PROJECT BASED LEARNING 1

The Effect of Implementing Project Based Learning Tasks on the Academic Performance of

Seventh Grade Mathematics Students

Meredith Mitchell

George Mason University

EDRS 810, Spring 2014

Dr. Sheri Berkeley

PROJECT BASED LEARNING 2

Abstract

Standardized testing has become increasingly important in the world of education and impacts

instruction in the classroom. Students today need a variety of skillsets in order to be successful

in todays global economy, and it is arguable that standardized testing does not always encourage

or reflect these skills, but rather focuses solely on students understanding of content knowledge.

Project based learning is an instructional method that has the potential to encourage the

development of many skills, while still promoting understanding of content knowledge. An

experimental design in a 7th grade mathematics setting will set out to explore the effects of

employing project based learning tasks during students remediation block. The study will

measure the effects of the intervention on academic performance on a standardized, statewide

test.
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 3

The Effect of Implementing Project Based Learning Tasks on the Academic Performance

of Seventh Grade Mathematics Students

As educators, what is our goal for our students? This question can be answered in a lot of

ways and in todays culture of high stakes testing, the answer might often involve a discussion of

student achievement or performance. However, educators do not enter the field for the purposes

of achieving high pass rates on standardized tests; educators enter the field because they want to

make a difference. Teachers are facilitators in preparing students with the knowledge and skills

they need to be independent, successful, contributing members of society. Teachers equip

students with the tools they need to reach their personal goals. Tomorrows doctors, lawyers,

poets, and artists are born in todays classrooms and it is this product, not testing data, that

educators are generating. This product, however, is not easily quantified or measured. How then

do we drive educational reform to ensure we are developing young people the best we can?

The Emphasis of Standardized Assessment

With the passing of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) during

the Johnson administration, educational testing came into the limelight as a means by which

educational reform could be guided (Resnick, 1980). In the time since the ESEAs passage, the

reliance of educational policymakers on educational testing and the stakes associated therein

have risen tremendously (Thomas & Brady, 2005). Specifically, in 1988, academic testing

assumed an even greater role as ESEA was amended that Title 1 funds would now be allocated

based on standardized test scores (Thomas & Brady, 2005). Over the next decade, President

George H. W. Bush and his successor, President Bill Clinton, continued to build on a paradigm of

educational reform based in standards based achievement testing (Thomas & Brady, 2005).

Their respective programs, America 2000 and Goals 2000: Educate America Act, perpetuated a
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 4

need for and reliance on standardized testing data for content area knowledge (Thomas & Brady,

2005). Through this historical lens, the trend is abundantly clear: standardized educational

testing has been assuming an increasingly important role throughout our history in an effort to

motivate increased student success and enforce higher amounts of accountability. Furthermore,

there is no evidence that high stakes testing will be going away anytime soon.

As such, many educational decisions are being taken out of the hands of educators and

put in the hands of national and state policy makers (Hursh, 2007). This external influence is

changing to some extent what and how students are being assessed as well as what and how

teachers are teaching (Au, 2007). Teachers are often finding that their individual evaluations are

now tied to their students performances and as a result, are adapting their planning, instruction,

and assessment practices to meet these demands (Au, 2007). Au used a metasynthesis of 49

studies to explore the effects of high stakes testing and the results indicate that in most cases,

high stakes testing can be attributed as the reason behind the narrowing of curricular material, the

disintegration of knowledge, and an increase in teacher centric instruction (2007). When the

system in place does not promote best educational practices, what security do we have that we

are actually preparing students to be successful when they enter the global economy? We

emphasize a form of standardized testing that is predominately used to measure a students

understanding of content knowledge, but have neglected to measure or address other skills

students will need in their futures.

21st Century Skills

Kay and Greenhill compiled research from the Partnership for 21st Century Skills to

explain the identified skills needed for people preparing for the workforce in todays competitive

job market and also explain how and why these skills can be integrated and fostered in the
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 5

classroom (2011). These skills include: thinking critically, solving complex problems, thinking

creatively, communicating and collaborating in teams, using knowledge innovatively, as well as

being responsible (Kay et al., 2011). The researchers also make a call for educators and

education reformers to reflect these skills more greatly in content standards (Kay et al., 2011).

