Dear Label_Name,

Greetings! I hope you are well.

I am writing on behalf of an international publishing house, Science and Education Publishing, USA (http://www.sciepub.com).

Science and Education Publishing (SciEP) is a multidisciplinary open access publisher of Journals covering the fields of Science, Technology and Medicine. All SciEP publications are subject to high-quality peer review, editorial and production processes and are freely available online.

Welcome to the April, 2013 edition of SciEP newsletter, providing monthly summaries of articles on science & education related topics of interest to scientist and professionals. The mission of our journals is to provide an open access forum for publishing new findings on issues pertinent to scientific and academic field. We also invite you to submit original research papers, review articles, short reports, or case studies are considered for publication in our Multidisciplinary Journals.

American Journal of Public Health Research
DOI: 10.12691/ajphr-1-1-3

The Implementation of a Tele-Homecare System with Service Oriented Architecture and HL7 Message Transmission Standard
Ching-Sung Wang

American Journal of Medical and Biological Research
DOI: 10.12691/ajmbr-1-1-2

The Influence of Ethanol on Pyruvate Kinases Activity in Vivo, in Vitro, in Silico
Lelevich Sergey Vladimirovich, Khrustalev Vladislav Victorovich, Barkovsky Eugene Victorovich, Shedogubova Tatyana Aleksandrovna

American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine
DOI: 10.12691/ajmsm-1-1-1

Clinical and Histological Features in Wegener Granulomatosis
Li Cavoli Gioacchino, Passantino Rita, Bono Luisa, Tortorici Calogera, Ferrantelli Angelo, Giammarresi Carlo, Rotolo Ugo

American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
DOI: 10.12691/ajidm-1-1-2

The Curse of Lymphatic Filariasis: Would the Continual Use of Diethylcarbamazine Eliminate this Scourge in Papua New Guinea?
Anne Lanham, Lillian Mwanri

We have released issues of some journals on February 2013.
American Journal of Public Health Research
American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine
American Journal of Medical and Biological Research
American Journal of Pharmacological Sciences
American Journal of Clinical Medicine Research
American Journal of Nursing Research
American Journal of Cancer Prevention
American Journal of Medicine Studies
American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
American Journal of Cardiovascular Disease Research
American Journal of Biomedical Research
American Journal of Mechanical Engineering
American Journal of Microbiological Research
Journal of Preventive Medicine
American Journal of Food and Nutrition
American Journal of Hypertension Research
American Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Journal of Cancer Research and Treatment
American Journal of Zoological Research
Journal of Biomedical Engineering and Technology
American Journal of Microbiological Research
Biomedical Science and Engineering

We are pleased to announce that submissions are now being accepted for peer review for all the journals across all our subject areas in SciEP.

Please submit your manuscript via our online submission system:
http://www.sciepub.com/author/signin

To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please click on the following link: unsubscribe

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

David Rain
Email:join@sciepub.com
Science and Education Publishing (http://www.sciepub.com)

Problem-based Learning in Teaching Science

Michael C. Bagay, Robie Rose R. Ursua, May Ann A. Abellera, Roselyn Joyce G. Baldovino, Rose Ann P. Concepcion, Vilma S. Galapon, Romiro G. Bautista*

Graduate School Faculty, Quirino State University, Philippines

Abstract: Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is an inquiry approach in teaching involving the use of real-world problems in a student-centered environment and a method to stimulate students' construction of knowledge and ideas, including the promotion of self-directed learning. It implies the concept of autonomy and self-directed instruction. This study aimed to investigate the affordance of PBL in teaching science. The respondents were the science teachers in a Schools Division who were teaching science from Elementary to Senior High School during the time of this study. The result indicated that the science teachers' PBL affordances were not influenced by their educational attainment and grade level they teach; self-directed learning, a specific precept of PBL, showed a significant result in terms of the grade level taught by the respondents; and the over-all affordance of the respondents in PBL was seen to be agreeable in all its tenets. In conclusion, PBL implementation should be observed and studied correctly following the curriculum being implemented and the need for sufficient materials to fully grasp its essence and value, especially in science education.

