論  文 Paper

Learning Outcomes of Global Project-Based Learning:

Insights From Teaching Assistants
　Nuttakarn KITPO ※1　　Suphanut KONGWAT ※1　　Takara HIRABAYASHI ※1
Worawat LAWANONT ※2　　Hiroshi HASEGAWA ※1
Masahiro INOUE ※1　　Anak KHANTACHAWANA ※3

　Global Project-Based Learning（gPBL）, hosted by Shibaura Institute of Technology, Japan, is an

opportunity for students to work within a global environment. The members consisting of professors,
staff, and teaching assis-tants（TAs）cooperate throughout this program. As key components of
the program, TAs are responsible for preparing and supporting every activity of gPBL. This paper
describes gPBL’s history, activities, and learning outcomes from the TAs’ perspectives. gPBL
activities play an important role in boosting the participants’ learning and advancing the TAs’ skills
from preparation to delivery and support of each activity. This research was conducted using the
post-gPBL outcome assessment and questionnaire. The questionnaire was applied to assess the
participants’ perspectives. The results of the learning outcomes and the questionnaire responses
showed that the participants managed to improve their learning skills. Notably, they managed to
advance their skills in working in multicultural and interdisciplinary teams and build international
friendship networks through the accomplishment of the provided group activities.
　Keywords： Engineering Education, Global, Project-Based Learning（PBL） , Learning Outcome,
Learning Process

1.Introduction the international and interdisciplinary team.

　Global Project-Based Learning（gPBL）is an educa-
tional program in the College of Systems Engineering
and Science for multicultural and multidisciplinary
engineering students. This program is the result of a
collaboration between Shibaura Institute of Technol-
ogy（SIT） , Japan, and King Mongkut’s University of
Technology Thonburi, Thailand, in 2012 in Bangkok,
Thailand1）. Global Industry-Academia Collaborating
Project-Based Learning with local communities and
industries was combined and implemented for 9 days,
with 68 participants from eight countries in 2015 2）. The
focus of this program is to enable the students to ac-
quire problem solving skills with international perspec-
tives and appeal. Moreover, it is expected that through
this program, the students can obtain relevant concepts
and technologies based on systems thinking, engineer-
ing method, and project management. The students are
expected to acquire these skills to work as a member of
Received May 27, 2020
※1Graduate School of Engineering and Science,
Shibaura Institute of Technology, Saitama, Japan
※2Institute of Engineering, Suranaree University of
Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
※3Department of Mechanical Engineering, King
Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi,
Bangkok, Thailand
　In gPBL, the participants are supported by profes-
sors, staff, and teaching assistants（TAs）throughout
the program. TAs play a leading role in gPBL and are
responsible for several important tasks. TAs are se-
lected from among the students who have experience of
past gPBL and have enrolled in systems engineering or
project management conducted at SIT. These experi-
ences allow TAs to form the supportive core of gPBL,
who can lead the program by planning, communicating,
and conducting several activities locally and globally.
English language proficiency is also required to solve
problems in every working stage of gPBL. These ca-
pabilities enable the students who work as TAs in the
gPBL program to develop themselves as future compe-
tent engineers.
　SIT has implemented gPBL in various departments
both in Japan and in collaboration with partner univer-
sities to foster students’ knowledge and skills3）. One
study reviewed the key factors used to assess both
personal and technical skills for developing competent
graduates4）. Several recent researches on gPBL and
multicultural education have assessed their learning
outcomes and competencies from students’ perspec-
tives2）,5）, whereas others have examined them from
teachers’ perspectives6）. However, very few studies
have reported on TAs’ perspectives and learning out-

工学教育（J.of JSEE）, 68–5（2020） 39

comes. Hence, it is necessary to discuss TAs’ learning
outcomes in collaboration with a global team.
　This paper draws on TAs’ perspectives, experiences,
comments, and recommendations on the presentation
of their activities and learning outcomes. This study
focuses on the results of the gPBL outcome assessment
and individual survey conducted in the fourth gPBL
program held at Omiya Campus of SIT, Japan, in De-
cember 2018.
was used to share images, videos, and comments on
social media from the SNS Competition Mission activity
during the field trip in the Nasu Town, Tochigi Pre-
fecture. Additionally, the participants were required to
engage in a brainstorming activity based on assigned
tourism spots and create an“empathy map”used to
support their 1-min video making endeavor of Nasu’s

