Evaluating the Implementation of Project-Based Learning (PjBL): A Study at the English Language Education Study Program, Faculty of Education, Jambi University

Adrefiza Adrefiza; Ahmad Ridha; Habizar Habizar

doi:10.22159/ijoe.2024v12i1.49787

Authors

Adrefiza Adrefiza English Language Education Study Program, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Jambi University, Jl. Jambi Ma Bulian, Mendalo, Jamni, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0009-0007-0841-2244
Ahmad Ridha English Language Education Study Program, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Jambi University, Jl. Jambi Ma Bulian, Mendalo, Jamni, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5462-3210
Habizar Habizar English Language Education Study Program, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Jambi University, Jl. Jambi Ma Bulian, Mendalo, Jamni, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ijoe.2024v12i1.49787

Keywords:

English, evaluation, project-based learning (PjBL), tertiary education

Abstract

The present study evaluated the implementation of Project-Based Learning (PjBL) by the lecturers at the English Language Education Study Program, Faculty of Education, Jambi University. Using information from 100 selected students through electronic email questionnaires with Likert’s 5 points-scale of frequency levels (never to always) concerning ten PjBL main principles, the results fell into the “good” category with an average score of (3.17). Principle 1 (Starting the class with driving questions/issues/problems); 2 (Students work independently in small groups based on a selected project); and 7 (The groups do project presentations for feedback) received the highest rate in the evaluation with an average score of (3.8) each, followed by the principle 4 (The groups discuss, pose, inquire, analyze, and evaluate issues or problems related to the topics) and the principle 9 (The students develop new soft-skills e.g. collaboration, problem-solving, critical thinking, and management skills) with the average scores of (3.5 & 3.2) respectively. The other principles such as “collecting information, facts, evidence, and data outside the classroom for the project work” (principle 5) and “receiving feedback and controls from the lecturers” (principle 6), still need to be improved and developed to achieve better results in the future.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Al-Balushi, S. M., & Al-Aamri, S. S. (2014). The effect of environmental science projects on students’ environmental knowledge and science attitudes. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 23(3), 213-227. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2014.927167

Barak, M. (2012). From ‘doing’ to ‘doing with learning’: Reflection on an effort to promote self-regulated learning in technological projects in high school. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(1), 105-116. https:/doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2012.658759

Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415

Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 369–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653139

Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B. J., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2000). Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3503_2

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). (Eds). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press.

Cocco, S. (2006). Student leadership development: The contribution of project-based learning [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Royal Roads University.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and Mix-methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publication.

Dewey, J. (1959). Dewey on education. Teacher’s College Press.

Greenier, V. T. (2020). The 10Cs of project-based learning TESOL curriculum. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 14(1), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2018.1473405

Guo, P., Saab, N., Post, L. S., & Admiraal, W. (2020). A review of project-based learning in higher education: Student outcomes and measures. International Journal of Educational Research, 102, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101586

Hanney, R., & Savin-Baden, M. (2010). The problem of projects: Understanding the theoretical underpinnings of project-led PBL. London Review of Education, 11(1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/14748460.2012.761816

Harmer, N., & Stoke, A. (2014). The benefits and challenges of project-based learning: A literature review. Plymouth University.

Helle, L., Tynjälä, P., & Olkinuora, E. (2006). Project-based learning in post-secondary education – theory, practice and rubber sling shots. Higher Education, 51(2), 287–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-6386-5

Holubova, R. (2008). Effective teaching methods—Project-based learning in physics. US-China Education Review, 5(12), 27–36.

Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improving Schools, 19(3), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480216659733

Kolmos, A. (2009). Problem-based and project-based learning. In O. Skovsmose, P. Valero. & O. R. Christensen (Eds) University Science and Mathematics Education in Transition. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09829-6_13

Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (1994). A collaborative model for helping middle grade science teachers learn project-based instruction. Elementary School Journal, 94(5), 483–497. https://doi.org/10.1086/461779

Krajcik, J. S., Czerniak, C. M., & Berger, C. F. (2002). Teaching science in elementary and middle school environment: A project-based approach (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Thu L. T. K. (2018, October). Project-based learning in 21st century: A review of dimensions for implementation in university-level teaching and learning. 4th ICEAC International Conference on English Across Cultures. Bali, Indonesia

Lehmann, M., Christensen, P., Du, X., & Thrane, M. (2008). Problem-oriented and project-based learning (POPBL) as an innovative learning strategy for sustainable development in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 33(3), 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043790802088566

Maros, M., Korenkova, M., Fila, M., Levicky, M., & Schoberova, M. (2023). Project-based learning and its effectiveness: Evidence from Slovakia. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(7), 4147–4155. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1954036

Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., Geier, R., & Tal, R. T. (2004). Inquiry-based science in the middle grades: Assessment of learning in urban systemic reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1063–1080. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20039

Nassaji, H. (2015). Qualitative and descriptive research: Data type versus data analysis. Language Teaching Research, 19(2), 129–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815572747

Patton, M. (2012). Work that matters: The teacher’s guide to project-based learning. Paul Hamlyn Foundation.

Styla, D., & Michalopoulou, A. (2016). Project Based Learning In Literature: The teacher’s new role and the development of student’s social skills in upper secondary education. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(3), (307–313). https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n3p307

Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. http://www.bobpearlman.org/BestPractices/PBL_Research.pdf

William, M., & Linn, M. (2003). WISE inquiry in fifth grade biology. Research in Science Education, 32(4), 415–436.

Wurdinger, S., Haar, J., Hugg, R., & Bezon, J. (2007). A qualitative study using project-based learning in a mainstream middle school. Improving Schools, 10(2), 150–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480207078048