First thank you for your work I appreciate it but you misunderstood.docx

First thank you for your work I appreciate it but you
misunderstood the instruction. You were writing about the
various of modes of transportation, and that in not related to the
history for transport The topic should related to the history of
transportation such as how did people get started using transport
how were they moving from place to another. How has transport
changed? For instance, History of road transport:The first road
transport was people riding animals( horses, oxen……et .Than
using carts, train, bicycles , buss, car …….ets what ever . and
should be arranged based of what the used to use first I really
appreciate your working but you need to turn it to historical
topic as I mentioned in the Instruction File to be something
related to the history not to the types of transport in general.
Show how the process of changing transport has changed?
Thanks :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpVqY6Z74Tkhttps://www.
youtube.com/watch?v=puyiRLtO7Fk
Student 1
David Presley
DB1: Option A, Forecasting
Top of Form
Through a recent forecast through eMarketer, Snapchat (SNAP)
is projected to bring in roughly $3 billion in advertising sales
alone. Yahoo and Twitter have seen decreasing figures in
advertising numbers, where Snapchat has seen
growth. Facebook and Google are currently dominating the
advertising market, but Snapchat looks to compete with the two
giants: “Snapchat is expected to present a challenge
to Facebook and Google’s rule of mobile advertising” (Simon,
2017). The few articles I researched don’t specifically speak on
the type of forecasting that was used to acquire these figures,
but from what I’ve gathered it appears to be “time-series
forecasts”. “Time-series forecasts simply attempt to project past

experience into the future. These techniques use historical data
with the assumption that the future will be like the past”
(Stevenson, 2015, pg. 82). Snapchat’s previous advertising
figures, as well as their incredible $9 price jump in the stock
market, would point to Snapchat being on the rise. Also, what
points to Snapchat surpassing Yahoo and Twitter, is the decline
in advertising revenue from both companies. To look at the
declining numbers and assume a similar trend in the future
would share the same style of forecasting as the time-series
forecasting approach. Snapchat’s current market share in the
advertising realm is relatively low (1.3%), but according to the
same forecast by eMarketer, their market share (in terms of
percentage) will double to 2.7% by 2019 (Jain, 2017). The
forecast couldn’t have come at a better time for Snapchat and
it’s shareholders. The stock price has shot up in the very early
stages since becoming a publicly traded company, and
these forecasted reports point to more growth in the next two to
three years. Twitter and Yahoo currently have more advertising
revenue than Snapchat, but if the time series forecast continues
to be applied, it points to Twitter and Yahoo continuing to
decline, and Snapchat continuing to grow. The impact of the
forecast will soon be determined (as the report came out today),
but this bodes well for shareholders and potential shareholders
that continue to help financially support the new publicly traded
company.
References:
Jain, R. (2017, March 27). Snapchat Parent Snap Inc. Revenue
To Reach $3 Billion By 2019: Report. Retrieved
from http://www.ibtimes.com/snapchat-parent-snap-inc-
revenue-reach-3-billion-2019-report-2515505
Simon, K. (2017, March 27). Snapchat forecast to pull $3bn a
year by 2019, to surpass Twitter, AOL and Yahoo. Retrieved
from http://www.phonearena.com/news/Snapchat-forecast-to-
pull-3bn-a-year-by-2019-to-surpass-Twitter-AOL-and-
Yahoo_id92434
Stevenson, W. J. (2015). Operations management. New York,

NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
Student 2
1 day ago
Misty Raup
Demand Forecasting- McDonald's
COLLAPSE
Top of Form
While McDonald’s has long been considered a burger
fast-food enterprise across the globe, much of how they achieve
their iconic status has to do with how they forecast their sales
for future periods. Looking at upcoming promotions, seasonal
trends, and consumer demands, their forecasting method is
primarily demand forecasting. They utilize daily point-of-sale
data at each item level, as well as stock levels at the restaurant
and by embracing technology and interconnected data systems
to never run out of stock, they achieve customer satisfaction by
honing in not only on what people want each day, but what they
will want in the near future, (Supply Chain Movement, 2012).
This strategy has served them well as they saw share
prices rising 27% in 2015, the second-best performance on the
Dow Jones Industrial Average, (Sozzi, 2016). With the launch
of all day breakfast, they knew in advance that they would need
to increase their supply of hash browns and McMuffins, two
items offered on their all day breakfast menu. In article in
Benchmarking for Quality Management & Technology
(Bradford), “the ability to forecast consumer demand accurately
is of great importance”, (Adbanjo, 2000). Food services view
consumer availability as the cornerstone of their business.
Major benefits of effective forecasting according to the article
include: increased product availability to the consumer, lower
inventory levels along the supply chain, and true
customer/supplier partnerships. McDonald’s being able to
accurately keep their inventory in line with their expected