Keywords: problem-based learning, real-life problems, scaffolding, science education

Received February 22, 2023; Revised March 27, 2023; Accepted April 07, 2023

Citation: Michael C. Bagay, Robie Rose R. Ursua, May Ann A. Abellera, Roselyn Joyce G. Baldovino, Rose Ann P. Concepcion, Vilma S. Galapon, Romiro G. Bautista, Problem-based Learning in Teaching Science. Journal of Innovations in Teaching and Learning, 3 (1). 7-14. January 2023. doi:10.12691/jitl-3-1-2

1. Introduction

Teaching science in the verge of the new normal is one of the many challenges that educators face in the country as we are slowly transitioning into different learning modalities. Considering one of the main goals of preparing learners for lifelong learning and setting them ready for real-life challenges requires a cutting-edge approach to teaching and learning [1,2]. It requires building knowledge from real-world experiences and problems involving real-life situations. This underscores the emphasis on improving learners' knowledge, attitude, and learning behavior through PBL; thus, fostering collaboration, creativity, critical thinking, communication, and problem-solving [3]. This allows expressing their ideas in a creative and active learning environment [4].

Venturing into one of the many student-centered approaches in teaching, PBL drives the mainstream of learning into providing students with the opportunities to learn and develop new skills in a particular subject by building learning groups to solve real-life and open-ended problems. The central tenets of PBL include the promotion of self-learning, highly engaging, developing of transferable skills, improving teamwork abilities, and encouraging intrinsic rewards [5]. The overall motivation of this approach that drives the learner to prosper in learning is the given set of problems [6]. Problem-based learning is a strategy used in the educational setting that entails the propulsion of students learning collaboratively to solve real-world issues and develop the ability of self-directed instruction [7,8,9]. In this sense, learners take the initiative and autonomy in processing their learning and diagnosing their needs in education. Noting these learning indicators, PBL builds a bridge of understanding the nature of the learners' interest through their well-constructed responses and pushes learners to be the controller of their learning.

Moreover, the provisions of PBL are cognizable stimuli in arousing students' motivation, analysis, and reasoning ability to arrive at a scientifically accurate solution. Problem-based learning starts with initiating a learning obstacle to a group of learners mimicking a given role to solve challenging and practical problems in a collaborative way guided by the teacher-facilitator [10]. Recent studies show a promising result in improving cognitive, affective, and psychomotor learning areas, evident in using style content and teaching materials aligned with PBL [9,11]. In addition, learners being assisted in developing fundamental skills in each discipline stand out when exposed with PBL, receiving positive feedback from both learners and facilitators, and noting a significant improvement in self-directed learning [12].

Concurrently, science educators are in a continuous stride in improving the comprehension and understanding of content for better learning outcomes. It is evident in the aftermath of the pandemic that it leaves the students’ understanding and comprehension at a superficial level. This study is in a cahoot of ascertaining the concordances of science teachers on PBL as a strategy in teaching science.

1.1. Objectives of the Study

This study aimed to determine the concordances of science teachers on PBL. Specifically, it sought to:

a. determine the teachers' agreement on their concordances on the provisions of PBL.

b. differentiate teachers' agreement on their concordances on the provisions of PBL.

1.2. Theoretical Framework of the Study

This study is anchored on the Problem-Based Instructional Model. The PBL model uses students' acquired skills and knowledge through a progressive sequence of contextual problem-solving and the promotion of collaboration among individual learners to develop and foster independent-lifelong learners. This model allows learners to master communication, teamwork, collaboration, problem-solving, research, time management, and computing skills. Under this model of learning, it emphasizes four different learning strands (1) Through active learning, wherein learners have the control of learning, (2) Through integrated learning, wherein the focus of their study is the problem answered by working altogether on the knowledge, understanding, and skills, (3) Through cumulative learning as the time progresses the level of complexity and difficulty of the topics and problems increases in depth, and lastly (4) Through learning for understanding as seen in processing the lesson and facts being delivered through soliciting their reflections and testing their knowledge via feedback [13,14].

This learning model underscores the use of open-ended structured problems that reflects the natural world and emphasize problem solving as a recursive process. This often contemplates the sense of ownership of the problem stimulating their engagement in the learning process. Moreover, learners develop flexibility in dealing with real-world issues correlated with their interests as they can view it from different angles based on their schema leading to authenticity in their learning experience. This equates to re-framing personal choice of the learning process and re-integrating their interest: thus, providing them with intrinsic motivation to learn [15].

2. Methodology

This study employed the Quantitative-Descriptive research design. This design fits best the research objective as it obtained the needed information and systematically described the research problem. This study sought to explain the provisions of PBL as perceived by the lenses of science teachers in their respective niches. The respondents of this study were the science teachers from a Schools Division who were currently teaching science in elementary, junior, and senior high school. They were selected randomly vis-à-vis the required number of samples via Raosoft sample size calculator.

