Assignment 6: Draft thesis proposal

Why English teachers should care about project-based learning:

integrating multiliteracies, assessment for learning and digital technologies.


There is impetus for pedagogical change in the English classroom. This impetus stems from our rapidly changing world as observed by Bull and Anstey (2010, p.6), ‘literacy teaching and learning should respond to the rapid changes in literacy arising from increasing globalization, technology and social diversity.’ This transforming social, cultural and technological landscape necessarily influences the responsibilities of the secondary English teacher in Australia and brings with it a set of new challenges. Three of these challenges are the purposeful integration of digital technologies into the classroom, the nature of assessment and the necessity to teach multiliteracies. It can be argued that these challenges may be successfully overcome by the reshaping of traditional teacher-centred pedagogy to a more student-centred and inquiry based pedagogy in the Australian secondary English classroom. In fact, this impetus towards pedagogical change is reflected in the federal government’s Digital Education Revolution (DER) and (surprisingly for some) the new Australian Curriculum: English.

Literature Review

Theoretical Framework

The researcher is a practicing educator and thus this study draws on broader learning theories of constructivism, engagement, assessment and literacy which are key drivers in education. Central to these perspectives are cooperative learning, activity theory, situated practice, structural alignment and formative assessment however this study will focus on project based-learning, digital technologies, multiliteracies and assessment for learning.

This cross-sectional study aims to provide a descriptive account of how technology usage, assessment for learning practices and the teaching of multiliteracies in the English classroom change when project-based pedagogies are used. This researcher posits that project based learning will provide teachers with the impetus and framework to successfully and purposefully integrate digital technologies, assessment for learning (feedback) and the explicit teaching of mutltiliteracties in the secondary English classroom.

Project-based learning is a pedagogy that engages students in relevant, real-world problems that require them to attain and strengthen skills essential for success in the 21st century – collaboration, communication, creativity, digital citizenship – as well as understanding positive ‘habits of mind’ (Costa, 2007). Founded in Constructivist theory, Project Based Learning “involves completing complex tasks that typically result in a realistic product, event or presentation to an audience” (Barron and Darling-Hammond, 2008, p. 2).   Research into project-based learning (PBL) “has found that students who engage in this approach benefit from gains in factual learning that are equivalent or superior to those of students who engage in traditional forms of instruction” (Barron and Darling-Hammond, 2008, p. 2).

Since the implementation of DER, English teachers have been faced with the challenge of when, how and why to introduce digital technologies into their lessons. Moreover the current NSW Stage 4/5 syllabus (2003, p. 4) and the Draft Australian Curriculum: English (2011, p. 11) both stipulate that teachers are required to help students to become productive, creative and confident users of technology. The types of digital technologies that are beginning to be seen in educational settings and that will be the focus of this study include a combination of fixed (televisions, IWBs, computer lab) and mobile technologies (ipads, ipods, mobile phones) as well as the software and web-based tools teachers and students access.    Digital technologies that teachers and students bring into the English classroom should be meaningfully integrated into learning activities. Ravitz (2010) conducted a study into the relationship between online technologies and the implementation of PBL in small schools across the United States and found that PBL “helps teachers integrate technology by providing reasons for its use” (p. 10) however there is a need for a greater understanding of the influence project based learning has on the use of technology in the classroom (Ravitz, 2010).

A second challenge faced by secondary English teachers in Australia is the nature of assessment. Often the primary assessment in English is summative despite evidence that formative or assessment for learning practices have ‘more impact on learning than any other general factor’ (Petty, 2006). The Rationale of the NSW English Stage 4/5 Syllabus (2003, p. 7) and Australian Curriculum: English (2011, p. 6) both advocate assessment for learning practices including peer and self-assessment.  In their seminal paper, Black and William (1998) conclude that the introduction of effective assessment for learning  “will require significant changes in classroom practice” (p. 141) because “instruction and formative assessment are indivisible” (p. 143). Importantly Black and William propose that “what is needed is a classroom culture of questioning and deep thinking, in which pupils learn from shared discussions with teachers and peers” (p. 146). These features are key elements of project-based pedagogies which have been shown to “have documented positive changes for teachers and students in motivation, attitude toward learning, and skills, including work habits, critical thinking skills and problem-solving” (Barron and Darling-Hammond, p. 4, 2008) Barron’s (1998) study of project and problem-based learning using a longitudinal case study of 5th graders found that, given timely feedback as part of their PBL experience, students took “advantage of the opportunity to revise” (p. 304). Moreover, Barron concluded that an “emphasis on formative assessment and revision” (p. 305) is central to PBL.

