1

Rachel M. Mudrich

EPY 602 – Fall 2015

Five Paper Review

Project-Based Learning Activities on Intrinsic Motivation and Skill of Middle School

Mathematics Students

Two optimal goals of schooling are for students to develop an in-depth understanding of

various content areas, as well as the motivation to continue learning beyond the classroom

(Miller & Atkinson, 2001). Students' academic achievement can be developed and influenced by

experiences inside of school when the proper types of instructional environments are associated

with classroom learning opportunities (Nye, Hedges, & Konstantopoulos, 2001). In addition,

their motivation can be shaped by the learning context as well as social variables, such as

working in relationships with others and engaging in group work (Patrick, Ryan, & Kaplan,

2007). This collaborative group approach is widely believed to be a powerful teaching strategy

that can enhance student motivation and promote self-directed learning because the learning

issues usually arise from problems that attract the interest of students (Hmelo-Silver, 2004).

When students take part in tasks in collaboration with their peers they begin to consider

others' ideas and perspectives, be responsible to others, and engage in critical thinking.

Furthermore, active engagement in the learning process allows students to create, discover, and

deeply understand material in a way that is hard to attain when students are exposed only to

traditional, passive lectures (Freeman, Alston, & Winborne, 2008).

Since the beginning of public schooling in the United States, educators have struggled

with the presence of considerable differences in individual students' backgrounds and methods of

2

learning (Zimmerman, 2002). In addition to this increase in the range and abilities of the general

education classroom population, concern has emerged regarding the teacher's ability to cope with

a class of students with multiple learning styles (Tournaki, 2003). Therefore, the framework for

understanding the basis of learning has shifted gradually from a teacher-centered approach to a

student-centered approach to learning (Sungar & Tekkaya, 2006).

Today's education must include providing students with a classroom environment where

they experience the richness and excitement of knowing and understanding the natural world and

where they can use appropriate scientific processes and principles in making personal decisions

(Sungur, Tekkaya, & Geban, 2006). Also, allowing the students to make decisions about which

actions to take to meet their goals makes their work increasingly meaningful, a condition that

encourages depth of understanding and motivation (Pedersen & Williams, 2004).

Furthermore, when the focus of classroom activities is directed toward student-led

approaches and away from teacher-led approaches, learning tends to be more meaningful since

students are the ones who generate what is needed to advance their skills. Also, when they

believe that they can exercise control over important activities in the classroom or they can

produce desirable outcomes through their actions, they will have greater motivation to expand

effort and to continue at a given task (Cheng, Lam, & Chan, 2008). Students who are free to

choose the activity that they find most interesting and useful are more likely to be engaged in a

task and show determination (Pedersen & Williams, 2004). The most important variable in the

education process is not located in the classrooms or in the schools. What the students do with

what they learn is the real measure of educational achievement (Howard, 2002). Focus must be

placed on how children can be motivated to think about what they are doing, and not just on

coverage of material.

3

During the past two decades, the student-centered classroom has come to the forefront in

education because of its ability to provide significant opportunities for deeper individual learning

(Ahern & El-Hindi, 2000). To become student-centered, educators must develop students'

understanding of course content by enriching the classroom environment to include physical,

emotional, and social aspects (Kaufman et al., 2008). This type of setting must provide

opportunities for students to construct knowledge by solving real-life problems through asking

and refining questions, designing and conducting investigations, gathering, analyzing, and

interpreting information and data, drawing conclusions, and reporting findings (Blumenfeld et

al., 2000). Pedagogy that fosters personal interests and interactions with peers offers promising

alternatives to teacher-centered instruction (Grant & Branch, 2005).

The purpose of this review of case studies was to research the association between

project-based learning, intrinsic motivation, and skill acquisition of students in a middle school

math class. This research review focused on how project-based activities enhanced the

relationship between self-regulatory learning and intrinsic motivation and how both effected

academic achievement in math students at the middle school level.