2.gPBL Activities
　The TAs comprised four Japanese and two interna-
tional students who worked with their professors and
other staff to achieve the latest gPBL goals. The TAs’
roles involved preparing and supporting all activities to
obtain new experiences. The extent to which each ac-
tivity has helped in improving and realizing the partici-
pants’ skills was considered during the preparation and （a） （b）
designation of the activities. Experiences of past gPBL
programs were also used to enhance the activities.
　For example, the ice breaking activity contained
enjoyable games that encouraged the participants to
make new international friends. Moreover, the sub-ac-
tivities involved a field trip aimed at promoting tourism
in local Japanese towns through the participants’ real
experiences. From the previous gPBL, the participants （c） （d）
visited the research field for the first time to make Figure 1　Examples of the gPBL activities:（a）ice breaking,
a public relations video for a local town. In the latest （b）designing a review presentation,（c）Nasu’s
gPBL program, the social networking service（SNS） empathy map, and（d）Nasu’s field trip.

Table 1　List of Activities

Activity title
1 Ice breaking
Group activities
2 W
（Themes/requirements/goals）
First design review（DR）presen-
3 P
tation
4 Nikko Toshogu Shrine Mission
5 Group cultural show
Nasu Field Research and“Oh My
6 S
God”experience
7 Nasu empathy map
8 Nasu video presentation
9 Factory tour
10 Prototype video presentation
Group activities
11
（research/survey/production）
12 Final DR presentation
Type Purpose
To become familiar with the global environment, make new international friends, and
L
communicate in English（Figure 1a）
To share ideas about social issues and requirements and develop creative themes and
goals
To develop problem solving skills, creativity, and systematic thinking for selected
project themes（Figure 1b）
To develop teamwork, communication, and presentation skills
L To experience Japanese culture with team members
To be able to lead the team, share ideas, communicate within the team, and enjoy the
L
show
To experience Nasu Town and Japanese cultures and communicate with local Japanese
staff
To understand the statuses of inbound and outbound tourism and promote tourism in
Nasu via social media（Figure 1c）
To be able to draw on real observations in Nasu Town to create feasible plans, content,
S
and conclusion for the Nasu video（Figure 1d）
To be able to propose attractive and creative ideas to suggest travel itineraries and
S
promote and improve tourism in Nasu
To be able to communicate with local staff and learn and understand local organization
S
（Sakura Environmental Center, Saitama）
To be able to interpret ideas and use system design, thinking, and method in their
W and P
project（e.g., the business model）to solve social issues
To be able to draw on feedback from their professors and organizations to improve
W
their works and seek more effective solutions
To devise attractive, innovative, and useful solutions
P To be able to deliver presentations through written DRs and mock demonstrations
To understand and respond to comments and suggestions from pro-fessors and staff

40 工学教育（J.of JSEE）, 68–5（2020）

sights（Figure 1） . Over 9 days, particularly three days and two nights of
　The list of activities conducted during the gPBL pro- fieldwork at Nasu Town, the participants learned these
gram is shown in Table 1. Each item explains the activ- activities to attain the required five personal and six
ity type and purpose, as well as what the participants team outcomes, as shown in Table 2 and Table 3.
were expected to learn from it. The type of activity de- 　The findings from the participants’ evaluation of the
noted by“L”appreciates cultural differences and pro- outcome assessments in Figure 2（a）−2（c） show that
motes international corporation,“W”stands for group the participants managed to improve themselves in all
work,“P”refers to presentations, and“S”signifies a personal learning areas, especially working in multicul-
surprise experience or the“Oh My God”experience. tural and interdisciplinary teams with the largest dif-
ference between the pre- and post-gPBL periods. This
means that the participants managed to improve their
Table 2　Personal Learning Outcomes Assessment communication and teamwork skills while learning the
Learning Outcome Competency
S, W, and P activities, such as group activities and DR
Communicate and teamwork presentations, whereby they were expected to share
Work in a multicultural,
1
interdisciplinary team
in multi-culture and interdisci- ideas, solve problems, and experiment to meet their
plinary team
Design system, service and
2 Engineering design process which satisfy needs
and constrains Table 3　Team Learning Outcomes Assessment
1. Understand engineering Learning Outcome Description
System thinking; solve process and apply it to solve
Propose creative systems and ser-
interdisciplinary problems interdisciplinary problem 1 Creativity
3 vices
by understanding the engi- 2. Recognize and analyze prob-
neering process lem, and design and evaluate Propose useful systems and ser-
2 Usefulness
solution vices
Engineering methodology; Obtain results with a higher de-
Understand engineering meth- 3 Completion gree of completion through analy-
apply engineering method-
4 odologies and apply them to sis, planning, and evaluation
ologies to solve interdisci-
model, and determine system Technically, socially, and economi-
plinary problems 4 Feasibility
Can find out about a situation cally feasible
and can exert the leadership 5 Achievement Achieve the set goals
5 Leadership
in quick response to the status Written and Oral Pre- Produce written and oral presenta-
6
of group sentation tions