The final challenge facing English teachers today is the necessity to teach multiliteracies. The term multiliteracies was coined by the New London Group and is defined as ‘a new approach to literacy teaching … (that) … overcomes the limitations of traditional approaches by emphasizing how negotiating the multiple lingustic and cultural differences in our society is central to the pragmatics of the working, civic, and private lives of students” (New London Group, 1996, p. 1) A three-year ethnographic study by Ito et al (2008) describes how “new media allow for a degree of freedom and autonomy for youth that is less apparent in a classroom setting (p. 2)” and conclude that “the diversity in forms of literacy (accessed by young people) means it is problematic to develop a standardised set of benchmarks to measure” (p. 2) multiliteracies. Traditionally English in Australia has been viewed as a teacher-centred discipline with a heavy focus on linguistic literacy – reading and writing. However the introduction of multimodal and multimedia texts into the Australian Curriculum: English (2011, p. 1) reshapes our understanding of subject English. English teachers are now responsible for the teaching of multiliteracies, inviting another challenge for teachers because “literacy must address the impact of new communication technologies, and the texts delivered by them.” (Bull and Anstey, 2010, p. 6)

Meeting the demands of changing literacy needs, curriculum changes and the federal 1-1 initiative forces secondary English teachers in Australia to reconsider their pedagogy. Here, again, one alternative pedagogy that may provide teachers with a scaffold to integrate digital technologies and multiliteracies into the English classroom is project-based learning (PBL).  The researcher will adopt an interpretive approach in an attempt to address the gap in research into student-centred and inquiry based pedagogies in English classrooms in Australia, specifically project-based pedagogies and the changes made to assessment practices, digital technology usage and teaching of multiliteracies when these pedagogies are implemented.


Research Strategy

Research Questions

This study is designed to answer three questions:

  • What changes are made to digital technology usage when project-based pedagogies are introduced into the Australian secondary English classroom?
  • What changes are made to assessment practices when project-based pedagogies are introduced into the Australian secondary English classroom?
  • What changes are made to the teaching of multiliteracies when project-based pedagogies are introduced into the Australian secondary English classroom?


This researcher posits that project based learning will provide teachers with the impetus and framework to successfully and purposefully integrate digital technologies, assessment for learning (feedback) and the teaching of mutltiliteracties in the secondary English classroom.


This exploratory study will use a mixed method research strategy to address the research questions and provide a rich description of a specific pedagogy.  A survey of Australian secondary English teachers in the form of an online questionnaire will ask questions about their usage and implementation of technology in their classroom, how often – if at all – they include student-centred, project-based pedagogies in their classroom and what types of assessment are used. This survey will include both closed and open-ended questions. The population for the study will be secondary English teachers within New South Wales with a wide demographic including teachers from government, independent and Catholic schools – all members of the NSW English Teacher Association.

The study will include two class case studies drawn from two different teaching contexts (government, independent and Catholic schools and/or different SES) that are implementing project-based pedagogies in their classrooms. Drawn from these two classes will be two teacher case studies and eight student case studies.  See Figure 2 for factors that will be the focus of each case study.

Figure 1


The population for this study is teachers of secondary English in Australia. The sample of this population will be drawn using a mixed sampling method – purposive sampling and cluster sampling.

The survey sample will attempt to be representative of the population. This sample will be drawn using a probability sampling method – cluster sampling. The sample will be members of the NSW English Teachers Association. A random selection of the 2000 members will be emailed a link to the online questionnaire. It is not anticipated that all recipients will complete the questionnaire. The number of teachers in the survey will depend on the number of responses to the online questionnaire. Ideally N = 200 teachers.

The strength of the random sampling method for the survey is cost (Neuman, 2006) that it only selects members who are secondary English teachers. The weakness is that the population members are only from NSW – a small proportion of the total population – and do not represent the total population of secondary English teachers in Australia. These teachers are also all members of an association and this could result in cluster effects such as similar teaching approaches, access to similar resources and ideas about English teaching and possibly a greater willingness to use technology in the classroom than the average English teacher in Australia. This will impact the validity of the data and its representativeness. This survey aims to give the researcher a general picture of: teaching pedagogies, the use of digital technologies, assessment practices and the teaching of literacies in the Australian secondary English classroom.