Chin and Chia (2004) conducted an investigation to evaluate how authentic inquiry in

project work affected students' self-evaluation of how well they learned skills from particular

lessons. The research consisted of 38 girls, which were separated into four to five groups, within

a ninth-grade biology class. Each group worked for 180 weeks on self-selected project topics

related to a particular theme. Each group member read one study and brought his or her ideas

back to the group in order to create the group research topic for the project. Each groups then

designed their own project tasks based on their identified problem. The teachers created a forum

page on the Internet for the students to contact any desired professional or to use to do any other

4

research. In addition, the group kept a learning log for recording information that was being

researched. They also planned the next steps in their inquiry in the journal (Chin & Chia, 2004).

Student feedback on their project-based experiences was reflected in two survey forms.

For knowledge application skills, 89.7% of the students were able to search for information from

various sources, and 74.4% felt what they learned in their project was applicable to their lives.

In evaluating their independent learning skills, 74.4% were able to think of questions that helped

to drive the progress of the project, and 82.1 % indicated they were able to sustain their interest

in solving their problem. Most of the students (76.9%) agreed that they were inspired to do the

project because of some related daily life experiences, and 89.7% indicated that the information

they had learned was going to be helpful to them in other related subject areas (Chin & Chia,

2004).

Similarly, Gultekin (2005) conducted a study to identify the effects of project based

learning on learning outcomes of students in a fifth-grade social studies class. Specifically, the

following two questions guided the study: (a) Is there a difference between the academic

achievements of experimental groups of students (in which the project-based learning approach

was used) and control group students (in which the conventional teaching approach was used)?

(b) What are the opinions of the students and teachers regarding the project-based learning

approach?

The study consisted of 20 students in the experimental group and 20 students in the

control group. The groups were balanced based on their grades in the social studies course,

personal characteristics, and the scores from the achievement test. The experimental process

lasted for 3 weeks (6 hours per week and 20 class hours in total). It consisted of different

stages that included identifying the objectives; identifying and defining the task to perform or

5

the problem; gathering, organizing, and reporting the information; and presenting the results

and the conclusion (Gultekin, 2005). According to the findings, the project-learning approach

positively affected the academic success of the students in the social studies course. The

qualitative data showed the learning approach was enjoyable and motivated the students while

they learned. Research findings claimed that the approach also improved the research skills of

the students. Additionally, the findings of the study stated the projects lead students to reach

information easily by doing research through group work and cooperation. The approach was

shown to be effective in developing students' higher order thinking skills, stating that the

students used these skills and learning strategies to design their project. However, the most

noticeable result of the study was that the project-based approach to learning improved

academic success of the students and developed essential and important skills.

This approach also enhanced the students' study habits by making the learning process

enjoyable, entertaining, meaningful, and permanent, and by forcing them to be busy learning,

leading them toward research by improving cooperation and developing a variety of abilities.

This type of learning also helped the students become conscious of their strengths and more

willing to delegate different tasks to students who were more capable of getting a specific part of

the project done in a timely manner (Gultekin, 2005).

Mueller and Fleming (2001) conducted a case study of 29 sixth and seventh grade

students who worked in groups over 5 weeks to examine the effect of peer group learning.

The participants were engaged in a scientific inquiry project to design an amusement park ride

for a class exhibition. Two classrooms were structured to allow children to participate in

small-group inquiry for an extended period of time. Projects were outlined to provide

opportunities for children to develop portfolios of information and knowledge about science,

6

such as research reports, scale drawings, and models, and to provide children with

opportunities to make informal and formal presentations. After the project, self-evaluation and

interview information were collected to measure children's reflections on the nature of what

they had learned. Improvements in knowledge of science were reported by 54% of

participants, and the same percentage stated they learned how to apply science in a realistic

way. In addition, 35% of participants stated their learning was linked directly to the

enjoyment they found in taking part in the project (Mueller & Fleming, 2001). The

participants also reported that they learned better when they were able to actually create

something, compared to just using a book for learning. The findings also revealed that girls

emerged as group leaders in all the groups, and although apparent problems did surface, all the

groups found ways to cooperate to the point where they could complete the requirements of

the project (Mueller & Fleming, 2001).