When thinking about these skillsets needed to achieve in the modern world, understanding

content knowledge is just one item on a lengthy list of skills that benefit working people in the

21st century (Kay et al., 2011). However, most of these 21st century skills do not lend themselves

to being as easily assessed in our current assessment paradigm as compared to less subjective

content knowledge (Kay & Greenhill, 2011). If our objective is to prepare students with these

skills in order to shape our world and future, why dont our assessments reflect these

instructional aims? Our current view of educational assessment is limited and arguably not

reflective of whether or not a student has the tools that are necessary to be successful adults.

However, without standardized assessment, what accountability do teachers have for teaching

content knowledge and adhering to any set curriculum?

Finding the Balance: Using PBL to Promote Holistic Achievement

Project Based Learning (PBL) is a method of instruction and assessment designed to be

flexible enough to incorporate practice of a variety of skills and also encapsulate multiple

measures of student achievement (Gijbels, Dochy, Van den Bossche, & Segers, 2005). Decades

ago, John Dewey wrote of this active, constructivist approach to learning when he wrote, they

give the pupils something to do, not something to learn; and the doing is of such a nature as to

demand thinking, or the intentional noting of connections; learning naturally results (1916, p.

181). In its most basic form, project based learning requires students to solve problems and

generate a product in an instructional context that is interdisciplinary, collaborative, student

PROJECT BASED LEARNING 6

directed, reflective, and based in real world situations (Savery, 2006). Project based learning is

very closely related to multiple other instructional methods, including problem based learning,

inquiry based learning, and case based learning; so much so that these terms are often used

interchangeably (Savery, 2006). While all of these methods employ the use of higher level

thinking and necessarily require more active student involvement, project based learning tends to

lend itself to slightly more objective measurement as the finished product, the project of PBL,

is scaffolded by a specified set of procedures more so than the other, more open ended

instructional methods (Savery, 2006). Despite their subtle differences, these methods universally

fit the aforementioned criteria and necessarily require students to employ a variety of different

valuable skillsets (Savery, 2006).

Even in its earliest conceptions, the merits of project based learning were espoused by

Roark (1925):

It develops initiative and foresight; it promotes efficiency and makes for serious

sustained thinking; it leads to self-direction, self-reliance and control; it imposes

responsibility, and thus tends to sober and to steady wavering dispositions; it may create

new and desirable attitudes and call forth better responses; it breaks the monotony of

routine of the classroom and serves as recreation, and thus economizes energy; it creates

habits of inquiry and research and develops and perfects skills (p. 201).

While the foundation for project based learning was laid in the early 20th century, despite

its promising advantages, the method did not take off as a monumental reform for how teaching

and learning occurred in the classroom in the decades following its conception (Barron et al.,

1998) It is commonly accepted that the difficulties in training, implementing, and reformatting

school structures that project based learning required were reasons why it did not flourish
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 7

pervasively, coupled with the idea that such progressive movements were also misaligned with

college admission criteria (Barron et al., 1998). While project based learning did not redefine

public education as a whole, it has continued to shape instruction through the modern era and has

proven to be easily adaptable to incorporating multiple skills, such as those relating to

technology, that are relevant today (Kay & Greenhill, 2011).

Evidence of the instructional utility of project based learning is supported by a myriad of

research studies (Gijbels, Dochy, Van den Bossche and Segers, 2005; Petrosino, 2004; Barron et

al., 1998). In their research, Gijbels, Dochy, Van den Bossche and Segers employed a meta-

analysis of the performance of students along three different constructs measured through a

problem based learning assessment (2005). The three constructs included knowledge of

concepts, understanding of principles that link concepts and the application of such concepts and

principles (Gijbels et al., 2005). It was found that PBL can be a highly effective platform, or just

as effective as other learning methods, for promoting achievement in all three constructs (Gijbels

et al., 2005). This supports the idea that project based learning allows for students to learn

content knowledge while practicing life skills and that educators can use PBL to develop a more

holistic understanding of students learning (Gijbels et al., 2005).

