Project-Based Learning

Project-based learning (PBL) provides opportunities for in-depth content mastery and improved student engagement. At profiled districts, teachers design PBL units or courses around standards that relate to a real-life issue, organization, medium, or activity (i.e., an authentic audience) to assess students and measure content mastery.

In our research, profiled districts implement one of three different models of project-based learning (PBL): blended PBL teaching methods, PBL courses, or PBL tracks. They implemented PBL to provide students with an opportunity to conduct in-depth exploration of course topics through applied learning. Administrators at profiled districts encourage teachers to explore the connection between academic standards and the application of those standards to design projects that assess students’ content mastery in an applied setting. Teachers’ PBL skills can be developed through initial professional development sessions and subsequent, wraparound supports.

This research considers instructional practices, project-based learning implementation, community outreach, and outcomes related to PBL. The research also explores how some profiled high schools use project based learning as an alternative form of assessment.

Implementation and stakeholder engagement

Contacts at all profiled districts report that PBL courses provide students with an opportunity to apply their learning in an authentic setting, which deepens their understanding of the course content. At School E, contacts report that applied learning through projects cannot cover as many standards as traditional coursework. For this reason, some teachers at District B and District C express concern that the PBL model will not sufficiently prepare students for standardized tests. However, contacts describe numerous benefits from applied learning. For example, contacts at District B and District D attribute increased student engagement to PBL course participation.

Optimizing instruction

Administrators at all profiled districts worked with consultants or other external experts to deliver initial professional development sessions to teachers when the district implemented PBL initiatives. Administrators at School A highlight the importance of providing sufficient PBL-specific professional development before teachers implement PBL in their classrooms to facilitate PBL success. For example, at School E, teachers planning to lead a PBL course in the coming school year attend a week-long professional development course provided by Savi Ed Labs.

At School E, one full-time administrator oversees PBL and senior capstone projects. This administrator provides instructional and project design support upon teachers’ request. In addition, this administrator manages the logistics of all community partnerships that teachers build to enhance PBL.

All other profiled districts also offer ongoing PBL support to teachers throughout the year. For example, at District C, administrators include a PBL-focused session at district-wide professional development days, which occur three times throughout the year. Administrators required teachers to attend this session in the first year of PBL implementation, and now offer this as an optional session. Further, District B offers holistic supports for teachers using PBL.

Assessment

Administrators at profiled districts evaluate PBL initiatives in two broad categories: student engagement and student achievement—using quantitative metrics for achievement and qualitative metrics for engagement. Contacts report that administrators expect PBL initiatives to improve student engagement and student achievement due to the pedagogical value of applied, student-centered learning.

Metrics profiled districts use to evaluate PBL