The research sites will be two purposively selected Australian high schools, most likely public schools in the Sydney region. These will be drawn from the data collected from the survey of ETA members. The case study samples (two teachers and eight students from each class) will be drawn using a non-probability sampling method – purposive sampling.  This sampling method will allow for the selection “unique cases that are especially informative” (Neuman 2006, p. 222) based on the survey data. Participants for the teacher case studies will not be matched in regards to SES, gender or teaching experience as this study is descriptive and does not aim to be representative. Moreover it is anticipated that it will be difficult to identify many English teachers using project-based pedagogies, resulting in a small sample pool from which to select participants for the case study. The student case studies will be drawn from the participating classes using a random sampling method using a random number generator. Ideally student case studies will include a balance of male and female, SES and age however there will be range in attitudes towards English and achievement levels. For these embedded case studies N=10 (n1 = 2 n2 = 8) N= number of participants. In this study the participants will include two secondary English teachers and four students from each teacher’s class.

The strength of the purposive sampling is that it will ensure the participants are teachers and students who are actively using project-based pedagogies in the classroom. This will allow the researcher to observe and measure in what ways project-based pedagogies change the use of digital technologies, assessment practices and the teaching of literacies. The weakness of this approach is that it is not a representative sample of the population – Australian secondary English teachers. However these case studies do not aim to be representative of the entire population (Yin, 1989). The case studies aim to be a rich description of a particular pedagogy in practice and its impact on the use of digital technologies, assessment practices and the teaching of literacies.

The strength of the sampling method for this study derives from its use of a combination of random and purposive sampling methods.

Data Collection

This proposed mixed methodology study includes four data-collection methods. The quantitative survey will collect data from an online questionnaire. The qualitative embedded case studies will collect data from interviews, observation document content analysis. All of these data collection methods will allow for the operationalisation of the central concepts of the study. These concepts are outlined in the table Figure 2. This table also outlines the content of interviews, questionnaire, observation protocols and document analysis codes.

Concept Content of interview questions, questionnaire items, observations protocols and document analysis
change I would concentrate on if/how much time was spent in class and in planning targeting each concept below
digital technology use type of technology used, how often technology is used, duration if technology used, purpose of technology
assessment practices amount of feedback given during class, mode of feedback delivery, type of feedback given (verbal, whole class, individual student, physical – ticks on page, written comment, positive or negative feedback, quality of feedback), teacher and students’ discussion of feedback, types of assessment used in and out of class
teaching of multiliteracies types of texts incorporated into each lesson, explicit literacies taught, types of literacy practices used, lesson materials
pedagogies types of pedagogies used, most common pedagogy used, when specific pedagogies are used, attitudes towards student-centred pedagogies, frequence of student-centred pedagogy used, attitude towards PBL, knowledge of PBL

Figure 2

The researcher will be semi-participatory for the observations and interviews in regards to using question probes to develop questions and data based on participant answers. The researcher will be a non-participant in the questionnaire and content analysis.

An online questionnaire survey is planned for NSW English Teacher Association members. The data from this questionnaire will be stored in the online survey tool, most likely The quantitative data from this questionnaire will provide information on the usage of digital technologies in the Australian secondary English classroom, the pedagogies adopted when using technology, the types of assessment and feedback strategies used and what types of literacies are supported and explicitly taught in the secondary English classroom. This will allow for a picture of the population from which the case studies will be drawn and have the benefit of allowing allow for representativeness which will help argue for generalisability of results. Participants will be asked between 15 and 20 questions taking no more than 15 minutes to complete.

This structured data collection process will draw many of the questionnaire items from a survey created by Ravitz, Hixson, English and Mergendoller (2011) as well as older studies including the TALIS Teaching and Learning International Survey (2008). Items will be re-written based on relevance of items to project-based learning, assessment, literacies and digital technologies.  The survey will ask about the frequency of 5-8 practices specifically pertaining to teaching practices, assessment practices, the teaching of literacy and the use of technology using Lickart scale-style responses.

A qualitative approach to data collection will be taken for the embedded case studies.  A variety of data will be collected including interviews with teachers and students, observation of teachers and students in classroom, interviews with students, examination of a variety of educational documents and artifacts used by each teacher including programs, lesson plans, student work samples and teaching resources.