PBL could also be employed as a method to counteract a common criticism that

standardized testing results in teaching to the test (Au, 2007). In a case study conducted by

Petrosino, a project based astronomy unit was implemented in a classroom with the intention of

addressing and assessing the practical issues that occur when teachers utilize project based

learning (2004). The study identified the impact on curriculum, instruction and assessment as

well as identified the positive outcomes from the project based unit: independent student-driven

work, a sense of purpose in undertaking a project, teamwork through a community of workers, a

PROJECT BASED LEARNING 8

balance of conceptual and procedural understanding, as well as creating an environment where

all students can meaningfully contribute (Petrosino, 2004). Research such as Petrosinos begs

the question of what would happen to the quality of classroom instruction if standardized testing

shifted to an assessment based in PBL? With more project based learning necessarily happening

in the classroom, it would be interesting to see what gains would occur not only in terms of

student achievement, but overall teacher and school effectiveness.

In 1990, the California State Department of Education motioned for such a shift and

boldly purported that, An assessment system which measures student achievement on

performance-based measures is essential for driving the needed reform toward a thinking

curriculum in which students are actively engaged and successful in achieving goals in and

beyond high school (Linn, 1993, p. 8). However, Robert Linn criticizes this reform approach in

his research that shows how performance based assessment provides limited information from

smaller numbers of tasks which causes assessment results that are not generalizable (1993). He

concludes that a large number of tasks would need to be completed that would require more time,

greater cost, and attention to quality control (Linn, 1993). These are, admittedly, obstacles to the

success of such a reform and consistent with obstacles that have been historically documented as

to why project based learning did not spread on a broad scale in the 20th century. However, even

though there are obstacles, it does not mean that this instructional and assessment method is not

worth exploring. Again, it would not be easy, but if PBL supported our purposes as educators to

develop and prepare successful adults, isnt it worth undertaking?

Exploring the Effects of PBL

While there is extensive research to support the effectiveness and utility of project based

learning, it is realistic to consider that large scale educational reforms will not happen overnight;
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 9

we still must ultimately operate within a system that emphasizes student performance on

standardized assessments. It is worth exploring, however, whether or not instructional practices

based in PBL can also be used to ultimately help educators reach those ends. Can shifting the

focus from normal instructive and assessment practices to those based in PBL yield the

standardized test performances we are looking for? The proposed investigation will set out to

determine whether or not implementing appropriately aligned project based learning tasks into a

seventh grade math curricular program will affect the standardized test performance of these

students on the Virginia Mathematics Standards of Learning (SOL).

Method

The researchers will use an experimental group research design for the purposes of

studying the effects of implementing PBL tasks on math performance. The study will take place

in one accredited middle school in the state of Virginia that participates in standardized,

statewide testing. The middle schools master schedule currently is built to include a remediation

block, which is a class period designed for delivering interventions to students who are working

towards mastery of content standards. This study will explore how using project based learning

tasks during this remedial time might impact the performances of students on their end of year

math SOL as compared to their performance on a beginning of the year mathematics pretest.

Design

Students who are taking the Mathematics 7 course at the middle school will be randomly

assigned to a remediation block for the entirety of the school year. This remediation block

occurs twice a week for 45 minutes and normally includes a heterogeneous group of students that

meet with their assigned math instructor. For the purposes of this study, students will be
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 10

randomly assigned a number and also randomly assigned a remediation block math instructor.

Half of the teachers will utilize the remediation block to review math quizzes and tests with

students during the first 15 minutes of class, and then will provide additional practice items of

the most frequently missed questions to students. The other half of the teachers will review math

quizzes and tests with students for the first 15 minutes of the remediation block, then will utilize

the remainder of the block to introduce the project based learning tasks and allow for student

work time for the tasks.

Participants

Students. Three hundred thirty student participants at a middle school in a large county in

the state of Virginia will be randomly assigned to either the control treatment or the PBL task

treatment. The students range in age from 12-14 years old and come from diverse backgrounds:

46% of students identify as White, 22% identify as Asian American, 22% identify as Hispanic,

8% identify as African American, and 2% identify as Multiracial or Other. The student

population contains 21% English Language Learners (ELL) and 17% receive Special Education

services.

Teachers. A total of 16 teachers will be assigned a group of students to work with during

the schools remediation block. The teachers have taught for a range of 3 -12 years and all are

certified in the state of Virginia in Middle School Mathematics. Three of these teachers currently

hold Special Education certifications and two teachers hold certifications in ELL instruction.

