Direct Instruction in Knowledge Application and Metacognitive Skills

Teaching & Assessing Metacognitive Skills  

Dr.  Tammy  Heflebower  Senior  Scholar  

Marzano  Research  Laboratory  tammy.heflebower@marzanoresearch.com  

@tammymrl     1  

           Explore  a  Few  QuesCons  Together  

•  Why  teach  metacogniCve  (21st  century)  skills?  

 •  What  are  the  metacogniCve  skills?        •  What  are  some  ideas  for  teaching  and  assessing  them?  

   History  of  the  21st  Century  Movement                                                                                                                        (Kay,  2010;  Gardner,  2010;  Darling-­‐Hammond,  2010)  

 •  Kay  (2010)  noted  that  the  types  of  jobs  available  are  shiUing  from  manufacturing  

and  industrial  jobs  to  service  sector  occupaCons.  Computers  now  perform  most  rouCne,  rule-­‐guided  tasks,  and  informaCon  and  communicaCon  technologies  enable  extensive  interacCon  among  people  from  many  cultures  in  the  global  marketplace.    

•  Instead  of  compleCng  rouCne,  task-­‐based  assignments,  employees  must  now  set  goals,  solve  problems,  work  effecCvely  with  a  wide  variety  of  customers  and  colleagues,  and  make  decisions  without  direct  supervision.  Kay  observed  that  these  funcCons  require  skills  that  were  not  necessary  for  most  manufacturing  and  industrial  jobs  in  the  20th  century.  

•  Drop-­‐out  rate  –  For  every  10  students  who  enter  eighth  grade,  only  seven  graduate  high  school  on  Cme,  and  only  three  

complete  a  postsecondary  degree  by  age  26:  (Jobs  for  the  Future,  2005,  p.  5)  

•  Lack  of  student  engagement  –  Drop  out  rates  and  student  engagement  are  inextricably  linked.  

•  Achievement  gaps  –  Students’  current  lack  of  engagement  can  be  a`ributed  to  a  “new  set  of  desires  and  expectaCons”  that  21xt  

century  students  have  developed  as  a  result  of  their  “lifelong  immersion  in  all  things  digital”  (Trilling  &  Fadel,  2009,  p.  29).    

 

2  

3  

Cogni5ve  Skills   Cona5ve  Skills  GeneraCng  Conclusions   Becoming  aware  of  the  power  of  

interpretaCons  

IdenCfying  common  logical  errors   CulCvaCng  a  growth  mindset  

PresenCng  and  supporCng  claims   CulCvaCng  resiliency  

NavigaCng  digital  sources   Avoiding  negaCve  thinking  

Problem  solving   Taking  various  perspecCves  

Decision  making   InteracCng  reasonably  

ExperimenCng   Handling  controversy  and  conflict  

InvesCgaCng  

IdenCfying  basic  relaConships  between  ideas  

GeneraCng  and  manipulaCng  mental  images  

Level      3      Lagging      Indicators  The    following    are    examples    of    statements    that    could    be    used    as    lagging    indicators    for    level    3:  •  Curriculum    documents    have    been    created    that    correlate    the    wri`en    curriculum    to    state    and  

district    standards    (for    example,    the    CCSS,    if    applicable).  •  Curriculum    documents    have    been    created    that    correlate    the    wriAen    curriculum    to    21st    century        

skills    (for    example,    college    and    career    readiness    skills    and    mathema5cal    prac5ce    skills    from      the  CCSS).  

•  Data    show    a    very    strong    posiCve    correlaCon    (90    percent    or    higher)    between    what    is    taught    in  classrooms    (that    is,    the    taught    curriculum)    and    the    wri`en    curriculum.  

•  Data    show    a    very    strong    posiCve    correlaCon    (90    percent    or    higher)    between    assessments    and      the  wri`en    and    taught    curricula.  

•  A    wri`en    list    of    essenCal    standards    or    content    in    the    curriculum    is    in    place.  •  A    wri`en    list    of    essenCal    vocabulary    is    in    place    for    all    levels    (that    is,    Tiers    1,    2,    and    3).  •  A    curriculum    audit    document    shows    that    the    Cme    it    would    take    to    adequately    address    the  •  essenCal    elements    of    the    curriculum    does    not    exceed    the    instrucConal    Cme    available.    