consumer demands helps to ensure they are capable of
delivering the product their customers desire.
References
Adebanjo, D. (2000). Identifying problems in forecasting
consumer demand in the fast moving consumer goods
sector. Benchmarking, 7(3), 223-230. Retrieved
from http://ezproxy.liberty.edu/login?url=https://search-
proquest-
com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/docview/217357295?accountid=12085
The ability to forecast consumer demand accurately is of great
importance to companies in the consumer market. The food
industry, in particular, views consumer availability as the
cornerstone of their business. However, many companies
concede that their forecasting process does not perform as well
as they would wish. A group of forecasting and demand
managers from some of the leading UK food companies, with
the support of Leatherhead Food RA, examined the problems
associated with their functions over an 18-month period. This
paper presents the key findings from their collaborative work.
McDonald's wants to be assured of delivery. (October 2012).
Retrieved March 27, 2017,
from https://www.supplychainmovement.com/mcdonalds-wants-
to-be-assured-of-delivery/
McDonald's aim to never run out of product is paying off as
they see growth in the supply chain management model.
Utilizing forecasting by demand, they maintain their product
supplies as needed and develop relationships with suppliers to
ensure accurate ordering. Their customers win by having the
product they desire at the time they want.
Sozzi, B. (2016, January 03). 3 predictions for what McDonald's
will do in 2016. Retrieved March 27, 2017,

from https://www.thestreet.com/story/13409843/1/3-
predictions-for-what-mcdonald-s-will-do-in-2016.html
The McDonald's franchises have seen tremendous growth in
2015. This is largely due to forecasting demands of the
consumer and by keeping inventory in stock. Offering all day
breakfast helped to boost sales to customers who hadn't visited
the store in previous months prior to the launch.
Bottom of Form
Bottom of Form
BUSI 414
BUSI 411
Discussion Board Forum 1 Instructions
Replies:
In Module/Week 2: Post a substantive reply to the thread of at
least 2 classmates. A substantive reply includes at least 150
words analyzing the thread as well as adding to the research and
concepts put forth in that thread. The goal is to create
meaningful discussion. To simply restate the idea already put
forth or to concur with the first reply is not adding substantial
discussion. That is why it is good to do additional outside
research.
Make sure to provide scholarly and educational material and
work that is engaging and substantive. Simply meeting the
minimum requirements earns one only the minimum grade.
Regarding plagiarism: Plagiarism will not be tolerated. The
results of plagiarizing a post or parts of a post will be a zero on
the post, an F in the course, or expulsion from the school.
In addition, trying to use pre-written posts (from another
course, etc.) for this course’s assignments will result in a very

low grade if the post does not address the requirements as
outlined in the Syllabus. If you did research for another course
and want to use part of that research in an assignment for this
course, that is perfectly okay. Just make sure you address all the
discussion topics and requirements as specified in the Syllabus.
Any form of plagiarism, including cutting and pasting, will
result in 0 points for the entire assignment, plus a required 500-
word written paper on the topic of plagiarism, in order to
receive credit for any online activity.
Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 1
ASSESSING YOUR PUPILS’ IMPROVEMENT
The ability to assess student improvement over time is one of
the central skills of being an effective teacher. Not only is it
impossible to be an effective teacher without an ability to assess
improvement in students of different levels of knowledge and
ability, but also, teachers who only know how to sort students
into high and low performers pose a risk to the learning and
development of students of all ability levels.
This handout explains 1) what assessing improvement is and
isn’t, 2) why the ability to assess improvement is so important
for teachers, and 3) how to plan assessments that clearly assess
improvement (and what kinds of assessments don’t assess
improvement).
* HOWEVER, before all that, the most important thing for you
to know is that you probably don’t know how to assess
improvement right now (but will believe that you do). From my
experience, many of you (students) who don’t know how to
assess improvement will be confident that you do, and this
overconfidence will get in the way of learning this skill, and
will cause you (and me) repeated frustration. I have taught over
1000 students to assess improvement (sometimes

unsuccessfully), and at first, the vast majority of students write
assessments that are nowhere close to assessing improvement—
but the students are sure that they do assess improvement. We
have two types of thinking in our minds—System 1 thinking and
System 2 thinking. System 1 thinking is more intuitive and
judges things at a glance, and helps us out when we need fast
answers, but also is the source of lots of bias, illogic, and
errors. System 2 thinking is that more slow and effortful and
systematic logical thinking, and it’s this System 2 thinking that
most of you will need to use in order to write assessment plans
that truly assess improvement.
What Assessing Student Improvement IS and ISN’T
Assessing improvement means assessing whether or not students
have gotten better or more consistent than they were before in
their knowledge, skills, habits, etc. Do students know more
(knowledge) at a later assessment than they did earlierin the
week, month, or year? Can students do something better(a skill
or performance) at a later assessment than they did earlierin the
week, month, or year? Do students do some positive habit more
consistently now than they did earlierin the week, month, or
year? Assessing improvement is about comparing where
students are at now to where they were before, and seeing if
they have gotten better, worse, or stayed the same.
Assessing improvement does NOT mean assessing whether
students are good or bad at something. Let me say that again—
Assessing improvement does NOT mean assessing whether
students are good or bad at something. A student who is good at
something (e.g., writing stories) may have not improved at all in
that outcome this year, but a student who is mediocre at it may
have improved a lot on that outcome in the last month. In that
case, the second student met the goal of improvement but the
first one didn’t. Assessing improvement also does NOT mean
assessing whether or not students have met some fixed and
arbitrary level of performance (e.g., can identify 80% of sight