‘The interactions that make up interviews are dynamic, not static, forms of social interaction’ (Freebody, 2003, p. 137) and require attention to what is said, how it is said and why it is said. The role of the researcher is semi-participatory as the interviews will be semi-structured in nature.  Question probes will be used to develop questions and data based on participant answers.  This structure allows for the possibility that ‘the issues guiding the research in the first place need to be adapted … in light of the statements of interviewees. (Freebody, 2003, p. 133) Interviews with teachers will include 6-10 questions with probes and last one hour in length. Interviews with students will include 3-4 questions with probes and last up to 30 minutes in length. This data collection process is semi-structured as the questions and probes will be pre-written however the researched may alter questions and/or probes to gain further details or (re)focus participant more on ideas central to study. The data for the interviews will be recorded by audio recording device and transcribed so that they can later be analysed and illustrated quotations can be extracted for inclusion in the final research report. Interview questions will be drawn from those used by Grant (2009) and the ‘Inside the Classroom Teacher Interview Protocol’ (2000). Questions may also need to be re-written based on relevance of questions to project-based learning, assessment, literacies and digital technologies.

The role of the researcher in the observations is semi-participatory and will involve observing three 50 minutes lessons of each case study class. This observation will be of both teachers and students. The data collection process is structured and semi-structured as the researcher will use an observation schedule (structured) but allow for brief supporting field notes (semi-structured). Observation will focus on four things for the teacher: pedagogy, use of technology; use of feedback and range of literate practices used. For students observation will focus on: use of technology; reception/expectation of feedback and range of literate practices used.

The data for the observation will be recorded on the observation schedule (a collection of ticked boxes) as well as brief unstructured written observation notes. The observation protocol will be designed using items from pre-existing protocols including the ‘Classroom Observation Instrument’ created by the National Science Federation, Grant (2009) and ‘Inside the Classroom Observation and Analytic Protocol’ (Horizon Research inc, 2000).

Finally, data will be collected from document content analysis including a variety of educational documents and artifacts used by each teacher including programs, lesson plans, student work samples and teaching resources. This data collection is structured as the researcher will use specific coding dimensions. The content analysis data will be recorded using frequency and manifest coding. This coding would look for: types and amount of technology used or referred to in documents; teacher, peer or self-feedback in the form of ticks, crosses, stars, stickers, stamps and written commentst; types of literacies used or referred to in documents.

Ethical Issues

According to Drew, Hardman and Hosp (2008) ‘a basic ethical principal for qualitative researchers is this: Do not tamper with the natural setting under study’ (p. 70) because this type of research ‘involves data that are recorded in narrative descriptions, not numbers.’ (p. 70). Ethics within a school setting will require a consideration of consent, privacy and observation. This study anticipates that informed voluntary consent for observation will be sought from the teacher participants. Substitute consent for observation as well as informed voluntary consent will be required for student participants in the form of parental permission. Privacy issues will be minimal for all participants as the sensitivity of the information being shared is low and the setting – a classroom – is a shared public space. As a further means to protect students’ privacy, pseudonyms will be used for student participants.


Data analysis ‘allows the qualitative researcher to move from the description of an historical event or social setting to a more general interpretation’ (Neuman, 2003, p. 467). As outlined in the introduction to this proposal, the researcher is an educator who brings with her a theoretical sensitivity relating to constructivism, engagement, assessment, cooperative learning, and situated practice. This sensitivity will inform the analysis strategies employed. In an attempt to assure reliability, this study will involve an analysis of both numerical and non-numerical data.

Coding of data from questionnaire, interviews, observations and document content analysis will attempt to identify recurrent patterns. This will involve both open coding focusing on surface (manifest) and latent (semantic) codes and moving on to axial coding to “conceptualise and reduce the data” (Strauss, A & Corbin, J, 1988, p. 12) identify relationships between recurring themes. Similarly, descriptive statistics will be used for all data collected to determine apparent distinctions and similarities within the data. The appropriate inferential statistical analyses (T-tests) will aim to determine the statistical significance of these differences. Furthermore, correlation statistical analysis will be used for anticipated associations between items on the questionnaire.

Grounded theory and content analysis approaches to data analysis are the most appropriate for this study “because they are likely to offer insight, enhance understanding and provide a meaningful guide to action (Strauss, A & Corbin, J, 1988, p.  12). Both require constant comparative analysis of data. During the proposed case studies ‘data collection and analysis processes tend to be concurrent’ (Thorne, 2008) whereas analysis will come after data collection with the survey. The process of data analysis for both will include collection, entry, cleaning and analysis.