Furthermore, a research questionnaire was used to gather the needed data. This helped the researchers unveil the concordances of the respondents on the provision of PBL as employed in their science classes. The questionnaire was divided into two parts; Part 1 gathered the profile of the respondents in terms of their academic background and grade level taught. Part 2 of the questionnaire focused on the employment of PBL in the classroom.

The gathered data were tabulated and treated using the SPSS application employing the t-test, ANOVA, and Scheffe test for post hoc analysis.

3. Results and Discussion

Table 1 shows the observance of PBL among the science teachers in terms of student-centered learning. All responses were interpreted as Much Agree with mean range of 2.621 to 3.052 wherein the second tenet earned the highest mean. The grand mean value of 2.834 was computed with a description of Much Agree. This result denotes that the learners showed the following affordances to their science teachers as observed in their responses. Moreover, this underscores that learners could actively engage in the learning process and exhibit full autonomy and responsibility in discovering learning among themselves.

Table 1. PBL Affordances of the Science Teachers

The PBL affordances on student-centered learning caters the active involvement of students in the learning process. These were evident in the results of Pease and Kuhn [16] when they claimed that students will focus on trying to arrive at specific answers to a given set of problems. Moreover, it was revealed that students strive and collaborate in monitoring their learning of a given situation [17].

Table 1.1 shows the PBL affordances of the science teachers when grouped by their grade level taught. Among the three grouping variables, the SHS teachers posted the highest computed grand mean value of 3.018 with a description of Much Agree, followed by the Elementary and JHS teachers with a grand mean of 2.910 and 2.704, respectively: both reported as Much Agree. This denotes that SHS science teachers exude better on the different tenets of PBL in their daily practice when compared to their JHS and Elementary counterparts. However, the computed p-value of .435 shows no significant difference among them, which means that the student's grade level, as observed by the teachers, does not affect their affordances of PBL under the tenets of self-directed learning.

Table 1.1. PBL Affordances of the Science Teachers when grouped by Grade Level Taught

Moreover, it is evident in the claims that PBL was seen to be more effective at the secondary school level [18]. This underscores that students' active participation was primarily seen at higher levels: in the case of the current study, the respondents from the SHS are better off than their counterparts.

Table 1.2 shows the affordances of the science teachers on PBL when grouped by their educational attainment. Both variables exhibited a grand mean value of 2.882 for BS degree holders and 2.767 for MA/MS/MAT degree holders, described as Much Agree. It can also be gleaned on the table that the BS degree holder-respondents established a mean difference of .115 when compared to their MA/MS/MAT degree holder counterparts. However, the computed p-value of .566 signifies no significant difference between the variables on the ground of PBL affordances, which means that their educational attainment has nothing to do with their evaluation of PBL tenets in science classes.

Table 1.2. PBL Affordances of the Science Teachers when grouped by Educational Attainment

This was proven to be true that the teachers’ knowledge and views on PBL across grade levels showed the same results especially in the participation of the students in the actual problem-solving process [17].

Table 2 shows the small group affordances of the science teachers on PBL. As it can be gleaned on the table, the mean value ranging from 2.672 to 3.069 was established among the five variables with a description of Much Agree. The grand mean value of 2.907, interpreted as Much Agree, was posted, implying that small groups are employable and observable in science classes.

Table 2. Small Group Affordances of the Science Teachers

It can be noted further that it is essential to consider the groupings of the learners to maximize the central tenets of PBL among them. It was found that better grouping was observed when they were adequately distributed [19].

Table 2.1. Small Group Affordances of the Science Teachers when grouped by Grade Level taught

Table 2.1 shows the small group affordances of the science teachers when they are grouped by their grade level taught. As it can be gleaned on the table, a mean range described as Much agree was posted in all variables. The grand mean of JHS (2.941) posted the highest mean followed by Elementary and SHS with grand mean values of 2.930 and 2.782, respectively, and interpreted as much agree. However, the p-value showed no significant difference among the three; thus, the grade level taught has nothing to do with their affordances along small group discussions.

The small group affordances in the PBL contributes to better interaction among group members and leads to higher participation in the group activity and presentations, fostering interest and enjoyment in the learning process [8,19].