words). When assessing improvement, we don’t focus on
something such as whether students could read 80% of sight
words, but we would focus on whether they can read more
words now than they could in the past. Finally, assessing
improvement does NOT mean assessing whether students are
better than other kids or “on grade level.”
Why is it Important for Teachers to be Able to Assess Student
Improvement?
First, one of the central jobs of teachers is to help students
improve their skills and habits, but if teachers are not skillful at
assessing student improvement, it is difficult for teachers to
assess their success in reaching this goal, and to know when
they need to try something different.
You might wonder, doesn’t all assessment assess what students
have learned, and areas in which they have improved? In fact, a
great deal of classroom assessment simply assesses what
students currently know and can do, but doesn’t tell us whether
they are more knowledgeable or more skillful or have better
habits than earlier in the day, month, or year. Much of
classroom assessment simply determines whether children can
or can’t do whatever was the objective in the lesson plan, and
this kind of “sorting” assessment creates problems for students
at every ability level.
To know whether they are reaching all students, teachers need
to know (in part) whether those students are improving in their
skills and habits, regardless of their current level of
performance, and regardless of whether those students’
performance is below average, average, or above average. When
assessing improvement, you don’t care whether the student is
below or above average at the ending assessment or whether
they have met some arbitrary/fixed objective or standard—you
care about whether they have made progress or improved over
their earlier performance. (Yes, I’m repeating myself a bit:
Trust me, it’s intentional.)

Second, and related to the first point, frequent use of
assessment that merely classifies students, or that results only
in grades or rankings relative to one’s classmates, without
identifying and recognizing improvement, can create profound
problems for student motivation and achievement. In simple
terms, very able students can often continue to “do well” in a
class without trying very hard or improving as much as they
might. Less able students can often continue to be viewed, and
view themselves as below average in skills, although they are
trying their hardest, and making notable improvements. In
classrooms where success is viewed in terms of relative ability
or grades (rather than improvement), many able students learn
that a great deal of effort is not needed for success while less
able students may learn that expending effort does not lead to
success (since success is defined not as steady progress but as
being better than average). Over time, both types of students
often stop working and improving as much as they could,
because the most advanced students don’t need to work much to
meet the standard and many of the least advanced students have
learned that no matter how hard they work, they will be labeled
as failures. Unwittingly, the way we assess students (based
largely on relative ability, not progress) leads many more able
students to view hard work as unnecessary for success, and
leads many less able students to see hard work as not leading to
success—thus undermining the work ethic in both groups.
Assessing students in terms of whether they met universal and
fixed standards/objectives (instead of assessing improvement)
also contributes to students developing a “fixed” view of
ability, the belief that ability is something you just have or
don’t have—rather than believing that ability and intelligence
can be improved through effort (which is the healthier view).
People who adopt the fixed view of ability set less challenging
goals for themselves, tend to give up when the going gets tough,
tend to focus on performance goals (proving ability) rather than
learning goals (improving ability), and tend to blame others
when they fail, rather than focusing on what they can do to

improve. Also, many of the goals we value most are complex
skills and performances and crucial habits that improve
gradually over long stretches of time, and if we aren’t often
assessing for improvement, we are probably neglecting some of
our most valued educational goals. In sum, the way we
frequently assess young children (based on fixed objectives or
sorting kids into high and low groups/performances) creates a
range of predictable problems for students’ learning and
development.
However, where teachers are focused on effort and progress,
lower-performing students are recognized for effort and
progress, while even the highest performing students are
challenged to do better, if they are not making adequate effort
or improvement. In order to emphasize effort and progress,
teachers simply must know how to assess student improvement.
BAD or Incomplete Examples
BAD Plan #1 for Assessing Improvement
(This does NOT assess improvement—it is a BAD example)
Objective: Students will improve their ability to describe their
feelings during actual classroom conflicts.
a. I will observe the students from September through
November, and for each student conflict observed, will
document on a checklist which student(s) described their
feelings, and which students did not.
b. A student will have met the objective if s/he described their
feelings in at least 75% of the conflicts recorded in November.
c. A student did not meet the objective if s/he described their
feelings in fewer than 75% of the conflicts recorded in
November.
Note: This never compares later performance to earlier
performance, so it simply can’t assess improvement. Also, if

kids were at 85% to begin with, hitting the 75% mark is going
backwards, not improvement. Similarly, kids could have gone
from 0% earlier in the year to 65% now, and be rated as not
improving. Fixed targets such as 4 out of 5, or 75% accuracy
can NEVER be relied on to assess improvement.
BAD Plan #2 for Assessing Improvement
(This does NOT assess improvement—it is a BAD example)
feelings during classroom conflicts.
feelings.
b. A student will have met the objective if s/he improved their
ability to describe their feelings.
c. They didn’t meet the objective if s/he didn’t improve their
ability to describe their feelings.
Note: This is circular reasoning—you’re sort of saying you’ll
know they got better if they got better, but never say what the
indicators of improvement are. Also, in steps b & c, there is no
comparison of the later performance to the earlier performance,
so this can’t assess improvement over time.
BAD Plan #3: An INCOMPLETE Plan for Assessing
Improvement
(This gives one example of how a student might improve but
does not address what improvement would look like in
general—it is an INCOMPLETE assessment plan)
feelings during actual classroom conflicts.