Baker and White (2003) conducted a study wherein two versions of a 2-week project-

based learning unit were developed, implemented, and assessed. Students used a collaborative

Geographic Information System (GIS) or paper maps to support data analysis activities in the

eighth-grade Earth Science unit. Attitude and self-efficacy in science as technology, as well as

student achievement in science process skills, were measured. The problem-based learning unit

was determined to closely align with eighth grade standards for science. The study was

conducted with two eighth-grade science teachers, across ten classrooms, and included all

eighth-grade students (n = 192). Instructor 1 had 87 students in the study, with 51 participating

in the GIS treatment and 36 in the traditional mapping classes. Instructor 2 had 105 students in

the study, with 42 participants in the GIS treatment and 63 in the traditional mapping group. In

totality, the experimental group consisted of 93 students in the GIS-supported project-based

7

learning activities, while the control group consisted of 99 participated in the paper mapping

supported classes (Baker & White, 2003).

Students who participated in the GIS project demonstrated significant increases in self-

efficacy toward science (p <.01) and attitudes toward technology (p <.001), but did not change in

their attitudes toward science or self-efficacy toward technology. Additionally, students

increased significantly on attitudes related to making personal decisions from scientific data and

attitudes toward analyzing and picturing scientific data in different ways (Baker & White, 2003).

Students who did not participate in the GIS project significantly increased their attitudes toward

science (p <.05). Also, attitudes regarding drawing conclusion from scientific data significantly

increased (p = .01). Student attitudes in Instructor 2's classes did not significantly increase in

attitudes or self-efficacy in science or in technology self-efficacy; however, students' attitudes

toward technology significantly increased (p < .05). Students of Instructor I significantly

increased on each of the four factors. Also in this study conducted by Baker and White (2003),

the students increased their technology attitudes (p < .01), technology self-efficacy (p < .05),

science attitudes (p < .05), and science self-efficacy (p < .05).

When searching for significant changes between traditional and GIS-based mapping,

while holding the instructor constant, the only significant difference appeared for instructor l's

students on the science self-efficacy factor. As students entered the study, there was no

significant difference in self-efficacy between the traditional and GIS mapping groups. On the

contrary, as students exited the study, a significant difference favoring the GIS-supported

project-based learning was detected (p = .01). These findings appear different than previously

reported findings for total sample, mapping treatment, or instructor effects likely due to

relatively small subgroup sizes (Baker & White, 2003). Male students significantly increased

8

their attitudes toward technology (p < .001), science self-efficacy (p = .01), science attitudes (p <

.01), and technology self-efficacy (p = .01). On the contrary, female attitudes and self-efficacy

did not significantly increase as a result of instruction provided. It has been suggested that

female attitudes toward science are extremely difficult to change, even while achievement gains

are documented (Baker & White, 2003). Students with identified special needs showed

significant improvements in attitudes toward science (p < .05) and self-efficacy in science (p

.05). Sufficient data disallowed further analysis of subgroups within this population (Baker &

White, 2003). Students who have more positive self-efficacy beliefs are more likely to work

harder, persevere, and ultimately achieve at higher levels (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002).

According to Brush and Saye (2000), it is important for students to be able to work in

teams to identify a problem and be provided with the resources to help solve that problem in

order to increase the class dynamics and enhance academic success. Offering children many

choices to experience what is to be learned also allows them opportunities to develop constructs

of knowledge to continue the learning process (Catapano, 2005). It is for this reason we will

look into case studies dealing with cooperative learning groups and its tie in with project-based

learning. Tan, Sharan, and Lee (2007) used cooperative learning groups to study the effects of

project-based activities on student success. The main goal of Tan et al. (2007) was to determine

whether the use of group investigation, such as project work, would result in higher levels of

academic achievement and have more positive effect on the success of lower achieving students

than higher achieving students, as compared with the traditional whole-class method of

instruction. The study consisted of seven, eighth-grade (ages 13-14) geography classes in two

schools. The schools were comparable in terms of each having a high-achieving and a low-

achieving groups of students within the school. All the secondary students were placed in either

9

the high-achieving or low-achieving group on the basis of an examination at the end of sixth

grade. The participants included 241 students who were taught in either the traditional whole-

class method (n = 103) or the group investigation method (n = 138). Students in all seven classes

studied two curricular units on environmental issues in geography over 6 weeks (Tan et al.,

2007).