Methodological limitations

The strength of this study is the design of its research strategy involving both qualitative and quantitative data, ensuring a picture of the wider population and a richer description of teacher practice in the form of case studies. This design also strengthens the reliability of the data. There are certain limitations to this study including its limited generalisability to the population of Australian secondary English teachers. However supportable generalizations about the changes made to assessment practices, digital technology use and the teaching of multiliteracies when project-based learning is introduced will attempt to be drawn. It is hoped that this study will provide Australian secondary English teachers with insight into the ways in which student-centred, inquiry-based pedagogies such as project-based learning may provide them with a framework  for the meaningful integration of digital technologies and the teaching of multiliteracies in their classrooms. It is also hoped that PBL will give teachers the impetus to implement greater use of feedback strategies in the form of assessment for learning.


It is anticipated that collecting and analyzing data as well as the writing of the final report will take between twelve and eighteen months. The time period during which each activity will be performed and the amount of time each will likely require are as follows:



December 2011 – January 2012 (ongoing) Literature review
February – April, 2012 Data collection
May – June, 2012 Data Entry
July – August, 2012 Data Cleaning
September – December, 2012 Data Analysis
January – March, 2012 Writing up findings

Figure 3




Equipment $500
Travel $1000
Printing $300
Casual teacher cover $2000
Accommodation $400
Miscellaneous $250



     Figure 4

Dissemination of Results

The findings of the study will be disseminated in several ways. Firstly a report of findings will be provided to the schools participating in the study. Secondly a thesis will be completed documenting the results of the study. Finally the results of this study will be presented at the Australian Association for English Teachers annual conference in 2013 and International Society for Technology in Education conference in 2013 and a journal article will be submitted for publication in both the Australian Association for English Teachers and English Teachers Association journals.


Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (2011). Australian Curriculum English. Retrieved October 26, 2011, from

Balakrishnan, M., Rossafri, M., Fong-Soon, F. & Rozhan, M. I.  (2009). Technology application in project-based learning. Journal of Communication and Computer 6(12), 78-84.

Barab, S. A., Gresalfi, M. & Arici, A. (2009). Why Educators Should Care About Games. Educational Leadership 67(1), 76-80.

Barron, B. (1998). Doing with understanding: lessons from research on problem and project based learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 271-311.

Barron, B. & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Teaching for meaningful learning: A review of research on inquiry-based and cooperative learning. In L. Darling-Hammond, Barron, B., Pearson, D., Schoenfeld, A., Stage, E., Zimmerman, T., Cervetti, G. & Tison, J. (Ed.), Powerful Learning: What We Know About Teaching for Understanding (pp. 11-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Black, P. William, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. The Phi Delta Kappan 80(2), 139-148.

Bradley-Levine, J., Berghoff, B., Seybold, J., Sever, R., Blackwell, S. & Smiley, A. (2010). Paper presented at Annual Meetings of the American Educational Research Association.  Denver, CO.  April, 2010. Retrieved October 3, 2011, from

Bull, G. Anstey, M. (2010). Redefining Literacy and Text. Evolving pedagogies: reading and writing in a multimodal world Carlton South, Vic: Education Services Australia.

Cazden, C., Cope, B., Fairclough, N., Gee, J. P., Kress, M., Luke, A., Luke, C., Michaels, S. & Nakata, M. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures’. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60-92.

Chai, C. & Lim, C. (2011). The internet and teacher education: traversing between the digitized world and schools. Internet and Higher Education, 12, 3-9.

Department of Education and Communities, (2003). English Years 7-10 Syllabus.   Retrieved October 26, 2011, from

Corbin, J. M. & Anslem, L. S. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Costa, A. & Kallick, B. (2001). Describing 16 habits of mind.   Retrieved September 18, 2011, from

Cusack, C. (2011). Project-Based Learning | Edutopia. K-12 Education & Learning Innovations with Proven Strategies that Work Retrieved September 10, 2011, from

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2009). Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) – Teacher Questionnaire Retrieved October 15, 2011, from,3770,en_2649_39263231_1_119826_1_1_1,00.html

Drew, C. J., Hardman, M. L. & Hosp, J. L. (2008). Designing and conducting research in education. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Freebody, P. (2003). Qualitative research in education: interaction and practice. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Grant, M. (2009). Understanding projects in project-based learning: A student’s perspective. Annual Meetings of the American Educational Research Association. Retrieved October 10, 2011, from

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.