feelings, and which students did not.
feelings in 25% of the assessments in September and at least
75% of the conflicts recorded in November.
c. A student did not meet the objective if s/he described their
feelings in fewer than 75% of the conflicts recorded in
November.
Note: We want you to be tuned into any of the ways in which
improvement might occur, especially for students whose ending
performances are at very different levels, so it is inadequate to
just describe one way in which improvement might occur. For
example, a student might be at 0% in September and 10% in
November and that also would be improvement. Part of what
I’m trying to teach you here is to stop focusing on some fixed
ending performance target, and focus instead on childrens’
growth trajectories over time.
BAD Plan #4: An INCOMPLETE Plan for Assessing
Improvement
(This has the right pre-post structure, but is too vague in terms
of what is being assessed to provide good evidence of assessing
improvement.)
Objective: Students will improve their ability write creative
fictional stories.
a. I will collect two fictional stories that students write in
September and two fictional stories that students write in
November. I will rate all four stories on a checklist I created to
assess creative writing.
b. A student will have met the objective if their two November
stories averaged more checkmarks than their two September

stories averaged.
c. A student will have not met the objective if their two
November stories averaged fewer or the same number of
checkmarks compared to the average of their two September
stories.
Note: At first glance, this is perfectly structured to assess
improvement because it has pre-post comparisons, but it is far
too vague about what is being assessed as evidence of
creativity. What’s on the checklist, and what does it prove to
have more checkmarks? You need to figure out what you mean
by creative writing and identify clear indicators of creativity
that they would need to do more of or do better in the second
assessment than in the first—in order to prove improvement.
How Can Teachers Assess Student Improvement?
Enough of the negative examples! To assess improvement, you
need three things:
First, you need an indicator or indicators of the student outcome
you are assessing (for example, more interesting characters or
more suspenseful plot might be indicators of improved fiction
writing). Again, saying you’ll know their writing is better if
their writing got better is called circular reasoning—it proves
nothing because it doesn’t say WHAT needs to be better the
second time than the first time—in order to prove that their
writing improved. For many student outcomes, it takes some
thought to come up with reasonable indicators of the
outcome/objective.
Second, you need a pre-assessment and post-assessment because
this will allow you to compare their current knowledge, skills,
habits or complex performances to their earlier knowledge,
skills, habits or complex performances. That is, you’ll need to
compare their current performance to their performance on a
similar task some days, weeks, or months ago. It is

IMPOSSIBLE to assess improvement without at least two
assessments that are separated in time, so any assessment plans
that don’t mention a pre-assessment and post-assessment in step
a, and compare the pre-assessment and post-assessment
performance in steps b and c will be returned as incomplete.
Third, you need some way to collect and record data (e.g.,
anecdotal notes, checklists, individual science journal that
students write in, samples of their writing, drawing, etc.).
Grades are poor evidence, because they don’t answer the
question of what exactly students were graded on, so they are
too vague to assess improvement in specific knowledge, skills,
or habits.
Finally, for me to know that you really understand assessing
improvement, I need clear data that you know how to a) collect
relevant data, b) identify what would be evidence of
improvement, and c) identify what would be evidence of non-
improvement. For this reason, I ask that all assessment plans be
written in these separate a, b, c steps, not as just one large
paragraph.
GOOD Assessment Plan #1 (for assessing increased knowledge)
Objective: Students will increase their knowledge about the
arctic animal of their choice.
a. At the beginning of the unit, after each student has chosen an
animal they wish to study, I will ask them to write in their
science journal all the facts they know about the arctic animal
they have chosen. At the end of the unit, I will again ask them
to write in their science journal all the facts they know about
their arctic animal. I will compare the number of facts the
students knew about their animal at the end of the unit to the
number of facts they knew about their animal at the beginning
of the unit.
b. Students will have increased their knowledge of the arctic

animal of their choice if they wrote more facts about their
animal at the end of the unit than they wrote at the beginning.
c. Students will have NOT increased their knowledge of the
arctic animal of their choice if they wrote the same number or
fewer facts about their animal at the end of the unit than they
wrote at the beginning.
GOOD Assessment Plan #2 (for assessing improved
understanding)
Objective: Students will improve their understanding of how
extrinsic rewards often backfire for promoting healthy
development. (This is an objective for teacher candidates, and
wasn’t written for young children)
a. On two occasions (before and after reading the course
materials on motivation), I will ask students to write short
essays explaining how extrinsic rewards often undermine
intrinsic motivation. I will compare these essays in terms of the
degree to which they explain the role of extrinsic rewards in
interfering with meeting learners’ basic needs, the ways in
which rewards get learners to focus on performance (and the
reward) rather than learning itself, the negative consequences
that often result from using extrinsic rewards, and the
conditions under which extrinsic rewards are most likely to
cause such harm.
b. I will conclude that teacher candidates deepened their
understanding of how extrinsic rewards often backfire for
promoting healthy development if their post-assessments were
more detailed or coherent in explaining one or more of the
following:
- how extrinsic rewards interfering with meeting learners’
basic needs,
- how extrinsic rewards promote performance goals and a
focus on getting the reward, rather than learning goals,
- the negative consequences that often result from using