Table 2.2. Small Group Affordance of the Science Teachers when grouped by Educational Attainment

Table 2.2 shows the small group affordances of the science teachers when they are grouped by their educational attainment. As observed in the table, item number 4 posted a significant result having a p-value less than .05. This means that item number 4, "The learning group provide support for every member," is afforded by the BS degree holders better when compared to their MA/MS/MAT counterparts: mean of 3.235 and 2.070, respectively. It is also apparent in the computed grand mean value that the BS degree holders have higher computed mean than their counterparts. However, the p-value of .100 showed no significant difference. Thus, their views on small group affordance of PBL is comparable regardless of their educational background.

This highlights the importance of grouping learners in every activity to maximize cooperation and support among each member. However, it is comparable in terms of the educational attainment of the science teachers [8].

Table 3. Problem as Stimulus Affordances of the Science Teachers

Table 3 shows the problem as a stimulus affordance of the science teachers in their classes. The table shows that the respondents agreed with the provisions presented in the table as evidenced in the computed grand mean value of 3.076 and interpreted as Much Agree. This means that incorporating or giving real-life problems in learning serves as a stimulus for students to understand the lesson better [20,21,22].

This emphasized that using problems in the context of learning improved the students' motivation compared to those taught with the standard method used in school [23].

Table 3.1. Problem as Stimulus Affordances of the Science Teachers when grouped by Grade Level Taught

Table 3.1 shows the affordances of the science teachers on problem as a stimulus when grouped by the grade level they taught. It is observed that elementary science teachers posted a grand mean value interpreted as very much agreed on items 1 and 3 when compared to their two counterparts. However, the computed p-value on this item showed no significant result with values of .307 and .361. Moreover, the computed grand mean across all levels was interpreted as much agree with a p-value of .571. This suggests no significant difference between grade level taught and affordances of PBL in terms of the problem as a stimulus.

Table 3.2. Problem as Stimulus Affordances of the Science Teachers when grouped by Educational Attainment

Presented in Table 3.2 are the affordances of the science teachers on problem as a stimulus when grouped by their educational background. As it can be gleaned in the table, the BS degree holders posted a higher grand mean of 3.124 (Much Agree) when compared to their MA/MS/MAT counterparts (3.008). However, the p-value of .543 revealed no significant difference. Therefore, regardless of educational attainment, PBL affordances in terms of a problem as a stimulus is perceived to be comparable.

Table 4. Real-World Problems Affordances of the Science Teachers

Presented in Table 4 are the real-world affordances of the science teachers, a grand mean value of 3.031 and interpreted as much agree. This implies that using real-world problems in science classes was viewed as an effective way to optimize students' learning. Aptly, using real-world problems in teaching science is beneficial in improving students' articulation [20,21,22]. This also underscores the teachers' best practices in teaching using a variety of realistic and case-based scenarios. These are expected to bring out students' creativity [24].

Table 4.1 Real-World Problems Affordances of the Science Teachers when grouped by Grade Level Taught

Presented in Table 4.1 are the real-world affordances of the science teachers when they are grouped by their grade level taught. Senior High School teachers posted the lowest mean score of 2.818 when compared to their Elementary and JHS counterparts, means of 3.060 and 3.096, respectively. Moreover, the computed p-value of .478 suggested no significant difference. It can be inferred therefore that the science teachers' affordances on real-world problems across all grade levels is the same.

Table 4.2. Real-World Problems Affordance of the Science Teachers when grouped by Educational Attainments

Presented in Table 4.2 are the real-world affordances of science teachers when grouped by their educational attainment. As it can be gleaned in the table, the MA/MS/MAT posted a higher mean score of 3.133, interpreted as much agree when compared to their BS degree holder-counterparts, mean of 2.959 and interpreted as Much Agree. However, the computed p-value of .316 showed no significant difference between the two variables regarding real-world affordances, a tenet of PBL. Therefore, educational attainment has nothing to do with the real-world affordances on PBL in science classes.

Table 5. Self-directed Learning Affordance of the Science Teachers

Table 5 shows the self-directed learning affordances of the science teacher in PBL. The table shows that only number 1 posted a mean value of 2.466, interpreted as Agree by the respondents. All other indicators posted a mean value of 2.586 to 2.810, interpreted as Much Agree. The computed grand mean, 2.655, is interpreted as Much Agree. This means that the respondents agreed with the provisions on self-directed learning as employed under the realms of PBL.

Moreover, it can be noted that the central tenet of PBL is the development of students' self-directed learning and autonomy in learning to produce life-ready students for the real-life they will face after schooling [17]. Students and teachers in PBL showed clarity in self-directed learning as students can work on their given tasks and formulate strategies and resources [23].