Horizon Research Incorporated. (2000). Inside the Classroom Teacher Interview Protocol.   Retrieved October 15 2011, from

Horizon Research Incorporated. (2000). Inside the Classroom Observation Analytic Protocol.   Retrieved October 15, 2011, from

Kellner, D. (2001). New Technologies/New Literacies: Reconstructing Education for the New Millennium International Journal of Technology and Design Education 11(1), 67-81.

Mills, K. (2011). Situated and Explicit Pedagogy. The multiliteracies classroom. . Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Mizuko, I., Horst, H. A., Bittanti, M., Boyd, D., Herr-Stephenson, B., Lange, P. G., Pascoe, C. J., * Robinson, L. . (2008). Living and Learning with New Media: Summary of Findings from the Digital Youth Project. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on Digital Media and Learning, November 2008.

Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston: Pearson.

Officers, T. C. o. C. S. S. (2011). Formative Assessment and Next-Generation Assessment Systems: Are We Losing an Opportunity?   Retrieved September 10, 2011, from

Petty, G. (2006). Evidence based teaching: a practical approach. Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.

Ravitz, J. (2009). Introduction: Summarizing Findings and Looking Ahead to a New Generation of PBL Research. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 3(1).

Ravitz, J., Hixson, N., English, M., & Mergendoller, J. . (2011). Using project based learning to teach 21st century skills: Findings from a statewide initiative. Proposal version of paper to be presented at Annual Meetings of the American Educational Research Association. Vancouver, BC. April, 2011. .   Retrieved October 4, 2011, from

Ravitz, J. B., J. . (2010). Assessing the impact of online technologies on PBL use in US high schools.  . Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Thornburg, D. D. (2001). Campfires in cyberspace: primordial metaphors for learning in the 21st century. Ed at a Distance, 15(6), 1-8.

Thorne, S. (2000). Data analysis in qualitative research. Evidence Based Nursing, 3(68-70).

Trauth-Nare, A. B., G. (2011). Assessment for learning: using formative assessment in problem- and project-based learning. The Science Teacher, 78(1).

Waxman, H. C. & Walbert, H. J. (1991). Effective teaching: current research. . Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Pub. Corp.

Yin, R. (1989). Case Study Methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

6 thoughts on “Assignment 6: Draft thesis proposal

  1. Pingback: Project Based Learning: share your story with us … | Bianca Hewes

  2. Hi Bianca,
    My name is Amaia Irazusta and I teach Basque language in the Basque Country (Spain) to secondary students. You might have no herad about that which is a minority langauge struggling to survive. I’m currently implementing a project based course with my eldest students, and I’ll be also doing my master thesis on PBL. I haven’t decided yet my research questions, but I’ll be working on assessment, students perceived learning gains and I’like to include digital technologies as well. I’ll be doing action research so my sample will be my own students. My projects are humble and nothing extraordinary, I feel very limited as I’m dealing with a minority language whose presence on media and the internet is still scarce, although increasing day by day. I envy all english teachers, because there are so many beautiful projects that can be done in english! I do agree with you that once you have started with PBL there is no way back. But sometimes I don’t perceive excitement among my students, some of them seem not to be very engaged. I think it’s normal since they always have worked with very traditional methods, and PBL can sometimes be too demanding, especially for L2 learners. They are used to get very good grades with some grammar exercises in class, some exams and that’s all. In PBL we don’t take tests, they also get very good grades, but more commitment is required. In spite of that, I’ll keep on going. I’ve also started using edmodo as plattform to share and communicate. I’m doing this with all of my groups, not only with the project group, and I think it’s fantastic. But I’m sure you already know it, in Spain we lag behind in technologies.
    I’m not sure If I can be helpful, but feel free to ask me anything you would like to know about my experience
    Sorry about my english

    • Hi Bianca and Amaia,
      I am also currently doing my masters on PBL in Perth and hoping to set up a research circle with local teachers. It has been interesting reading Bianca’s research question it has made me realise that I need to be more specific. I have read some interesting projects incorporating local histories and minority languages and the production of local history books, community displays. The Basque region has a fascinating history – I am sure there are many people with great stories to be told that your class could gather?
      Kind regards
      Lisa Knight

  3. Pingback: My research: PBL, assessment and subject English |

  4. why didnt u include in the reference list the book of straus and corbin which u quoted in this paper? thanks.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s