extrinsic rewards, or
- the conditions under which extrinsic rewards are most
likely to cause such harm.
c. I will conclude that teacher candidates did NOT deepen their
understanding of how extrinsic rewards often backfire for
promoting healthy development if their post-assessments were
NOT more detailed or coherent in explaining one or more of the
following:
- how extrinsic rewards interfering with meeting learners’
basic needs,
- how extrinsic rewards promote performance goals and a
focus on getting the reward, rather than learning goals,
- the negative consequences that often result from using
extrinsic rewards, or
- the conditions under which extrinsic rewards are most
likely to cause such harm.
GOOD Assessment Plan #3 (for assessing improvement on a
skill)
A skill means you are able to DO something (other than answer
a fact-based question or perform on a fact based task), so an
improved skill means you learned how to do something better
than you used to be able to do it. In the assessment below, we
are focused simply on getting children to describe their feelings
more often during conflicts.
feelings during conflicts.
a. I will observe the students during two recording periods; 1)
from September through October, and 2) from January through
February. For each student conflict observed during these two
recording periods, I will document on a checklist which
student(s) described their feelings, and which students did not.
For each student, I will compare the percentage number of times

s/he describe their feelings during actual classroom conflicts in
the first recording period with the same percentage for the
second recording period.
feelings in a larger percentage of conflicts during the second
recording period than during the first recording period.
c. A student will NOT have met the objective if s/he described
their feelings in the same percentage of conflicts during the
second recording period than during the first recording period,
or in a smaller percentage of conflicts during the second
recording period than during the first recording period.
Notice that the above assessment plan is focused on quantitative
change, or the frequency of an action. However, improvements
in skills are often best described in terms of improved quality of
performance, as the assessment below does.
skill)
feelings during conflicts.
a. I will record how students describe their feelings during two
conflicts, one in the fall, and one in the spring. For each
student, I will record the exact words they used to describe their
feelings during the conflicts.
feelings more clearly and in greater detail during the second
conflict (in spring) than during the first conflict.
c. A student will have not met the objective if s/he did not
describe their feelings any more clearly or in any greater detail
during the second conflict than during the first conflict.
complex performance)

Objective: The parent will improve their parenting.
Note: As with judging understanding, complex performances are
complex and there are multiple indicators of excellence that
could improve, get worse, or stay the same. I’ll just pick some
of the indicators of good parenting, so you get the idea of
assessing complex performances. Basically, if some of the
indicators get better over time and the others stay the same,
they improved, or if more indicators improve over time than get
worse over time, they improved on the complex performance.
a. I will shadow the parent during one week in March and one
week in May. During both months, I will keep track of the
amount of sleep the parent’s children get, how often they were
served healthy foods, how often the parent read to the children
or did other enriching activities with them (e.g., play,
conversations), and how responsive the parent was to the
children’s cues and interests. I will compare the results from the
March and May data collection.
b. I will conclude that the parent improved her parenting if s/he
was better in May than s/he was in March on more of the
following indicators than s/he was worse on:
- frequency of children getting the recommended hours of
sleep, and/or
- frequency of healthy meals, and/or
- frequency of reading to children or other enriching
interactions, and/or
- responsiveness to child’s cues and interests, or any other
possible indicators.
c. I will conclude that the parent did not improved his/her
parenting if s/he didn’t improve on the following indicators
from March to May or if she was worse in May than she was in
March on more of the following indicators than she was better
on:
- frequency of children getting recommended hours of

sleep, and/or
- frequency of healthy meals, and/or
- frequency of reading to children or other enriching
interactions, and/or
- responsiveness to child’s cues and interests, or any other
possible indicators.
Of course, there are other indicators of good parenting, but I
think you get the idea—for complex performances, if learners
improve over time on more of the key indicators of excellence
than they got worse on, then they improved at that complex
performance. If you only listed one indicator that you are
assessing (e.g., responsiveness to the child), then you would no
longer be assessing the complex performance of good parenting,
you would then be assessing the narrower (but important) skill
of being responsive to your children.
habit)
Goal: Our son will more consistently make his bed.
Because a habit refers to a pattern of action over time, for
assessing habits, you need several observations/pieces of
evidence at the pre-assessment, and several observations/pieces
of evidence at the second/post-assessment, later on. A skill
means you CAN do it, a habit means you consistently DO IT, so
habit assessments focus primarily on the consistency with which
the person does something.
a. I will record on the calendar the number of times Johnny
makes his bed (without reminders) during the first full week in
March and during the first full week in May. I will compare the
numbers of times he made his bed in that week in May to the
numbers of beds he made in that week in March.
b. If Johnny made his bed more times in the first full week in