At the start of the research, experimental classes were constructed where the teachers

implemented group investigation; each pupil was a member of a four-to-five person group. The

students composed the groups according to interests and friendships. The control classes studied

the same subject matter as the experimental classes, but in a traditional whole-class instructional

setting. The teachers taught by using the whole-class method, which was the regular

presentation-recitation approach in which all students received similar information and study

tasks. The teachers taught the two units with the available textbook and workbook. The main

interaction in the control classes was mainly teacher talk, and occasionally, communication

between the teacher and students. Classroom observations confirmed that the implementation

was carried out according to plan (Tan et al., 2007). There were no significant main effects for

method or achievement level for any of the groups or for the total intrinsic motivation score.

There were no significant differences in intrinsic motivation scores between students in the two

instructional methods and two achievement levels. The high-achieving students in the

experimental group experienced an increase in the criteria score, whereas their peers in the

control group recorded a decline. The opposite occurred for the low-achieving group: students in

the experimental group registered a decline in the criteria score, whereas the score for the control

group increased (Tan et al., 2007). The scores in the group investigation classes rose

significantly for the high achieving students, whereas the scores in the traditional classes

10

declined only slightly. Consequently, group investigation helped high-achieving students make

more independent judgments of their success or failure over the course of this experiment,

whereas students' feeling about their ability to make such judgments declined over time in the

traditional classes (Tan et al., 2007). Within the study, a comparison of the means was done with

an ANCOVA (analysis of covariance) and it showed a significant main effect for achievement

level in which the high-achieving groups scored significantly higher than did the low-achieving

groups. The high-achieving students in the experimental group experienced an increase in the

criteria score, whereas their peers in the control group recorded a decline. The reverse occurred

for the low-achieving group: students in the experimental group registered a decline in the

criteria score, whereas the score for the control group increased. Consequently, group

investigation helped high-achieving students make more independent judgments of their success

or failure over the course of this experiment, whereas students' feelings about their ability to

make such judgments declined over time in the traditional classes (Tan et al., 2007).

The researchers also investigated the students' perceptions concerning the positive effects

of group project activities on their academic achievement and learning. High-achieving students

(11.2%) and low-achieving students (10.9%) stated that the group investigation method enabled

them to learn better and to learn new things. Students seemed to learn more when they found

their own information. The students reported that group investigation helped them to increase

their understanding and to expand their knowledge (Tan et al., 2007). Both groups of students

indicated that group investigation promoted better social relationships and friendships. They

wrote that they learned more about cooperation and the strength of teamwork (Tan et al., 2007).

Tan et al. (2007) concluded in their plans for future research that teachers should examine the

impact exerted on students by group investigation through projects and other methods of

11

cooperative learning and should consider the method of instruction as part of a planned

educational change.

In another study, Boaler (1998) conducted a longitudinal study of mathematics

instruction in two secondary schools. The 3-year study consisted of closely-matched control

populations and included pretest and posttest measures. The two schools were chosen for their

differences with respect to traditional versus project-based methods of teaching. One of the

schools (the control group referred to here as traditional) was characterized as incorporating a

more teacher-directed, educational format for instruction. Mathematics was taught using whole-

class instruction, textbooks, tracking, and the frequent tests. At the second school (the

experimental group referred to here as project-based), students worked on open-ended projects

and in diverse groups. Teachers taught using a variety of methods with little use of textbooks or

tests, and allowed students to work on their own and implement a great deal of choice in doing

their mathematics lessons. The use of open-ended projects and problems was maintained in the

project-based school until January of the third year of the study (Boaler, 1998). The study was

conducted by following a group of students from each school (300 students in all) for 3 years as

they moved from Year 9 (age 13) to Year 11 (age 16). The researcher observed approximately

90 one-hour lessons in each school, and she interviewed students in the second and third year of

the study, administered questionnaires to all students in each year of the study, and interviewed

teachers at the beginning and the end of the research period (Boaler, 1998).