Measures

All 7th grade mathematics students will take a released version of the previous years math SOL

during the first week of the school year, which will serve as a pretest in the research design.

Additionally, all students will participate in testing during the SOL testing window in late May
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 11

which will provide the post test data. A standardized score, on a scale of 100-600 will be

calculated, using cut score information released by the Virginia Department of Education, at the

conclusion of each test. Students who achieve a score of 400 or more will have passed the

assessment; scores of 500 or more qualify as Pass Advanced.

Procedures

A unique random number, from 1-330, will be assigned to all students using a random number

generator. Each of the 16 teachers will also be assigned a number, from 1-16, using the random

number generator. Students numbers will be ordered numerically and then each student will be

assigned to a teacher, in order and beginning with the teacher also assigned as 1. The 17th student

will be assigned to teacher number one, and remaining students will continue to be assigned to

teachers sequentially until the last assignment is made. Once all students are randomly assigned

to a teacher, teachers will be randomly assigned either a 1 or 2 using a random number generator

to indicate whether or not they will participate as either (1) the control group or (2) the PBL

treatment group. Each group will meet separately in two different locations as Collaborative

Learning Teams (CLT) in order to discuss and plan for their remediation block. Before the

beginning of the school year, both the control and PBL groups will meet with their respective

CLT. The control group teachers will receive training from the researcher on using formative

assessment data to guide remediation, but the PBL treatment group will receive training on PBL

and map out a project for the quarter that requires students to demonstrate knowledge of the

essential mathematics standards that they plan to teach and assess in that quarter (Appendix I).

The teachers will devise a comprehensive unit plan, including an assessment rubric, for the PBL

task. Prior to each quarters project implementation, the unit plan will be reviewed and discussed

with the researcher to ensure compliance with the criteria of a PBL task and alignment with the
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 12

curriculum. The researcher will work with the treatment CLT to model project introductions and

establish timelines for teacher directions, student work time, and share strategies for scaffolding

and providing support. Throughout the school year, both groups of teachers will meet weekly in

their CLTs to discuss student learning as measured by common formative assessments and PBL

scoring rubrics. Teachers in the PBL group will score each students quarterly projects on the

assessment rubric as a committee, under the advisement of the researcher. Both the control

group and PBL group will make data driven decisions about practice items or PBL tasks to

incorporate into subsequent quarters remediation blocks.

Results

Seventh grade math students will be assessed at the beginning of the school year, in early

September, and again in late May on the 7th grade math SOL and the researcher will analyze

students academic growth between the two testing periods. A t-test of the difference scores

between the pre and post tests will be used to determine if there was a statistical difference in the

SOL score growth of the control and PBL treatment groups.

PROJECT BASED LEARNING 13

References

Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis.

Educational Researcher, 36, 258-267. doi: 10.3102/0013189X07306523

Barron, B., Schwartz, D., Vye, N., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., Bransford, J., and The

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1998). Doing with understanding:

Lessons from research on problem- and project-based learning. The Journal of the

Learning Sciences, 7, 271-311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0703&4_2

Dewey, J. (1902). The school as social center. The Elementary School Teacher, 3(2), 73-86.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/453152

Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based

learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational

Research, 75, 27-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543075001027

Kay, K. & Greenhill, V. (2011). Twenty-first century students need 21st century skills. In G. Wan

& D. Gut (Eds.), Bringing schools into the 21st century (pp. 41-65). Netherlands:

Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0268-4_3

Linn, R.L. (1993). Educational assessment: Expanded expectations and challenges. Educational

Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1164248

Petrosino, A. (2004). Integrating curriculum, instruction, and assessment in project-based

instruction: a case study of an experienced teacher. Journal of Science Education and

Technology, 13, 447-460. doi: 1059-0145/04/1200-0447/0

Resnick, D. (1980). Minimum competency testing historically considered. Review of Research

in Education, 8, 3-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1167122

Roark, M. L. (1925). Is the project method a contribution? Peabody Journal of Education, 2(4),
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 14

197-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01619562509534660

Savery, J. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions.

Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1(1).

http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1002

Thomas, J. & Brady, K. (2005). The Elementary Education Act at 40: Equity, accountability, and

the evolving federal role in public education. Review of Research in Education, 29, 51-

67. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0091732X029001051

Virginia Department of Education (2012). Standards of learning (SOL) & testing:

Mathematics. Retrieved from

http://www.doe.virginia.gov/testing/sol/standards_docs/mathematics/index.shtml#sol_doc

s
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 15

Appendix I

Grade Seven
The seventh-grade standards continue to emphasize the foundations of algebra. Students who
successfully complete the seventh-grade standards should be prepared to study Algebra I in grade
eight. Topics in grade seven include proportional reasoning, integer computation, solving two-
step linear equations, and recognizing different representations for relationships. Students will
apply the properties of real numbers in solving equations, solve inequalities, and use data
analysis techniques to make inferences, conjectures, and predictions.
While learning mathematics, students will be actively engaged, using concrete materials and
appropriate technology such as calculators, computers, and spreadsheets. However, facility in the
use of technology shall not be regarded as a substitute for a students understanding of
quantitative concepts and relationships or for proficiency in basic computations. Students will
also identify real-life applications of the mathematical principles they are learning and apply
these to science and other disciplines they are studying.
Mathematics has its own language, and the acquisition of specialized vocabulary and language
patterns is crucial to a students understanding and appreciation of the subject. Students should
be encouraged to use correctly the concepts, skills, symbols, and vocabulary identified in the
following set of standards.
Problem solving has been integrated throughout the six content strands. The development of
problem-solving skills should be a major goal of the mathematics program at every grade level.
Instruction in the process of problem solving will need to be integrated early and continuously
into each students mathematics education. Students must be helped to develop a wide range of
skills and strategies for solving a variety of problem types.
Number and Number Sense

Focus: Proportional Reasoning

7.1 The student will
a) investigate and describe the concept of negative exponents for powers of ten;
b) determine scientific notation for numbers greater than zero;
c) compare and order fractions, decimals, percents, and numbers written in scientific
notation;
d) determine square roots; and
e) identify and describe absolute value for rational numbers.
7.2 The student will describe and represent arithmetic and geometric sequences, using
variable expressions.
Computation and Estimation

Focus: Integer Operations and Proportional Reasoning

7.3 The student will
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 16

a) model addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of integers; and

b) add, subtract, multiply, and divide integers.
7.4 The student will solve single-step and multistep practical problems, using proportional
reasoning.
Measurement

Focus: Proportional Reasoning

7.5 The student will
a) describe volume and surface area of cylinders;
b) solve practical problems involving the volume and surface area of rectangular
prisms and cylinders; and
c) describe how changing one measured attribute of a rectangular prism affects its
volume and surface area.
7.6 The student will determine whether plane figuresquadrilaterals and trianglesare
similar and write proportions to express the relationships between corresponding sides
of similar figures.
Geometry

Focus: Relationships between Figures

7.7 The student will compare and contrast the following quadrilaterals based on properties:
parallelogram, rectangle, square, rhombus, and trapezoid.
7.8 The student, given a polygon in the coordinate plane, will represent transformations
(reflections, dilations, rotations, and translations) by graphing in the coordinate plane.
Probability and Statistics

Focus: Applications of Statistics and Probability

7.9 The student will investigate and describe the difference between the experimental
probability and theoretical probability of an event.
7.10 The student will determine the probability of compound events, using the Fundamental
(Basic) Counting Principle.
7.11 The student, given data for a practical situation, will
a) construct and analyze histograms; and
b) compare and contrast histograms with other types of graphs presenting information
from the same data set.
Patterns, Functions, and Algebra

Focus: Linear Equations

7.12 The student will represent relationships with tables, graphs, rules, and words.
PROJECT BASED LEARNING 17

7.13 The student will

a) write verbal expressions as algebraic expressions and sentences as equations and
vice versa; and
b) evaluate algebraic expressions for given replacement values of the variables.
7.14 The student will
a) solve one- and two-step linear equations in one variable; and
b) solve practical problems requiring the solution of one- and two-step linear
equations.
7.15 The student will
a) solve one-step inequalities in one variable; and
b) graph solutions to inequalities on the number line.
7.16 The student will apply the following properties of operations with real numbers:
a) the commutative and associative properties for addition and multiplication;
b) the distributive property;
c) the additive and multiplicative identity properties;
d) the additive and multiplicative inverse properties; and
e) the multiplicative property of zero.