May than he did in the first full week in March, then the habit
of making his beds increased or improved.
c. If Johnny made his bed the same number of times or fewer
times in the first full week in May than he did in the first full
week in March, then the habit of making their beds did not
increase or improve.
Assessing Emotions, a special note. Unless a child has had
emotional problems, assessing increased enjoyment, excitement,
happiness, or pride is not necessary. If a child truly enjoys
learning something, that is good enough—most of the time,
there is no need to assess whether they enjoyed it more than
before. Of course, if there were problems with student
motivation in a classroom, or motivation and attitudes were
declining, assessing an increase in positive emotions would be
useful, but such assessments are not needed for the assignments
in this class.
IS
IS NOT
_____________________________________________________
______________________________

* Learning something
* A behavioral objective
that is usually true across a
written with action verbs
wide variety of situations
(e.g., list, identify, etc.)
(e.g., people create new
which indicate what
goods and services to help
students will do to

meet people’s needs and
demonstrate that they
DEFINITION
to satisfy their wants.
learned the knowledge.
* A statement
* A statement of a fact
that was true in one
* A very important kind of
situation, but may not
learning for children to
be true in others.

construct/understand
* An unsupported
* Broader than specific
opinion
facts. May hold true across
short or very long periods
of time.
“ Students will
learn that …
… what goes up

must come down”
(true of the stock market,
* “Significant stock market
gravity, people’s mood, etc.)
declines followed the lastthree major stock market
… change is something that
booms.”
happens to many things”
EXAMPLES
(true of plants, animals, people,
* “Roses change a lot
physical systems, social systems)

during their life cycle.”
… there is usually more than one
* “Students will be able
way to solve a problem” (true in
to state, when asked, three
math, engineering,
different ways to solve a
social conflicts, etc.)
specific problem.”
… product design must usually

* “ Students will be able
address both form and function”
to define form and
(true in the design of houses,
function.”
clothing, cars, office products,
housewares, toys, etc.)
- By Karl F. Wheatley, Ph.D., 11/30/05
GENERALIZATION
OUTCOME
26
GENERALIZATIONS
DEFINITION

* Learning something that is usually true across a wide variety
of situations (e.g., people create new goods and services to help
meet people’s needs and to satisfy their wants.
* A very important kind of
learning for children to construct/understand.
* Broader than specific facts. May hold true across short or very
long periods of time.
Examples
“Students will learn that what goes up must come down” (true
of the stock market, gravity, people’s mood, etc.).
“Students will learn that change is something that happens to
many things” (true of plants, animals, people, physical systems,
social systems).
“Students will learn that there is usually more than one way to
solve a problem” (true in math, engineering, social conflicts,
etc.).
“Students will learn that product design must usually address
both form and function” (true in the design of houses, clothing,

cars, office products).
Note: If you find yourself writing about students’ improving
their “ability to” do something or their “skill” at doing
something, you’re writing a skill, not a generalization.
Difference Between Generalizations and Critical Facts
Generalizations are tricky to find, and it’s often tricky to
distinguish them from critical facts.
That “the voting age in America is 18” is a critical fact.
If “the voting age in most countries is 18,” that would be a
generalization stating what is generally true across most
countries.
That “the Cleveland Browns had a losing record last season” is
a critical fact (at least with respect to sports).
That “the Cleveland Browns usually lose” is a generalization.
Finding Generalizations
Generalizations are high-level knowledge about what is
generally true. As you read about your topic, look for
statements that say something about what is generally true about
your topic. For example, in a project on families, look for
sentences such as
"In families, people usually ..."
"In families, people generally ..."
"Most of the time, people in families ...."
Language such as this can signal generalizations about families,
but to find these generalizations, you have to do some reading
about your topic. I know that’s work, but here’s a generalization
about teaching: “It’s generally impossible to become a good or
great teacher without a lot of hard work.”

Note: Any generalization that kids discover/learn/construct may
extend beyond the topic the class is studying at the time, or may
be broader than what any individual or small group is studying.
For example, if you’re studying whales right now but studied
humans or other mammals in the past, students might learn a
generalization that is true about mammals (not just about
whales). Similarly, if different groups are studying different
types of insects, they might, by putting together what they
learned about those different species of insects, construct some
generalization about what is usually true about insects in
general.
To assess generalizations, basically if kids say or write the
generalization, and know what they are saying/writing, that’s
evidence they got it. Honest, it’s that simple. So, if kids say or
write “what goes up must come down” and understand what that
means, they learned that generalization. However, if they say
that hats thrown into the air generally come down, they’ve only
learned how this idea applies to hats (the specific case) and
have not shown they learned the general rule (generalization)
that applies to most objects.
InSight: RIVIER ACADEMIC JOURNAL, VOLUME 7,
NUMBER 2, FALL 2011
Copyright © 2011 by Margaret Holm. Published by Rivier
College, with permission. 1
ISSN 1559-9388 (online version), ISSN 1559-9396 (CD-ROM
version).
Abstract