Students in the two schools were considered to be similar in background and skill. At the

beginning of the research period, both groups of students had experienced the same approaches

to mathematics instruction in previous years, and they showed similar mathematics achievement

performance on a variety of tests. Results from a national, standardized test of mathematics

12

proficiency administered at the beginning of the first year of the study exposed no considerable

differences between the scores of students enrolled in the traditional school and those of students

enrolled in the project-based school (Boaler, 1998). Results from mathematical assessments

administered in each of the 3 years during the study favored the students at the project-based

school. The students at the project-based school performed as well as or better than students at

the traditional school on items that required rote knowledge of mathematical concepts. Also,

three times as many students at the project-based school as those in the traditional school

attained the highest possible grade on the national examination. Significantly more students at

the project-based school passed the national examination administered in Year 3 of the study

than traditional school students (Boaler, 1998). Based on other results, the findings showed that

the students at the project-based school outperformed students at the traditional school on the

conceptual questions, as well as on a number of applied problems. Not only were students at the

traditional school unable to use their knowledge to solve problems, but according to the

researcher, the students taught with a more traditional prescribed, educational model developed

an inert knowledge that they claimed was of no use to them in the real world (Boaler, 1998). In

contrast the students taught with a more project-based model developed more flexible and useful

forms of knowledge and were able to use this knowledge in a range of settings.

Wilhelm and Confrey (2005) conducted a project-based study intended to address the

misconceptions of the students and give students the freedom to choose a question to study

concerning the relationship between sound waves and trigonometry. The study was

implemented with 9 students within an industrial electronics course of an inner-city, low-

performing high school. The goal was to have the students gain concrete understanding and

relate that knowledge to their math classes. Pre-and post-waves and trigonometry tests were

13

administered to all 9 students in the industrial electronics class. A comparison of the results of

the waves pre-and posttests showed a significant improvement for the class. Using the t test for

paired data at the alpha = .05 level, they found a significant difference in the means, t(8) = -

2.763, p = 0.0246. Similarly, they observed a significant difference in the means when

examining the percent correct on trigonometry pre-and posttests, t(8) -3.482, p = 0.0083. A

notable phenomenon that emerged during this study was that students, who had a driving

research focus, thought about and connected their group project work with benchmark activities,

which led to conceptual understanding (Wilhelm & Confrey, 2005).

In a study described by Krebs (2003), the researchers investigated the students' learning

in a standard-based curriculum setting. The purpose of the study was to look at the students'

abilities to generalize from different patterns of data. Ten middle-school participants were

randomly chosen to participate in the study. There were five pairings of students, and low-

achieving students whose work would be less informative were omitted. Four project

performance tasks (Borders, Cutting, Dominoes, and Toothpicks) were administered, and each

was developed and revised to include a range of mathematical content and context. The tasks

were similar in that they all asked students to study with some regularity, make predictions for

future values, and then generalize what they discovered (Krebs, 2003).

In the Borders and Toothpicks problems, students explored two different patterns: one

linear and one quadratic. Students investigated one exponential pattern in Cutting and one

quadratic pattern in Dominoes. The resulting 29 patterns were the basis for the study (Krebs,

2003). All student pairs engaged in some strategies to explore the problem situation, and all

made progress on each task. In 24 of the 29 cases, students wrote correct symbolic

generalizations. The major finding claims that middle-to high-achieving students who

14

participated in the study demonstrated achievement in five strands of mathematical proficiency

of algebra (Krebs, 2003).