MetacogniCve  Skills  

 Meta-­‐analysis  found  that  problem-­‐based  learning  “is  significantly  more  effec5ve  than  tradiConal  instrucCon  to  train  competent  and  skilled  pracCConers  and  to  promote  long-­‐term  reten5on  of  knowledge  and  skills  acquired  during  the  learning  experience  or  training  session”  (Strobel  &  van  Barnveld,  2009).  

4  

 “Perhaps  the  most  obvious  and  dramaCc  way  the  21st  century  differs  from  those  previous  is  in  how  informaCon  is  discovered  or  created  and  how  it  is  distributed.  Students  cannot  be  successful  criCcal  thinkers  if  they  cannot  properly  focus  on  what  is  important,  navigate  digital  sources  to  find  informaCon  that  is  relevant  and  credible,  and  idenCfy  and  dismiss  arguments  that  contain  errors  in  thinking.  They  cannot  be  successful  at  considering,  developing,  and  defending  their  own  arguments  if  they  cannot  generate  reasonable  conclusions,  present  claims,  and  provide  adequate  support  for  those  claims”  (Marzano  &  Heflebower,  2011,  p.  69).  

Analyzing  and  Using  Informa5on  •           InformaCon  literacy  •           IdenCfying  common  logical  errors  

•  Faulty  logic  •  A`acks  •  Weak  references  •  MisinformaCon  

•  GeneraCng  conclusions  •  PresenCng  and  supporCng  claims  

 Addressing  Complex  Problems  and  Issues  Sample  Resource:  Annenberg  Learner  (formerly  Annenberg  Media/CPB,  now  part  of  the  Annenberg  FoundaCon)  advances  excellent  teaching  by  funding  and  distribuCng  mulCmedia  educaConal  resources—video,  print,  and  web-­‐based—to  improve  teaching  methods  and  subject-­‐ma`er  experCse  (annenbergfoundaCon.org).      Implica5ons  for  My  School  or  Classroom          

h`p://newsacCon.Cgweb.org/  www.wiki.newsacCon.Cgweb.org    Hosted  by  Washington  InternaConal  School  (DC)  in  partnership  with  regional  bureau  schools:  

Africa  Asia  and  the  Pacific  Central  and  South  Asia  Europe  Middle  East  South  America  

   Complex  Problems  and  Issues  

Thinking  and  InvenCon  Projects  and  Ideas    

Resources  and  Ideas  •  Problem-­‐solving  inven5on  conven5on  

–  Students  read  about  famous  inventors  and  how  they  developed  ideas.  They  also  learned  how  to  obtain  patents.    

–  They  considered  a  problem  they  would  like  to  solve  using  the  scienCfic  method.  

–  They  researched  whether  a  market  existed.      

–  If  a  market  existed,  they  began  creaCng  a  prototype.  

–  They  created  the  real  thing  and  tested  it.  

–  They  showcased  the  invenCon.    

•  Project  Ci5zen  (grades  5–12),    civiced.org    

 •  Future  Ci5es  (middle  school):  Future  

City  CompeCCon  serves  students  in  grades  6–8.  It  is  sponsored  by  NaConal  Engineers  Week.  

 •  Des5na5on  Imagina5on  (preschool,  

elementary,  middle,  high  and  post-­‐secondary),  idodi.org  

 

•  Project-­‐planning  ques5ons  –  What  is  the  problem?                                  

(Students  clearly  state  it.)  –  What  do  we  believe  (percepCon)?  –  What  do  we  know  (facts)?  –  What  do  we  want                                          

(desired  outcome)?  –  What  do  we  need  to  do  to  get  

what  we  want  (acCon  steps)?    •  Indicators  of  a  successful  project  

–  Students  demonstrate  knowledge  about  the  field.  

–  Students  discuss  and  reflect  on  the  learning  journey.  

–  Students  arCculate  learning  stretch—intellectual  and  personal  growth.  

–  Students  provide  physical  evidence  of  learning  by  applying  knowledge.    

       

5  

Digital  

Media  Global  

Think  about  learning  opportuniCes  that  intersect  these  three.  

 (Jacobs,  2014)  

ConaCve  Skills  Understanding  and  Controlling  Oneself  

Interpreta5on  InterpretaCon  is  basic  to  all  our  endeavors,  whether  as  scienCsts  or  as  individuals  going  about  our  daily  lives.  So  every  Cme  we  deliberate  on  events  or  on  our  experience,  we  are  interpreCng.  InterpretaCon  is  fundamental,  because  how  things  are  interpreted  determines  what  acCons  we  consider.  