Table 5.1 shows the self-directed learning affordances of the science teachers when grouped by their grade level taught. It can be noted that indicators 1, 3, and 5 suggest significant results with the elementary and SHS yielding comparable results which vary significantly with their JHS counterparts. Indicators 2 and 4 suggest insignificant results.

Table 5.1. Self-directed Learning Affordances of the Science Teachers when grouped by Grade Level Taught

The foregoing suggest that self-directed learning is once again proven effective when students tried to solve and arrived at a specific answer as this provides them an avenue for self-discovery and diagnoses of their learning [16,17,20,21,22].

Table 5.2. Self-directed Learning Affordances of the Science Teachers when grouped by Educational Attainment

Presented in Table 5.2 are the self-directed learning affordances of the science teachers when grouped by their educational attainment. Based on the table, both BS and MA/MS/MAT degree holders posted mean values of 2.734 and 2.558, respectively, and interpreted as Much Agree. On the other hand, the BS degree holders posted a higher mean, a mean difference of .166 from their counterparts. However, their educational background does not affect their affordance of PBL on self-directed learning as suggested by the comparable means under t-test.

4. Conclusion

Based on the results of this study, the following conclusions are drawn:

1. There are comparable affordances on the tenets of PBL in science classes across all levels. Thus, teachers view PBL as universal regardless of the grade level they are engaged in;

2. The educational attainment of science teachers is independent to their views on their affordances on PBL in science classes; and

3. Self-directed learning, a provision of PBL, varies across different grade levels.

5. Implications to Theory and Practice

This study explored the affordances of the science teachers on PBL. This will serve as the basis in implementing PBL in teaching science, especially in the research landscape at the aftermath of the pandemic. As a science curriculum focused on hands-on learning and student-centered instruction, PBL is a potential approach to implement, especially for topics requiring real-life integration and significant reinforcement.