40 Inadequate Marginal
40 Inadequate Marginal
Fair Good
35 Fair Good
Excellent 35
Excellent
30
30
Number of participants

25
Number of participants

25
20 20
15 15
10 10

5 5

0 0
Work in multi- Engineering System Thinking Engineering Leadership Work in multi- Engineering System Thinking Engineering Leadership
culture and Design Methodology culture and Design Methodology
interdisciplinary interdisciplinary
team team

(a）Pre-gPBL personal outcomes (b）Post-gPBL personal outcomes

5.0 70
4.5 Inadequate Mrginal Fair Good Excellent
Pre-gPBL 60
4.0 Post-gPBL
Number of participants

3.5 50
3.0
Average score

40
2.5
2.0 30
1.5
20
1.0
0.5 10
0.0
Work in multi- Engineering Design System Thinking Engineering Leadership 0
culture and Methodology Creatibity Usefulness Completion Feasibility Achievement Written and
interdisciplinary Oral
team Presentation

(c）Comparison of pre-and post-gPBL (d）Post-gPBL team outcomes

Figure 2　Participants’ personal and team outcomes

工学教育（J.of JSEE）, 68–5（2020） 41

team’s goals. From the first day through to the last day,
the participants tried their best to improve on their
English communication to understand each other well
and better enjoy teamwork. These activities helped the
participants gain international experience and gradu-
ally feel more comfortable in international settings7）.
Moreover, they improved their problem solving skills
through activities such as DR presentations and demo
video presentations. These activities were important
milestones that the participants used to report their
progress and revise their projects based on feedback
from their peers and professors. These suggestions
helped encourage the participants to develop a broad
vision of problem solving, as well as engineering design,
system thinking, and engineering methodology.
　Apart from personal learning, the participants also
demonstrated good and excellent performances in their
team learning goals, as shown in Figure 2（d）. These
results indicate the participants’ strengths in teamwork
through their final DR presentations, where each team
was allowed to display their achievements over 9 days.
３.TAs＇ Learning
　The gPBL activities and the participants’ learning
outcome results reflect the TAs’ learning of the activi-
ties that they planned, prepared, and supported. The
results are satisfactory, showing that the participants
managed to improve their learning and gain new ex-
periences, such as working and communicating in mul-
ticultural teams, solving social issues, acting as a team
leader, and exploring Japan. The activities over the
9 days also had an impact on enhancing participants’
learning. Besides the learning outcome results, we also
surveyed the participants：（1） “What did you learn
from gPBL?”and（2） “Please provide your comments
and suggestions.”We analyzed the responses using
the KH Coder8）. We used the analysis results to gain
insights into the participants’ opinions about gPBL. The
top three words repeated in the questionnaire were
“friend,” “skill,”and“experience,”respectively. Sample
answers were as follows:“I also met lots of new friends
from many countries,”“Made new friends,”“Com-
munication skills,”“Teamwork skills,” “English skills,”
“New global experience,” “Good experience,”and“Got
more problem solving experience.”Figure 3 displays
the word co-occurrence network, which comprises a
graph of word in-teractions representing the co-occur-
rence of words in sentences. It suggests that the par-
ticipants managed to learn and experience real problem
solving skills and teamwork environments, have the
opportunity to work in multicultural teams, improve
their English proficiency, and build their international
friendship networks.
　Working as TAs, we had several chances to learn

meet enjoy
lot

fun
country
Make

improve develop Communication

time
innovative
global multi-culture
communication 01 04
gain
02 05
multi-culture understanding 03 06
work
ability new
solve thing
lack
english 2
people
aware
problem
4
different
better
learn real vision
corporate connection
gPBL group networking perspective 6

international solution experience

life
expand world
member student Chance
8
memory
Engineering
team
Engineering method
Challenge chinese
work

