Is Project-Based Learning Overrated?

Project-based learning grew out of the architectural and engineering education movement that began in Italy during the late 16th century (Knoll, 1997). However, in America, William Heard Kilpatrick is credited with pioneering project-based learning. A protégé of educational theorist John Dewey and a leader in the progressive education movement, he is also credited with popularizing Dewey’s theory.

However, Kilpatrick is best known for popularizing “The Project Method” in a 1918 essay.

Dewey’s theory of experience was the springboard for the theory of “The Project Method”. In “The Project Method”, Kilpatrick explained that the interest of children should be at the center of the project approach. This interest serves as the “unit of study.” By utilizing topics of interest, learning becomes more relevant and meaningful. Solving problems within a meaningful social context is how knowledge is best constructed. “Purposeful” learning, therefore, becomes the motivational factor for children to engage in the project. According to Kilpatrick, there are four phases to a project: “purposing, planning, executing and judging. The student ideally, should initiate all phases, not the teacher (Provenzo).

Knoll (1997) notes that Kilpatrick was actually more influenced by Edward L. Thorndike’s psychology of learning than Dewey’s theory of experience.

According to Thorndike's "laws of learning," an action for which there existed an "inclination" procured "satisfaction" and was more likely to be repeated than an action that "annoyed" and took place under "compulsion." From this, Kilpatrick concluded that the "psychology of the child" was the crucial element in the learning process. Children had to be able to decide freely what they wanted to do; the belief was that their motivation and learning success would increase to the extent to which they pursued their own "purposes" (Knoll, 1997).

Would Kilpatrick be pleased with how project-based learning (PBL) has evolved? He probably would be delighted to see the popularity of PBL. Today PBL is ubiquitous. It is a model for classroom activity that emphasizes student-based education, longer thematic units, interdisciplinary instruction, collaboration, feedback, and is “integrated with real world issues and practices” (San Mateo County Office of Education, 1997). Students are also more engaged and focused when engaged in PBL, because they are provided more choice over what topics to pursue and how to find answers to problems. Since students are allowed to choose their topics, they become more motivated to work hard and strive for the highest quality (Wolk, 1994). PBL users typically use technology to communicate with professionals and experts outside of school and use multimedia for presentations, which, in itself, is an attraction for students. Instead of pouring knowledge into the student, teachers of PBL act as coach, facilitator and co-learner, a collaborator (San Mateo County Office of Education). PBL promotes many types of collaboration.

PBL accommodates and promotes collaboration among students, between students and teacher, and ideally between students and other community members as well. This component is intended to give students opportunities to learn collaborative skills, such as group decision-making, relying on the work of peers, integrating peer and mentor feedback, providing thoughtful feedback to peers, and working with others as student researchers (ibid.).

PBL may connect to real world issues through topics that “are relevant to students’ lives or communities” (ibid.) or connected to actual professions. Other researchers (Ayas and Zeniuk, 2001) propose PBL to enable long-term reasoning, knowledge creation, and sharing beyond the individual. So how might an instructor use PBL?

Basic level projects include a social studies project focusing on a particular state; a science project involving building a bird feeder; and a language arts project in which students interview senior citizens to write a biography. Intermediate level projects are a health/language arts project regarding human anatomy; a science project in which teams design an irrigation device; and a visual/language arts project in which students create a field guide for manufactured objects (Berman, 1997).

A video of young students exploring the world of insects is an example of PBL. After choosing their insect and researching its characteristics, students interacted with professional researchers using an electron microscope. Students showed high interest and worked hard on the project. The amount and level of learning appeared to be high. PBL has been used successfully in many different settings. Outside the mainstream classroom, an instructor can use PBL with adult English language learners of varying levels of English proficiency (Moss and Van Duzer, 1998).

However, not all researchers believe that PBL should be used in education. Many experts criticize PBL and Kilpatrick’s methods and practices. Most notably, E. D. Hirsch in The Schools We Need and Why We Don’t Have Them is highly critical of the progressive approach and Kilpatrick in particular (Provenzo). Hirsch’s criticism of Kilpatrick and his methods can be summarized in the following statements:

There is no substitute for the acquisition of commonly held knowledge, skills, and dispositions. "Natural" child-centered methodologies are patently false and harmful…. Educationally progressive methods actually create, not solve learning problems. Educationally conservative methods offer the best means and widest opportunities for learning for all children and research from fields other than education proves it” (Saxe, 1997).

PBL is a time consuming method of teaching and an inefficient method for teaching large amounts of knowledge in a short time. Simply reading text or listening to lecture is a more efficient use of scarce class time, and that is why teachers still assign so much reading and give lectures. Secondly, if PBL and other progressive methods worked as well as their proponents claimed, the educated of 150 years ago would compare unfavorably with today’s children. The opposite is true. The American high school entrance exams of 1850 would stump a college freshman today. Have PBL and other progressive methods been responsible for this change? The controversy over the efficacy of PBL is far from over.

References

Ayas, K. and Zeniuk, N. (2001). Project-based Learning: Building Communities of Reflective Practitioners. Management Learning, 32 n1, 61-76.

Berman, S. (1997). Project Learning for the Multiple Intelligences Classroom. K-College, SkyLight Training and Publishing, Inc., Arlington Heights, IL.

Knoll, M. (1997). The project method: Its vocational education origin and international development. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 34(3), 59-80.

Moss, D. and Van Duzer, C. (1998).Project-Based Learning for Adult English Language Learners. ERIC Digests (073).

Provenzo, Jr., E. F., Contemporary Educational Thought. Retrieved October 12, 2002 from http://www.education.miami.edu/ep/html/william_heard_kilpatrick.html.

San Mateo County Office of Education, 1997-2001, Why do project-based learning. Retrieved October 11, 2002 from http:pblmm.k12.ca.us/PBLGuide/WhyPBL.html.

Saxe, D W. (1996). The Books We Need. Network News & Views, Retrieved October 13, 2002 from http://www.edexcellence.net/library/saxe.html.

Wolk, Steven (1994). Project-Based Learning; Pursuits with a Purpose. Educational Leadership, v52 n3, 42-445.