Ways  of  Thinking  Self-­‐efficacy:  At  its  core,  self-­‐efficacy  is  an  individual’s  disposiCon  to  control  his  or                                her  life.  Marzano,  Pickering,  &  Heflebower  (2010)  note  that  self-­‐efficacy  plays  a  major  role  in  performance,  ciCng  the  following  three  points:  

1.  “The  average  weighted  correlaCon  between  self-­‐efficacy  and  work-­‐related  performance  …  =  impressive  28-­‐percent  gain  in  task  performance.”  

2.  “Self-­‐efficacy  has  an  effect  size  of  .82  relaCve  to  students’  academic  performance.“  

3.   This  translates  to  an  expected  29-­‐percen5le  point  gain.      In  addiCon,  self-­‐efficacy  includes:  •  A  growth  mindset  

•  Resiliency  

•  PosiCve  possible  selves  

•  OpCmism  

Avoiding  Nega5ve  Thinking  NegaCve  thinking  includes:  •  EmoConal  thinking  

•  Worry  

6  

ConaCve  Skills  InteracCng  With  Others  

Perspec5ve    Taking  This  involves  understanding  how  a  situaCon  appears  to  other  people  and  the  reasons  for  their  cogniCve  and  emoConal  reacCons.  

 

Responsible  Communica5on  •  One  should  understand  how  acCons  and  words  either  posiCvely  or  negaCvely  affect  

another  person’s  reacCons.  •  Research  and  theory  on  acCve  listening  is  parCcularly  relevant  to  responsible  

communicaCon.    

Addressing  Conflict  and  Controversy  •  Controversy  is  “when  one  person’s  ideas,  informaCon,  conclusions,  theories,  and  

opinions  are  incompaCble  with  those  of  another  and  the  two  seek  to  reach  an  agreement”  (Johnson  &  Johnson,  2005).  

•  Conflict  exists  when  two  people  try  to  accomplish  incompaCble  goals  or  complete  incompaCble  acCviCes  at  the  same  Cme.  

 Implica5ons  for  My  Classroom                

              7  

A  Few  Facts  About  GeneraCon  Y  GeneraCon  Y  is  the  largest  consumer  and  employee  group  in  history.  In  addiCon,  it:  •  Has  been  studied  and  marketed  to  since  infancy  •  Will  dominate  the  workforce  for  next  40  years  •  Is  the  most  cross-­‐culture,  cross-­‐creed,  and  cross-­‐color  generaCon  in  history  •  Has  remarkable  longevity  (120  years)  •  Includes  new  life  phases  

–  Formerly:  childhood,  adolescence,  adulthood,  old  age  –  Now:  Childhood,  adolescence,  odyssey  (20s  as  a  Cme  for  exploraCon),  

adulthood,  acCve  reCrement,  old  age      •  In  a  survey  of  HR  managers  at  400  companies:  75  percent  said  recent  college  

graduates  displayed  only  “adequate”  in  the  following  areas:  –  Professionalism    —        Work  ethic  –  CreaCvity    —        InnovaCon    –  CriCcal  thinking      —        Problem-­‐solving  skills    

Implica5ons  for  Teaching  Genera5on  Y  •  Teach  funcCons  rather  than  tools.  

–  Think  in  verbs  (presenCng,  sharing,  and  communicaCng)  instead  of  nouns  (PowerPoint,  YouTube,  or  Twi`er).    

 •  Revise  technology  policies  so  tech  can  be  used  as  a  tool  without  being  a  

contraband.  –  Think  of  courtesy  and  appropriateness.    

•  Develop  students  through  intenConal  instrucCon  and  interacCon.  –  Use  gradual  release  of  responsibility  (Duke  &  Pearson,  2002)  –  “I  do,  you  watch.”      –  “You  do,  I  help  guide  and  confer.”  –  “You  do,  I  watch  and  assess  next  steps.”    

•  Create  item  banks  rather  than  formal  tests  solely  (Frey,  Fisher,  &  Gonzalez,  2010).  –  Use  banks  to  provide  teachers  with  opCons:  quiz  items,  unit  tests,  retests,  

and  a  few  proficient  quesCons  as  a  review.  –  Consider  public  item  banks  where  students  can  also  contribute.    