program discuss food

business good

foreigner
project Knowledge

Figure 3　Participants’ responses in the co-occurrence network of words

42 工学教育（J.of JSEE）, 68–5（2020）

from every step of the working process of gPBL, in-
cluding the planning and preparation of activities be-
fore gPBL, supporting and observing the participants’
development during gPBL, and the evaluation process
after gPBL. We paid attention to the details of each
activity and worked closely with the participants. Thus,
（a） （b）
（2）project discussion and management challenge,（3）
（5）teamwork and team spirit,（6）improvement in
we learned many things through these multicultural
working experiences（see TAs’ roles in Figure 4） . Simi-
lar to the participants, the TAs were also engaged in
teamwork within a multicultural and interdisciplinary
environment, with the exception that the TAs’ roles
were different, which resulted in different learning ex-
periences. For example, the participants solved social
issues on the basis of their project theme, whereas the
TAs solved problems emerging during their work pro-
cess, such as during activity preparation and schedule
planning, group management, and timekeeping during
gPBL. The keywords we learned throughout gPBL
were similar to those of the participants, which can be
grouped into six major terms as shown in Figure 3, to
which two learning targets can be added： （1）ability
to work and understand multicultural environments,
problem solving experience,（4）international network,
communication,（7）leadership, and（8）presentation
and public speaking skills. These eight learning points
will be discussed in Table 4.

（c） （d） 4.Conclusions

Figure 4　Examples of TAs’ roles in gPBL：（a） preparation 　We discussed the participants’ learning outcomes
for gPBL, （b） opening ceremony, （c） group through the TAs’ points of view, on the basis of the
discussion, and （d） TAs meeting activities conducted during gPBL 2018. Different types

Table 4　TAs’ Eight Learning Areas

Keywords
Ability to understand and
1 work in multicultural envi-
ronments
Project discussion and man-
2 from the 9 day program. We learned a lot from the time management of the“Oh My God”mission
agement challenges
3 Problem solving experience
As TAs, we had the chance to closely interact with many participants, so people began to recognize us
International network
4 easily, helping us to make new friends at the same time. Moreover, we managed to build great friend-
（friendship and connection）
ships and expand our network with SIT professors and staff.
5 Teamwork and team spirit
Improvement of communi-
6
cation
7 Leadership
Presentation and public
8
speaking skills
Learning outcomes
We enjoyed working with other TAs in a multicultural team. We were motivated to improve our Eng-
lish through communication with each other and with our international peers. In every stage of the
work, we cooperated a lot and respected each other’s different ideas and perspectives. Hence, we took
advantage of those opportunities to make our work easier and understand different working styles.
The project involving TAs is all about activity preparation and support. We learned how to plan the
schedule and accurately match the activities to the specified time frames to be able to benefit the most
because TAs were expected to arrange many activities within a time limit. So, managing the time for
every activity was a huge challenge.
TAs managed to analyze urgent problems and quickly respond to them during gPBL（e.g., problems
related to time management and activity arrangement）. First, the weather forecast predicted rain for
the campus tour day, so TAs prepared other activities for all the participants. But the forecast was not
accurate, and there was no rain, forcing the TAs to reschedule.
We discussed and planned our ideas and problems openly in every step of the work process to produce
good outcomes together and create joy in teamwork. We also shared our feelings and feedback. Given
our long period of cooperation from preparation to the end of gPBL, we adjusted our working style and
motivated each other to achieve success in every activity of the program.
We encouraged everyone to use English in gPBL. We wrote emails and prepared documents in English,
which helped us develop our writing and reading skills. Moreover, we managed to improve our English
speaking through communication with professors, staff, and participants. Sometimes our English was
not comprehensible enough, so we relied on non-verbal gestures in our communication.
Given our leading role in many activities, we developed our abilities to become global leaders. We took
on responsibility in several roles, such as managing groups of people, guiding them through the activi-
ties, and supporting and encouraging teamwork among the TAs and participants.
We learned to improve our confidence and overcome the fear of speaking in front of many people; we
also motivated each other. Every TA had the chance to become the activity leader responsible for an
ongoing activity, such as being the master of ceremony in the ice breaking activity and the cultural
show in Nasu.

