by conclusions
and inferences based on data.

2—Student projects include somewhat clear:

■ Knowledge of past plan strengths and weaknesses and overall success of plan.
■ Knowledge of changes in AMA, stakeholders, water supplies, demand, and wastewater treatment.
■ Analysis of plan successes and failures; little use of data to support statements.
■ Presentation of past plan final results and discussion of factors for planners to consider. Statements may or may not be
supported by data and logical arguments.
■ Discussion of consulting groups strengths, weaknesses, and their results; main points somewhat supported by conclusions
and inferences based on data.

1—Student projects include:

■ Little knowledge of past plan strengths and weaknesses and overall success of the plan.
■ Little knowledge of changes in AMA, stakeholders, water supplies, demand, and wastewater treatment.
■ Confusing and contradictory analysis of plan successes and failures; little use of data to support statements.
■ Confusing and contradictory presentation of past plan final results and discussion of factors for planners to consider.
Statements little supported by data and logical arguments.
■ Confusing and contradictory discussion of consulting groups strengths, weaknesses, and their results; main points
somewhat supported by conclusions and inferences based on data.

28 T h e S c i e n c e Te a c h e r
Assessing
student knowledge
Student understanding can be assessed in a number of
ways, including giving students the “answer” to the prob-
lem. The students evaluate the instructor’s answer based
on what they learned from the problem. For example, if
students have a diagnosis for a patient, they can judge
whether or not the diagnosis is reasonable. Another way to
assess students is to have them present their solutions. For
instance, students who create a plan to manage the reintro-
duction of an endangered species can present the plan to a
panel of community representatives. Regardless of how
learning is determined, the more authentic the student
assessment is, the higher the quality of student products.
To assist student product assessment, community mem-
bers, other teachers, and university students and faculty
can act as patients, city council members, and governmen-
tal agency representatives.
An essential part of PBL is for students to conduct
self-reflection and self-assessment on how well indi-
viduals worked with each other (Barrows, 1994). This
can be done by using both an anonymous questionnaire,
which allows students to make constructive comments
about themselves and others in the group, and an open
discussion in which self-reflection and positive rein-
forcement are used to develop cooperative group skills
and build group dynamics.
Rubrics are used in my classes to assess student under-
standing and presentation quality. The rubrics are given
to students at the beginning of the PBL activity and pro-
vide the students detailed information about what will be
evaluated during their presentations. Students can use
the rubrics as a guide to determine which information
should be included in the presentation as well as how the
presentation should be structured. A sample content ru-
bric is shown in Figure 3.
Benefits of PBL
Using PBL problems as the center of a science curricu-
lum provides several benefits. Students have control over
their own learning and are focused on the problem with
a specific goal and timeframe. In addition, because stu-
dents often learn content as they work with the problem,
time is saved because the presentation of basic informa-
tion is eliminated. Clear statements of performance ob-
jectives and constant self-evaluation direct students to in-
formation to be learned from the PBL problem.
The main benefit to students is developing an under-
standing of the connection between science and society.
Students see the importance of using concepts from spe-
cific science disciplines to explain collected data to influ-
ence government policies. Furthermore, students gain
knowledge of how science and mathematics are used to
make predictive models about future events, to explore
the limitations of these models, and to see the need for
continued scientific research to improve these models.
Designing a PBL problem and getting the materials
ready for student use is time-consuming; the availability
of time for the teacher increases as the students begin
work on the problem. Because less time is spent directly
instructing the whole class, the teacher can spend more
time monitoring and assisting individual students. Ad-
mittedly, using PBL continuously—as with any peda-
gogy that has a high cognitive level—is tiring to the stu-
dents and the instructor. However, prudent use of PBL
can not only teach important science concepts at a deep,
comprehensive level to all students but also situate sci-
ence in the world of students’ experiences.

Steve Uyeda (e-mail: suyeda@u.arizona.edu) is a
science teacher at Catalina Foothills High
School, 4300 East Sunrise Drive, Tucson, AZ
85718; John Madden (e-mail: maddenj1@
mindspring.com) is a science teacher at Mountain
View High School, 3901 West Linda Vista Boule-
vard, Tucson, AZ 85742; Lindy A. Brigham
(e-mail: lbrigham@ag.arizona.edu) is an assis-
tant research professor at the College of Agricul-
ture, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721–
0036; Julie A. Luft (e-mail: luft@u.arizona.edu)
is an associate professor at the College of Educa-
tion, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721;
and Jim Washburne (e-mail: jwash@hwr.arizona.
edu) is an assistant adjunct professor at the
College of Engineering and Mines, University of
Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721–0011.
References
Barrows, H.S. 1994. Practice-Based Learning: Problem-Based Learn-
ing Applied to Medical Education. Springfield, Ill.: Southern Illi-
nois University School of Medicine.
The College of William and Mary. 1997. Guide to Teaching a Prob-
lem-based Science Curriculum. Dubuque. Iowa: Kendall/Hunt
Publishing.
Gallagher, S., W.J. Stepien, B.T. Sher, and D. Workman. 1995.
Implementing problem-based learning in science classrooms.
School Science and Mathematics 95(3): 136–146.
Greenwald, N.L. 2000. Learning from problems. The Science
Teacher 67(4): 28–32.
Isselbacher, K.J., Martin, J.B., Braunwald, E., Fauci, A.S., Wilson,
J.D., Kaspar, D.L., eds. 1994. Harrison’s Principles of Internal
Medicine. New York: McGraw-Hill.
National Research Council. 1996. National Science Education Stan-
dards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Acknowledgment
This work is supported in part by SAHRA (Sustainability of semi-
Arid Hydrology and Riparian Areas) under the STC Program of the
National Science Foundation, Agreement EAR-9876800. Any opin-
ions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this
material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the
views of SAHRA or of the National Science Foundation.
January 2002 29