8  

Six$Types$of$Tasks$That$Employ$Hypotheses$Generation$and$Testing$$$

Systems$Analysis!"""!Students!at!all!grade!levels!study!many!systems!across!the!disciplines!such!as!ecosystems,!anatomical!systems,!systems!of!government,!and!transportation!systems.!One!way!to!enhance!and!use!students’!understanding!of!these!systems!is!to!ask!them!to!generate!hypotheses!that!predict!what!would!happen!if!some!aspect!of!a!system!were!changed.!!!Problem$Solving$"""!By!definition,!problems!involve!obstacles!and!constraints.!While!engaged!in!solving!problems,!students!must!generate!and!test!hypotheses!related!to!the!various!solutions!they!predict!might!work.!For!example,!a!teacher!might!present!students!with!a!task!that!requires!them!to!build!something!(e.g.,!a!model!car,!a!bridge)!under!the!constraint!that!they!are!allowed!to!use!limited!or!specific!materials!only!(e.g.,!balsa!wood,!a!rubber!band,!a!mousetrap).!Using!their!understanding!of!concepts!related!to!the!problem!they!must!consider!different!approaches!to!a!solution!and!then!generate!and!test!their!hypotheses!about!those!solutions.!!Historical$Investigation!"""!Students!are!engaged!in!historical!investigation!when!they!construct!plausible!scenarios!for!events!from!the!past,!about!which!there!is!no!general!agreement.!For!example,!scholars!have!presented!conflicting!versions!of!Roosevelt’s!role!in!the!events!that!led!up!to!the!bombing!of!Pearl!Harbor.!To!engage!in!historical!investigation,!students!need!to!use!their!understanding!of!the!situation!to!generate!a!hypothetical!scenario.!To!test!this!hypothesis,!each!student!must!then!seek!out!and!analyze!as!much!information!as!possible!to!determine!if!the!hypothesis!is!supported!by!the!evidence.!!Investigation!"""!Another!task!that!requires!students!to!generate!and!test!hypotheses!is!the!process!of!invention.!For!example,!students!might!use!their!understanding!of!the!principles!of!the!cardiovascular!and!muscular!system!to!invent!a!new!form!of!exercise.!To!do!this,!they!must!hypothesize!what!might!work,!develop!the!idea,!and!then!conduct!tests!to!determine!if!their!idea!does,!in!fact,!work.!Invention!often!demands!generating!and!testing!multiple!hypotheses,!until!one!of!them!proves!effective.!!!Experimental$Inquiry!"""!We!most!commonly!associate!the!process!of!experimental!inquiry!with!generating!and!testing!hypotheses!in!science.!But!teachers!can!use!experimental!inquiry!across!the!disciplines!to!guide!students!in!applying!their!understanding!of!important!content.!For!example,!based!on!their!understanding!of!how!literary!devices!in!literature!have!influenced!readers,!students!might!hypothesize!the!effects!of!using!specific!literary!devices!in!their!own!writing.!!DecisionBmaking!"""!Although!we!might!not!associate!decision!with!generating!and!testing!hypotheses,!using!a!structured!decision"making!framework!can!help!students!examine!hypothetical!situations,!especially!those!requiring!them!to!select!what!has!the!most!or!least!of!something!or!what!is!the!best!or!worst!example!of!something.!For!example,!if!students!were!asked!to!predict!who!is!the!most!influential!musical!group!or!visual!artist!of!the!last!decade,!many!students!would!quickly!offer!a!prediction.!If!they!were!then!asked!to!test!this!hypothesis!by!using!a!structured!decision"making!framework,!the!result!might!be!different!from!what!they!predicted.!Further,!using!a!decision"making!process!to!test!their!prediction!requires!them!to!reflect!on!and!use!a!broad!range!of!knowledge!related!to!the!topic.!!!!

9  

Assessing!the!Intangibles!

•  Instruc<on!in!21st!century!skills!without!feedback!can!be!concerning.!!•  Without!assessments!to!accompany!instruc<on,!students!receive!ligle!if!any!concrete!

feedback!regarding!their!progress.!!•  Feedback!is!a!vital!component!of!the!learning!process.!!

How&Can&I&Use&These&in&My&Content&Area?&!•  Obtrusive!assessments!

•  Unobtrusive!assessments!

•  StudentPgenerated!assessments!!!!!