Song and Grabowski (2006) conducted a study to examine the effects project-based

learning activities on intrinsic motivation and problem-solving skills by (a) Type of goal-oriented

context and (b) Peer groups composed according to self-efficacy level. It was expected that

students working in a learning-oriented context group would be more intrinsically motivated and

more effective problem solvers than the students in the other types of groups (Song &

Grabowski, 2006). The participants included 90 students (47 boys and 43 girls) at sixth-grade

level. The participating classes were mostly ethnically homogeneous, with students across all

classes classified European American (96%) and African American (4%). The results of the

self-efficacy pretest showed that no significant difference was found between participating

classes (Song & Grabowski, 2006). Two weeks before the experiment, the self-efficacy text was

administered in the target classroom. Students from the high-efficacy and the low-efficacy

groups were randomly drawn and assigned to either a heterogeneous or a homogeneous peer

group. Given that each classroom had 23-25 students, each class contained 11 or 12 peer groups

(Song & Grabowski, 2006). The study was administered in three separate 45-minute sessions.

Students completed the ill-structured problem-solving tutorial and then wrote an individual

problem-solving report on blank paper. The students then completed survey questionnaires that

measured the perceived goal atmosphere of their peer group environment, goal orientation, and

intrinsic motivation (Song & Grabowski, 2006). Students who participated in the learning

oriented context were predicted to have significantly higher intrinsic motivation scores than the

students who participated in the performance-oriented context. The analysis of variance

(ANOVA) results showed the students in the learning-oriented context had significantly higher

15

intrinsic motivation scores (M = 3.39, SD = .69) than the students in the performance oriented

context (M = 3.16, SD .66).

Pedersen and Williams (2004) conducted a study to examine the effect of student-

centered learning environment on motivation and learning. Students in three seventh-grade

science classes in a mid-size southwestern city participated in the study. Classes were randomly

assigned to one of the treatment conditions. Students in these classes were members of the target

audience for whom the software package used in this study was designed. The participants in the

study used Alien Rescue, a computer-based science learning program for middle school students.

The program was used for fifteen 50-minute periods for 3 weeks. The program presented

students with a complex problem to solve and provides access to all the informational resources

students need as well as a number of tools they can use to develop a solution to this problem.

Students were placed in the role of scientists aboard a space station who were tasked with finding

new homes on worlds in our solar system for each of six extraterrestrial species aboard a

spaceship in orbit around Earth (Pedersen & Williams 2004). Among the resources available

within Alien Rescue are three that are of importance to this study. The first is the notebook,

which allows students to flexibly create sections to organize their notes. The second resource is

a simulation in which students can design probes to send to other worlds in our solar system to

gather data that they are missing about those worlds. Designing probes requires students to deal

with a number of constraints, such as choosing the correct instrument to gather the desired data

and selecting the appropriate type of probe based on which instruments are used. Finally, Alien

Rescue provided a recommendation from where students record their solutions (Pedersen &

Williams, 2004). A within subjects repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance

(MANOVA) was conducted with the five subscales of the Scale of Intrinsic versus Extrinsic

16

Orientation in the classroom as dependent variables. Analysis of the subscales shows a

significant difference in the curiosity and mastery subscales, with students showing greater

intrinsic motivation in the regular science classes than in programs like Alien Rescue (Pedersen

& Williams 2004). The data from both the Scale of Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Orientation in the

classroom and the interviews conducted with students were analyzed, and student responses on

the scale were analyzed using a MANOVA of post treatment scores on five subscales as

dependent variables and assessment method as the between subjects factor. The results were not

statistically different, suggesting that the assessment methods did not impact student motivation

differentially (Pedersen & Williams, 2004). The opportunity for active learning in both the

project and the regular science classes positively impacted students' attitudes toward learning.

Almost all the students said that they enjoyed the project class and thought this was a better way

to learn science than simply reading a textbook. However, several students pointed out that in

their regular science class they engaged in many hands-on activities, and in a few cases, students

argued that they preferred their regular science class to project class (Pedersen & Williams,

2004).