This article provides a review of research (2000-2011)
regarding the effectiveness of project-based
instruction in preschool, elementary and secondary school
classroom settings, including academic,
learner, and teacher response outcomes. First, the review
provides some historical context, and a
definition of project-based learning. Next, the reviewer
synthesizes several themes emergent in the
literature, including student and teacher attitudes, academic
outcomes, and information about what
recent research on project-based learning has shown as it has
been used with specific student
subgroups. Finally, the author provides a perspective on factors
that can enhance or detract from
instructional success with project based methodology, and
suggest directions for further research.
Overall, current research offers a generally positive view of
project-based methodology, with some
practical and theoretical caveats voiced by practitioners and
researchers.
Introduction
Project-based learning, a teaching methodology that utilizes
student-centered projects to facilitate
student learning (Mergendoller, 2006), is touted as superior to
traditional teaching methods in improving
problem solving and thinking skills, and engaging students in
their learning (Berends, Boersma &
Weggemann, 2003; Scarborough, Bresnen, Edelmann, Laurent,
Newell & Swann, 2004; Tsang, 1997).
Popular in pre-professional training in medicine, science,
technology, engineering and mathematics
careers since the 1970’s, momentum has more recently
developed to extend these practices to

elementary and secondary classrooms (Buck Institute, 2005;
Knoll, 1997).
Definition
While most commonly known as a part of adult education,
project-based learning for school-age
children is not new. Project-based learning can be described as
student-centered instruction that occurs
over an extended time period, during which students select,
plan, investigate and produce a product,
presentation or performance that answers a real-world question
or responds to an authentic challenge.
Teachers generally serve as facilitators, providing scaffolding,
guidance and strategic instruction as the
process unfolds. According to an historical survey of project-
and problem-based learning undertaken by
Michael Knoll at the University of Bayreuth in Germany (Knoll,
2006), project methodology in
American education can be traced to an early 20th century
description offered by William H. Kilpatrick
(1918), which referred to the Project Method as “a hearty,
purposeful act", generally a project or pursuit,
undertaken by the child, which has four distinct, student-
centered phases: purposing, planning, executing
and judging. Ideas such as these, combined with the model for
scientific inquiry, have contributed to a
PROJECT-BASED INSTRUCTION:
A Review of the Literature on Effectiveness in Prekindergarten
through 12th Grade Classrooms
Margaret Holm§
Ed.D. Program in Leadership & Learning, Rivier College

Margaret Holm
2
variety of student-centered methods such as problem-based,
case-based, discovery learning, and
expeditionary learning (Knoll, 1997; Thomas, 2000; Prince &
Felder, 2007).
In a review of the research on project-based learning, Thomas
(2000) identified five distinguishing
features of project-based learning:
• The use of projects that focus on content that is central to the
curriculum. These projects
become the primary vehicle for content learning, and often,
assessment.
• Projects are based on questions of importance or driving
questions (Blumenfeld et al., 1991).
Driving questions must be germane to the content, and crafted
both to engender optimal
student engagement and foster active intellectual pursuit of
solutions.
• Projects involve students in ways that require them to identify
problems, develop and design
solutions, and create an end product such as a presentation,
report, invention, or model.
• Projects are student-centered to the greatest extent possible.
Teachers serve as resources,
facilitators and guides, but it is the students who define, choose
and carry out their projects.

• Projects are developed from reality-based ideas and problems
rather than on academic
exercises and pursuits. The projects represent authentic efforts
in solving or investigating
real-world dilemmas.
Both Thomas (2000) and Kilpatrick (1918) emphasize depth of
learning and intrinsic motivation as
key benefits of this methodology, as well as a focus on student-
centered, systematic inquiry.
A number of researchers and educational theorists have adopted
the principles of project-based
learning as a foundation for related methodologies (Knoll, 1997;
Prince & Felder, 2006). The goal of
these methodologies is to move education toward more student
centered, inquiry-based, active learning
methods. The intent is to help students become self-directed
learners who can apply sound higher-order
thinking skills. Meyer (2004) describes three broad inquiry-
based approaches that emerged as a response
to the rise of constructivist ideas about learning in the 1960’s:
inquiry on the basis of understanding
problem-solving rules based on the work of Jerome S. Bruner;
in the 1970’s, Jean Piaget’s conservation
of strategies applied to problem solving, and Seymour Papert’s
contributions to discovery learning
applied to computer programming concepts. Far from supporting
such approaches, however, Mayer
contends that constructivist, student-centered, discovery
learning that minimizes the need for expert
guidance and downplays the role of the teacher has repeatedly
failed to deliver promised gains in student
autonomy and the development of problem solving and thinking
skills (Kirschner, Sweller & Clark,

2006; Mayer, 2004).
Mayer (2004) is not alone in challenging the utility of student-
centered teaching. Some theorists
believe that such teaching methods are in direct conflict with
cognition research that demonstrates not
only that learners in the novice stage do not attend to critical
problem features or employ effective
problem solving strategies, but that they should not necessarily
be encouraged to do so. Kirschner,
Sweller & Clark (2006) assert that the ideals of constructivist,
project-based learning may miss the mark
by leaving too much at the discretion of novice learners. They
suggest that leaving students to self-direct
can result in sustained misconceptions and multiple “false
starts”. Accordingly, adherence to a highly
student-centered approach that does not promote strategic
teacher intervention and guidance may prove
inefficient and/or ineffective (Bransford, et al., 2000;
Kirschner, Sweller & Clark, 2006). Similarly,
Blumenfeld, et al. (1998) described numerous classrooms where
project based learning activities were
being conducted, but where project results did not live up to
expectations because the students got
“stuck” or channeled their inquiry efforts in unproductive
directions. They concluded that teacher
involvement and guidance is needed for optimal learning.
3
LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
PROJECT BASED LEARNING