Student2Generated&Assessments&Consider!the!comprehensiveness!of!an!assessment!system.!Reconsider!the!simple!types!of!assessments!we!have!relied!upon.!Instead,!think!about!student2generated&assessments&using!products!and!performances!employed!by!contemporary!professionals:!•  Films!•  Podcasts!•  Quarterly!reports!•  Interac<ve!videoconferences!•  Digital!music!composi<ons!•  Websites!•  Online!journals!•  Playlists!that!depict!major!themes!of!a!story!

24!

                                 MulC-­‐tasking  

Key  Concepts  

•  Focus  –  MulCtasking:  Is  it  fact  or  ficCon?  –  Focus  provides  clear  goals  with  immediate  feedback.  –  It  offers  frequent  opportuniCes  for  making  decisions.  –  AcCon  and  awareness  merge.  –  Irrelevant  sCmuli  disappear.  –  We  feel  in  control.  –  There  is  a  sense  of  growth—larger  than  oneself.  –  Time  is  perceived  to  pass  more  quickly.  –  AcCvity  is  worth  doing  for  its  own  sake.  

 •  Divergent  and  convergent  thinking  

–  Brainstorming  –  Logically  considering  brainstorming  

 •  A  strategy  for  addressing  problems  in  life              

11  

•  Dux,  Ivanoff,  Asplund,  and  Marois  (2006)  found  that  delays  in  task  switching  are  due  to  our  inability  to  make  two  decisions  at  once,  resulCng  in  a  “response  selecCon  bo`leneck.”    

•  When  the  brain  is  forced  to  respond  to  mulCple  sCmuli  at  once,  it  needs  extra  Cme  too  decide  which  task  to  perform  first,  so  tasks  end  up  taking  longer  than  normal.  

•  Ophir,  Nass,  and  Wagner  (2009)  found  that  people  who  did  not  mulCtask  on  a  regular  basis  were  be`er  at  filtering  out  distracCons,  holding  informaCon  in  working  memory,  and  switching  back  and  forth  between  tasks  compared  to  people  who  mulCtasked  oUen.  They  concluded  that  constant  mulCtasking  behavior  actually  impairs  one’s  ability  to  concentrate,  focus,  and  deal  with  distracCons.  

 (More  research  examples  are  on  pp.  17–18  of  Teaching  &  Assessing  21st  Century  Skills.)  

References  Aldridge,  D.,  (2013).  Media  literacy  VoiceThread.Accessed  at  h`p://travistechies.wikispaces.com/Media+Literacy+VoiceThread  on  August  17,  2013.      www.archives.gov/educaCon/lessons/worksheets/photo.html.      Baker,  F.,  (2006).  Is  seeing  believing?  Resources  for  teaching  bout  the  manipula?on  of  photographic  images.  Accessed  at  www.frankwbaker.com/isb.htm  on  May  30,  2013.      Baker,  F.,  (2007).  The  role  of  media  in  elec?ons;  Helping  students  understand  media’s  influence.  Accessed  at  www.frankwbaker.com/media_poliCcs  on  May  8,  2013.      Center  for  Media  Literacy.  9201).  Five  key  ques?ons  form  founda?on  for  media  inquiry:  Keywords  and  guiding  ques?ons  help  build  habits  of  cri?cal  thinking.  Accessed  at  www.medialit.org/reading-­‐room/five-­‐key-­‐quesCons-­‐form-­‐foundaCon-­‐media-­‐inquiry  on  May  12,  2013.      Christel,  M.T.,  &  Sullivan,  S.  (Eds).  (2007).  Lesson  plans  for  crea?ng  media-­‐rich  classrooms.    Urbana,  IL:  NaConal  Council  of  Teachers  of  English.      Churches,  A.  (2008,  April1).  Bloom’s  Taxonomy  blooms  digi?ally.  Accessed  at  www.techlearning.com/arCcle/44988  on  May  30,  2011.      Daly,  J.(2004,  September  14).  Life  on  the  screen:  Visual  literacy  in  educa?on.  Accessed  at  www.edutopia.org/lucas-­‐visual-­‐literacy  on  May  12,  2013.  

Darling-­‐Hammond,  L.  (2010).  New  policies  for  21st  century  demands.  In  J.  Bellanca  &  R.  Brandt  (Eds.),  21st  century  skills:  Rethinking  how  students  learn  (pp.  33–49).    Bloomington,  IN:    SoluCon  Tree  Press.  