Hooft (2005) conducted a study to examine the effect of project-based learning on

student perceptions toward science learning pertaining to three factors, which were described as

disciplined inquiry, construction of meaning, and application beyond the classroom. Subjects

included seventh-grade science students (N= 99 out of a total of 132) in one middle school in

Northeast Ohio during the 2001-2002 school year. There were 56 (56.6%) males and 43 (43.4%)

females, primarily Caucasian, spread across five class periods (Hooft, 2005). During the 2001-

2002 school year, students in seventh-grade science investigated alternative energy at two

different times. During the fall semester, students spent about 3 weeks learning about solar

17

energy and other alternative energy sources through fairly traditional whole-group instruction

and individual research. The whole-group instruction consisted of lecture and discussion using a

variety of sources that were displayed by way of the presentation system, including notes, charts

and diagrams, data from the solar arrays, images, and video. The lecture was used to transfer

basic knowledge about alternative energy sources, and the discussion was used to address issues

related to the different energy sources including cost, negative effects, and feasibility of large

scale implementation. Students also wrote individual research papers on a particular source and

used their textbooks, other print resources, the Internet, and experts as resources. Student project

products ranged from solar cars to solar windmills.

Students demonstrated these projects to their peers, explaining what they had created and

how it worked. Each student took on the role of scientist, environmentalist, economist, or

consumer within his or her group. Groups constructed arguments to convince a group of visiting

fifth graders that their form of alternative energy was the best one (construction of knowledge

and application beyond the classroom). The total length of the spring unit was about 2 weeks

(Hooft, 2005). Results indicated a positive effect in the areas of disciplined inquiry and

construction of knowledge. Students were asked about communicating with others when

working on life science problems, as opposed to solar energy problems, and they indicated that

they tend to work more with others to find a solution when working on solar energy problems.

Students worked in groups during both units and had the opportunity to talk to experts. In

addition, students wrote research papers to go along with their solar powered devices, including a

description of how they built their devices and the process they went through to get them to work

(Hooft, 2005). The results from this study indicated that the curriculum and technology

associated with the project had a positive effect on student perceptions related to science

18

learning. This was especially the case when students were given the opportunity to utilize higher

level skills commonly associated with complex intellectual tasks and learner-centered

approaches to learning science. According to the survey data, the first unit appeared to have a

larger effect on student perceptions than the second one, which could possibly be explained by

the fact that the first unit required more disciplined inquiry, hands-on work, and construction and

application of knowledge (Hooft, 2005).

In conclusion, Brown (2003) suggested that since there are so many learning styles and

abilities in a class, teachers must provide activities that vary widely regarding the skills needed to

be successful. Also, by providing students with opportunities for active involvement, their

abilities to retain very important information are enhanced (Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002).

According to Chen and McGrath (2004), project-based learning offers positive results in

increased involvement, determination, and motivation. It also enables the students to see

themselves as learners while helping others in their class with their skills and abilities. Project-

based learning also foster collaboration among students, which promotes a sense of

responsibility to others that motivates all learners to persist and perform up to their potential

(Pedersen & Williams, 2004).

Students' experiences in classrooms are critical to their attitudes, behaviors, and

achievement (Schweinle, Meyer, & Turner, 2006). As students transition through education,

they need to learn how to take greater personal control of their learning, which increases their

chances of being successful (Dembo & Sell, 2004). Project-based learning offers various ways

to address the needs of the students, which will motivate them to take control of their own

learning and lead them to become more confident of their decisions (Lin & Hsiao, 2002).

19

References

Ahern, T. C., & El-Hindi, A. E. (2000). Improving the instructional congruency of a computer-

mediated small-group discussion: A case study in design and delivery. Journal of

Research on Computing in Education, 32(3), 385-400.

Baker, T., & White, S. (2003). The effects of G.I.S. on students' attitudes, self-efficacy, and

achievement in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Geography, 102(6), 243-

254.

Blumenfeld, P. C., Fishman, B. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2000). Creating usable

innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up technology-embedded project-based science

in urban schools. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149-164.

Boaler, J. (1998). Open and closed mathematics: Student experiences and understandings.

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(1), 41-62.

Brown, D. M. (2003). Learner-centered conditions that ensure students' success in learning.

Education, 124(1), 99-106.

Brush, T., & Saye, J. (2000). Implementation and evaluation of a student-centered learning unit:

A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 79-100.

Catapano, S. (2005). Teacher professional development through children's project work. Early

Childhood Education Journal, 32(4), 261-267.