工学教育（J.of JSEE）, 68–5（2020） 43

of activity helped the participants develop their learn-
ing, especially in areas such as working in multicultural
and interdisciplinary teams, as well as problem solving
skills. Through the insights of the TAs, who worked
closely with and supported the participants throughout
the program, we can discern the participants’ develop-
ment and efforts to achieve their team goals, create an
enjoyable teamwork environment, and improve their
English communication. The learning outcomes and
the survey responses concerning the latest gPBL il-
lustrate the participants’ diverse learning perspectives,
especially in building international friendships. We will
use this information to improve the activities of future
gPBL programs to broaden the scope of participants’
learning and skill acquisition.
References
1） M. Inoue, H. Hasegawa, K. Mano, Y. Furukawa, A.
K. Yamazaki, and A. Khantachawana：Develop-
ment of an Engineering Education Program for
Innovation in Global Environment, The World
Engineering Conference and Convention（WECC） ,
2015
2） S. Oda, H. Hasegawa, A. K. Yamazaki, M. Inoue, Y.
Furukawa, K. Mano：Program Design on Global
Project Based Learning for Multicultural and Mul-
tidisciplinary Engineering Students in Collabora-
tion with Local Communities, Proceedings of the
10th SEATUC Symposium, 2016
3） Y. Koike, H. Yokoi, S. Kanoh, R. Silapunt, K. Jiraser-
eeamorn, A. Yaicharoen, R. Semba, K. Takeda, Y.
Uehara, and M. Tokumura：PBL between KMUTT
and SIT in both Thailand and Japan in cooperation
with GTI consortium, Proceedings of 2018 JSEE
Annual Conference, 2018
4） A. B. Masek, S. Yamin：Problem Based Learning :
A review of the monitoring and assessment model,
International Conference on Engineering Educa-
tion, pp.171−175, 2010
5） S. Oda, M. Inoue, A. K. Yamazaki：Assessment of
Global Competency for Engineering Students in a
Multicultural and Multidisciplinary Project Based
Learning Course, 7th World Engineering Educa-
tion Forum（WEEF）,2017
6） F. Yilmaz：Multiculturalism and multicultural edu-
cation: A case study of teacher candidates’ percep-
tions, Cogent Education, 3（1）,1172394
7） S. Oda, A. K. Yamazaki, M. Inoue：A Comparative
Study on Perceptions of Cultural Diversity in En-
gineering Students, Proceedings of EDULEARN18
Conference, 2018
8） Higuchi, K.：KH Coder（Version. 3. Alpha17） . 2019,
Kyoto, Japan: Ritsumeikan University
44
Biography
Nuttakarn Kitpo
Nuttakarn Kitpo received the B.Eng degree from
King Mongkut’s University of Technology（KMUTT）
in 2017. She is currently a graduate student in the
Department of Systems Engineering and Science at
Shibaura Institute of Technology（SIT）,Japan.
Suphanut Kongwat
Suphanut Kongwat received B. Eng and M.Eng
in Mechanical Engineering from King Mongkut’s
University of Technology Thonburi （KMUTT） ,
Thailand in 2013 and 2016, respectively. He also
received M.S. in Systems Engineering and Science
from SIT in 2016.
Takara Hirabayashi
Takara Hirabayashi received B.Eng in Machinery and
Controls System from SIT in 2017. He is currently
a graduate student in the Department of Systems
Engineering and Science at Shibaura Institute of
Technology（SIT）,Japan.
Worawat Lawanont
Worawat Lawanont received the B.Sc. and M.S.
degrees in information technology and computer
science, respectively, from King Mongkut's University
of Technology Thonburi, Thailand, and another
M.S. degree in system engineering and PhD in
Functional Control Systems from Shibaura Institute of
Technology（SIT）.
Hiroshi Hasegawa
Hiroshi Hasegawa received his B.Eng and M.Eng from
Shibaura Institute of Technology（SIT）,Japan, in 1992
and 1994, respectively. He received his Dr.Eng. in
Mechanical Engineering from the Tokyo Institute of
Technology, Japan, in 1998. He is currently a professor
at SIT.
Masahiro Inoue
Masahiro Inoue received B.S. and M.S. degrees in Pure
and Applied Physics from Waseda University and
Ph.D. in Computer Science from Shizuoka University.
He was engaged in research and development at the
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation. Since 2005, he has
been a professor at Shibaura Institute of Technology.
Anak Khantachawana
Anak Khantachawana is an Assoc. Prof. of Mechanical
Engineering at King Mongkut’s University of
Technology Thonburi, Thailand, where he has been
since 2004. He received his Ph.D. in Materials Science
and Engineering from University of Tsukuba, Japan, in
2003.
工学教育（J.of JSEE）, 68–5（2020）