Duke,  N.  K.,  &  Pearson,  P.  D.  (2002).  EffecCve  pracCces  for  developing  reading  comprehension.  In  A.  E.  Farstup  &  S.  J.  Samuels  (Eds.),  What  research  has  to  say  about  reading  instruc?on  (pp.  205–242).  Newark,  DE:  InternaConal  Reading  AssociaCon.  

Dux,  P.,  Ivanoff,  J.,  Asplund,  C.,  &  Marois,  R.  (2006).  IsolaCon  of  a  central  bo`leneck  of  informaCon  processing  with  Cme-­‐resolved  fMRI.  Neuron,  52,  1109–1120.  

EDUCAUSE  Learning  IniCave.  (2007).  7  things  you  should  know  about…digital  storytelling.  Accessed  at  h`p://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7021.pdf  on  May  12,  2013.  

Alberta%20conf%20Dec%202014/research%20for%20keynote/cross_curricular_comptencies_overview.pdf  

Frey,  N.,  Fisher,  D.,  &  Gonzalez,  A.  (2010).  Literacy  2.0:  Reading  and  wri?ng  in  21st  century  classrooms.    Bloomington,  IN:  SoluCon  Tree  Press.  

Gardner,  H.  (2010).  Five  minds  for  the  future.  In  J.  Bellanca  &  R.  Brandt  (Eds.),  21st  century  skills:  Rethinking  how  students  learn  (pp.  9–31).  Bloomington,  IN:  SoluCon  Tree  Press.  

Jacobs,  H.  (2010).  Curriculum  21.  Alexandria,  VA:  ASCD.  

Jobs  for  the  Future  (2005).  Educa?on  and  skills  for  the  21st  century:  An  agenda  for  ac?on.    Boston,  MA:    Jobs  for  the  Future.  Retrieved  from  h`p://www.jff.org/sites/default/files/AcConAgenda.pdf  

Johnson,  D.  W.,  &  Johnson,  R.  T.  (2005).  Teaching  students  to  be  peacemakers  (4th  ed.).  Edina,  MN:  InteracCon  Book  Company.  

Kay,  K.  (2010).  21st  century  skills:  Why  they  ma`er,  what  they  are,  and  how  we  got  there.  In  J.  Bellanca  and  R.  Brandt  (Eds.),  21st  century  skills:  Rethinking  how  students  learn  (pp.  xiii–xxxi).  Bloomington,  IN:  SoluCon  Tree  Press.  

Lenhart,  A.  (2010,  April  20).  Press  release:  Teens  and  mobile  phones.  Accessed  at  www.pewinternet.org/Press-­‐Releases/201/Teens-­‐andMobile-­‐Phones.aspx  on  May  12,  2013.  

Marzano,  R.  J.,  &  Heflebower,  T.  (2011).  Teaching  and  assessing  21st  century  skills.  Bloomington,  IN:  Marzano  Research  Laboratory.  

Marzano,  R.  J.,  Pickering,  D.  J.,  &  Heflebower,  T.  (2010).  The  highly  engaged  classroom.  Bloomington,  IN:  Marzano  Research  Laboratory.  

 NaConal  AssociaCon  for  Media  Literacy  EducaCon.  92009).  Key  ques?ons  to  ask  when  analyzing  media  messages.  Accessed  at  htpp://namle.net/wp-­‐content/uploads/2009/09/NAMLEKeyQuesCons0708.pdf  on  May  30,  2013.      

Ophir,  E.,  Nass,  C.,  &  Wagner,  A.  D.  (2009,  September).  CogniCve  control  in  media  mulCtaskers.  Proceedings  of  the  Na?onal  Academy  of  Sciences  of  the  United  States  of  America,  106(37),  15583–15587.  

Strobel.  J.,  &  van  Barnveld,  A.  (2009).    When  is  PBL  more  effecCve?  A  meta-­‐synthesis  of  meta-­‐analysis  comparing  PBL  to  convenConal  classrooms.  The  Interdisciplinary  Journal  of  Problem-­‐Based  Learning,  3(1),  44–58.  

Trilling,  B.,  &  Fadel,  C.  (2009).  The  perfect  learning  storm.  In  21st  century  skills:  Learning  for  life  in  our  ?mes.  San  Francisco,  CA:  Jossey-­‐Bass.  

Weiser,  M.  (1991,  September).  The  computer  for  the  21st  century.  Scien?fic  American,    Special  Issue  on  Communica?ons,  Computers,  and  Networks,  78–89.  

12