References

[1]   | Funa, AA., & Prudente, MS. (2021). Effectiveness of Problem-Based Learning on Secondary Students' Achievement in Science: A Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Instruction, 14(4), 69-84.
[2]   | Reynolds, JM., & Hancock, Dr. (2010). Problem-based learning in a higher education environmental biotechnology course. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(2), 175-186.
[3]   | Widowati, C., Purwanto, A., & Akbar, Z. (2021). Problem-based learning integration in STEM education to improve environmental literation. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 8(7), 374-381.
[4]   | Ritonga, HS., Nisa, AF., Dials, JG., & Wiarsih, N. (2022, August). Implementation of Problem-Based Learning Model in Elementary School. In International Seminar Commemorating the 100th Anniversary of Tamansiswa, 1(1), 334-338.
[5]   | The Hun School of Princeton. What is Problem-Based Learning Resources (2020). https://www.hunschool.org/resources/problem-based-learning.
[6]   | Nilson, L. B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Cited in: Cornell University, Center for Teaching Innovation Link: https://teaching.cornell.edu/teaching-resources/engaging-students/problem-based-learning.
[7]   | Akcay, B. (2009). Problem-based learning in science education. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(1), 28-38.
[8]   | Akcay, B., & Akcay, H. (2015). Effectiveness of Science-Technology-Society (STS) instruction on student understanding of the nature of Science and attitudes toward Science. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3(1), 37-45. ISSN: 2147-611.
[9]   | Sri, U. (2021). Problem-Based Technology and Science Development to Improve Science Learning Outcomes in Elementary Schools. ANP Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 2(2), 151-156.
[10]   | Allen, DE., Donham, RS., & Bernhardt, SA. (2011). Problem-based learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2011(128), 21-29.
[11]   | Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, CE. (2010). Productive use of learning resources in an online problem-based learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(1), 84-99.
[12]   | Gorghiu, G., Drăghicescu, LM., Cristea, S., Petrescu, AM., & Gorghiu, LM. (2015). Problem-based learning-an efficient learning strategy in the science lessons context. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1865-1870.
[13]   | Tamblyn, RM., Barrows, HS., & Gliva, G. (1980). An initial evaluation of learning units to facilitate problem-solving and self-directed study (portable patient problem pack). Medical Education, 14(6): 394-400.
[14]   | Bassi, G., Donadello, I., Gabrielli, S., Salcuni, S., Giuliano, C., & Forti, S. (2022). Early development of a virtual coach for healthy coping interventions in type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Validation study. JMIR Form Res, 6(2), e27500.
[15]   | Yew, EHJ, & Goh, K. (2016). Problem-Based Learning: An overview of its process and impact on learning. Health Professions Education, 2(2), 75-79.
[16]   | Pease, MA., & Kuhn, D. (2010). Experimental analysis of the effective components of problem-based learning. Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed, 95, 57-86.
[17]   | Stentoft, D. (2017). From saying to doing interdisciplinary learning: Is problem-based learning the answer? Active Learning in Higher Education, 18(1), 51-61.
[18]   | Achuonye, KA. (2010). A comparative study of problem-based and lecture-based learning in secondary school students’ motivation to learn science. International Journal of Science and Technology Education Research, 1(6), 126-131.
[19]   | Drăghicescu, LM., Petrescu, A., Cristea, GC., Gorghiu, LM., Gorghiu, G. (2014). Application of Problem-based Learning Strategy in Science Lessons – Examples of Good Practice. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 149, 297-301.
[20]   | Bautista, RG. (2012). The impact of cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies in desktop teaching. ANGLISTICUM: Journal of the Association-Institute for English Language and American Studies, 2(1), 135-143.
[21]   | Discipulo, LG & Bautista, RG. (2022). Students’ cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies towards hands-on science. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 11(2), 658-664.
[22]   | Ligado, FNG, Guray, ND., & Bautista, RG. (2022). Pedagogical beliefs, techniques, and practices towards hands-on science, American Journal of Educational Research, 10(10), 584-591.
[23]   | Masek, A. (2015). Problem-Based Learning instruction approaches for students’ intrinsic motivation stimulus. International Journal of Vocational Education and Training Research, 1(3), 42-48.
[24]   | Fernández-Jiménez, C., Fernández-Cabezas, M., Sánchez, MTP., Batanero, MCD. (2019). Autonomous work and skill learning strategies applying problem-based learning: Experience of innovation in subjects related to disability. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 56(5), 617-627.
[25]   | Ajai, JT., Imoko, BI., & O’kwu, EI. (2013). Comparison of the Learning Effectiveness of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Conventional Method of Teaching Algebra. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(1), 131-135. ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online). www.iiste.org.
[26]   | Gorghiu, G., Drăghicescu, LM., Cristea, S., Petrescu, AM., Gorghiu, M. (2015). Problem-based Learning - An Efficient Learning Strategy in the Science Lessons Context. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1865-1870.
[27]   | Pepper, C. (2010). ‘There’s a lot of learning going on but NOT much teaching!’: student perceptions of Problem-Based Learning in science. Higher Education Research & Development, 29(6), 693-707.
[28]   | Demirel, M. & Dagyar, M. (2016). Effects of Problem-based Learning on attitude: A meta-analysis study. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2016, 12(8), 2115-2137.
[29]   | Aidoo, B., Boateng, SK., Kissi, PS., & Ofori, I. (2016). Effect of Problem-Based Learning on students' achievement in Chemistry. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(33), 103-108.
[30]   | Bosica, J., Pyper, JS., & Macgregor, S. (2021). Incorporating Problem-based Learning in a secondary school Mathematics pre-service teacher education course. Teaching and Teacher Education, 102.
[31]   | Yukhymenko, MA., Brown, SW., Lawless, KA., Brodowinska, K., Mullin, G. (2014). Thematic analysis of teacher instructional practices and student responses in middle school classrooms with problem-based learning environment. Global Education Review, 1(3), 93-110.
[32]   | Hmelo-Silver, CE. (2013). Creating a Learning Space in Problem-based Learning. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7(1), 24-39.
[33]   | Yoon, H., Woo, AJ., Treagust, D., & Chandrasegaran, AL. (2014) The Efficacy of Problem-based Learning in an Analytical Laboratory Course for Pre-service Chemistry Teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 369(1), 79-102.
[34]   | Fuente, JAD. (2019). Driving Forces of Students’ Choice in specializing science: a science education context in the Philippines Perspective. The Normal Lights, 13(2).
[35]   | Ghani, ASA., Rahim, AFA., Yusoff, MSB., & Hadie, SNH. (2021). Effective learning behavior in problem-based learning: a scoping review. Medical Science Educator, 31(3), 1199-1211.
[36]   | Ajai, JT., & Imoko, BI. (2015). Gender differences in Mathematics achievement and retention scores: A case of Problem-based Learning method. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 1(1), 45-50.
[37]   | Yulianti, D. (2017). Problem-Based Learning Model used to Scientific Approach Based worksheet for Physics to Develop Senior High School students’ characters. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 824.