Chen, C., & McGrath, D. (2004). Visualize, visualize, visualize: Designing projects for higher-

order thinking. Learning and Leading with Technology, 32(4), 54-57.

Cheng, R., Lam, S., & Chan, 1. (2008). When high achievers and low achievers work in the same

group: The roles of group heterogeneity and processes in project-based learning. British

Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(1), 205-221.

20

Chin, C., & Chia, L. (2004). Implementing project work in biology through problem based

learning. Journal of Biological Education, 38(2), 69-75.

Dembo, M. H., & Sell, H. P. (2004). Students' resistance to change in learning strategies courses.

Journal of Development Education, 27(3), 2-11.

Freeman, K., Alston, S., & Winborne, D. (2008). Do learning communities enhance the quality

of students' learning and motivation in STEM? Journal of Negro Education, 77(3), 227-

240.

Grant, M. M., & Branch, R. M. (2005). Project-based learning in a middle-school: Tracing

abilities through the artifacts of learning. Journal of Research on Technology in

Education, 38(1), 65-98.

Gultekin, M. (2005). The effect of project based learning on learning outcomes in the 5th grade

Social Studies course in primary education. Educational Sciences Theory & Practice,

5(2), 548-556.

Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational

Psychology Review, 6(3), 235-266.

Hooft, M. (2005). The effect of the "Ohio Schools Going Solar" project on student perceptions of

the quality of learning in middle school science. Journal of Technology in Education,

37(3), 221-243.

Howard, J. (2002). Technology-enhanced project-based learning in teacher education:

Addressing the goals of transfer. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(3),

343-364.

Kaufman, Robinson, E., Bellah, K., Akers, C., Haase-Wittler, P., & Martindale, L. (2008).

Engaging students with brain-based learning. Techniques, 83(6), 50-55.

21

Krebs, A. S. (2003). Middle grades students' algebraic understanding in a reform curriculum.

School Science and Mathematics, 103(5), 233-245.

Lin, M., & Hsiao, Y. (2002). Middle school students as multimedia designers: A project based

learning approach. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(4), 311330.

Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success.

School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313-327.

Miller, S. D., & Atkinson, T. S. (2001). Cognitive and motivational effects of seeking

academic assistance. Journal of Educational Research, 94(6), 323-334.

Nye, B., Hedges, L. v., & Konstantopoulos, S. (2001). Are effects of small classes cumulative?

Evidence from a Tennessee experiment. Journal of Educational Research, 94(6), 336-

345.

Mueller, A., & Fleming, T. (2001). Cooperative learning: Listening to how children work at

school. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(5), 259-266.

Patrick, H., Ryan, A., & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents' perceptions of the classroom

social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 99(1), 83-98.

Pedersen, S., & Williams, D. (2004). A comparison of assessment practices and their effects on

learning and motivation in a student-centered learning environment. Journal of

Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(3), 283-306.

Schweinle, A., Meyer, K. M., & Turner, 1. C. (2006). Striking the right balance: Students'

motivation and affect in elementary mathematics. The Journal of Educational Research,

99(5), 271-293.

22

Song, H., & Grabowski, B. L. (2006). Stimulating intrinsic motivation for problem solving using

goal-oriented contexts and peer group .composition. Educational Technology Research

and Development, 54(5), 445-466.

Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Effects of problem-based learning and traditional instruction

on self-regulated learning. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(5), 307-317.

Sungur, S., Tekkaya, C., & Geban, O. (2006). Improving achievement through problem based

learning. Journal of Biological Education, 40(4), 155-160.

Tan, I. G., Sharan, S., & Lee, C. K. (2007). Group investigation effects on achievement,

motivation, and perceptions of students in Singapore. The Journal of Educational

Research, 100(3), 142-154.

Tournaki, N. (2003). Effect of student characteristics on teachers' predictions of student success.

Journal of Educational Research, 96(5), 310-319.

Wilhelm, J., & Confrey, J. (2005). Designing project-enhanced environments: Students

investigate waves and sound. The Science Teacher, 72(9), 42-45.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into

Practice, 41(2), 64-70.