Phenomena-based learning is one of the latest hot topics in education, specifically in science education. Our recently revised national science standards, the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), appear to develop with an emphasis on phenomena-based learning. Curricular materials set by publishers that align with the NGSS are also being developed based on phenomena-based learning.
To follow the NGSS, teachers are presented with three integrated dimensions; disciplinary core ideas (DCIs), crosscutting concepts (CCs), and science and engineering practices (SEPs). The NGSS are standards and are not intended to be curriculum. Rather, they need to be translated in curricular materials for effective use in the classroom. Publishers have been tasked with taking the NGSS and converting them into classroom materials. Although the NGSS does not specify adherence to a phenomena-based learning program directly, the NGSS website notes that “phenomena are an essential part of implementing the NGSS” and has information for teachers and publishers on how to accomplish this goal. The books, textbooks, and science kits that have been developed and aligned to the NGSS focus on a phenomena-based learning approach, giving teachers an anchoring point from which to launch a series of student-directed and teacher-directed investigative steps. Specific science phenomena are observed, meeting the DCIs, and connected to reading, math, and engineering meet both the CCs and SEPs. Knowledge-based content (eg. vocabulary) and the contextual framework for subject-specific topics are no longer emphasized.
Phenomena-based learning does enhance the science classroom. Research shows that students are more engaged when they are allowed to observe science phenomena, ask and answer questions about that phenomena, and explore how what they are learning applies to their everyday lives (Hoglund, 2020)
But what is phenomena-based learning, where did it come from, and is it the answer to US failing test scores and low numbers of graduates entering STEM fields?
The root of phenomena-based learning comes from the constructivist theories proposed by Jean Piaget (1896-1980), a Swiss psychologist who is most famously known for his theory of cognitive development. Constructivism is the theory that says learners construct knowledge rather than just passively taking in information. Constructivism is but one branch of cognitive learning styles, a subset of a more extensive array of learning theories. Here is an excellent summary of 31 different learning theories in education by Dr. Chris Drew.
It is helpful to note that phenomena-based learning shares similarities with project-based, problem-based, and inquiry-based learning. The critical difference is that students’ education must have a global context and an interdisciplinary approach for phenomena-based learning.
Phenomena-based learning is also rooted in holism, which suggests that learning works better by looking at the whole subject rather than breaking things down into parts. For many years, a holistic approach to science education has been the primary educational paradigm for Finnish schools. Phenomena-based learning is the learning method Finland adopted in 2016. Because many countries see Finland as the model school system worldwide, the U.S. embraced phenomena-based learning and has made it the focus on science education standards and curricular materials. Phenomena-based science programs have risen in popularity and dominate the science education publishing industry.
Is phenomena-based learning better than traditional methods for helping students learn science?
As with all learning theories, phenomena-based learning has both advantages and disadvantages for science education. The benefits include improved student engagement, connections across different subject domains, application and relevance to real-life issues, development of solid communication skills as students often work in groups, increased independence, self-initiated learning, critical thinking, and problem-solving.
The disadvantages include ill-defined learning goals, students struggling to identify and learn discipline-specific skills, a lack of technical knowledge being presented or required to complete a project, and the lack of formal structure. Students have difficulty creating the correct contextual framework for deeper learning understanding.
In How People Learn II from the National Research Council, the authors note that certain subjects, such as science, require discipline-specific content. Phenomena-based learning alone doesn’t transfer deeper student understanding and researchers have urged caution in making claims about how effective these methods are in the classroom (Condliffe et. a. 2017).
Phenomena-based learning can enhance a student’s willingness and motivation to learn scientific subjects but is incomplete. Without a knowledge base of vocabulary, techniques, skills, concepts, and the corresponding contextual framework that organizes information for rapid retrieval, we shortchange our students and leave them without proper preparation for high school and college-level courses. Phenomena-based learning alone will not work to move students towards deep learning if students don’t also learn the academic language used within and across content areas.
Hoglund, Shana, “Three-Dimensional Learning and the Phenomena Based Learning Approach with a STEM Curriculum” (2020). School of Education and Leadership Student Capstone Projects. 464.
Condliffe, B., Quint, J., Visher, M.G., Bangser, M. R., Drohojowska, S. Saco, L., and Nelson, E. (2017). Project Based Learning: A Literature Review, 1-78. New York, NY: MDRC.