Regardless of the opinions of theorists, the idea that students
can become independent, motivated
learners, able to apply their skills to real-world problems
through personal and group inquiry is an
energizing prospect that, as Kirschner (2006) put it, “appeals to
(educators) intuitively”, and project-
based programs and materials such as Expeditionary Learning
(http://elschools.org), the The Jasper
Series from Vanderbilt University (The Adventures of Jasper
Woodbury Videodisc Series, 1992), and
other commercial products which bundle resources and simplify
implementation for practitioners, have
met with some commercial and pragmatic success (David, 2008;
Thomas, 2000). A number of school
reform efforts (e.g., Ravitz, 2008) utilize project-based learning
as a cornerstone of their design. Yet, for
most schools and teachers, project-based instruction is carried
out on an individual classroom scale that
exists outside the eye of the research community. A review of
the literature prior to the year 1999
(Thomas, 2000) found little research on home-grown, project-
based learning in single schools and
classrooms, while more recently, David (2008) reported that
although project-based instructional
practice continues to take place most typically in isolated
schools and classrooms, little is known about
the effectiveness of this approach in these settings, particularly
when compared with other methods of
instruction.
What does current research say about the effectiveness of
project-based learning at the individual
classroom level? The purpose of this literature review is to
summarize peer-reviewed research on the
effectiveness of project-based learning over the past decade, as
it pertains to prekindergarten through

12th grade classrooms. It includes studies that address academic
outcomes, developmental gains, student
perceptions about project-based versus traditional learning,
attitudes toward subject matter, group
process, perceptions of peers, and in some cases, perceptions of
efficacy. Efficacy in this context can be
defined as a belief in the abilities of a group or an individual to
meet a goal, or achieve a desired
outcome.
Method
The review was conducted by means of searches of electronic
databases of education-related journals
and publications, including Academic Search Premier,
Education Research Complete and ERIC.
Articles were identified using the terms ‘project method’ and
‘teaching’ in combination with search
restrictions to peer-reviewed articles in the English language
that were published between January 2000
and June 2011. The initial search results yielded 768 articles.
Manual sorting of these results was used to
retain only articles pertaining to research relating to
prekindergarten through 12th grade students and
related to the instructional effectiveness of project-based
learning as carried out in classroom settings (as
opposed to distance learning), and the reference sections of the
remaining articles checked for other
articles that would meet the review criteria. Altogether, a total
of seventeen articles were identified for
inclusion.
In order to provide a frame of reference for the varying quality
of research methods, information,
and reporting across the included articles, the author utilized a
screening process, adapted from Fink
(2005), that focused on identifying whether or not:

(a) the main outcome variables were defined;
(b) evidence was offered as to the appropriateness of any
psychometric instruments used in data
collection;
(c) data were collected prospectively;
(d) the study population was randomized;
Margaret Holm
4
(e) the final sample size was explained and/ or response rate
adequacy for interviews and surveys
was explained;
(f) the information offered was directly related to the
effectiveness of project-based learning;
(g) the researchers provided psychometric evidence for the
validity of the data sources used for
the main variables (i.e., achievement, self-efficacy, IT skills,
group process skills, etc.), and
(h) the data analysis process was explicit.
Points were awarded for each factor, with one point
representing partial or present-but-unclear
elements and two points representing elements that were well-
described and fully in place. No points
were given if an element was absent, or the process for
development or inclusion could not be
determined. In the case of studies re-published in English but
that were originally documented in other

languages, each study was reviewed as carefully as possible to
determine the researchers’ intended
meaning and minimize translation effects. A list of the articles
included and the scores for each are
provided in Table 1. Summary information for the articles is
provided in Table 2.
Table 1. Evaluative scores for articles identified in the
literature review.
Category Scores
Article a b c d e f g h Total
Alacapinar, 2008 2 2 1 0 1 - 2 - 8
Aral, Kandir, Ayhan & Yasir, 2010 2 2 2 1 1 - 2 2 12
Baumgartner & Zabin, 2008 2 2 2 1 1 - 2 2 12
Beneke & Ostrosky, 2008 2 1 2 0 1 1 2 2 11
Bickaki & Gursoy, 2010 2 2 2 1 1 - 2 2 12
Cheng, Lam & Chan, 2008 2 1 2 2 1 - 0 2 10
Chu, Tse & Chow, 2011 2 1 2 0 1 - 1 2 9
Duncan & Tseng, 2010 2 - 2 1 1 - 2 1 9
Faris, 2008 2 0 2 1 1 - 2 0 8
Gutelkin, 2005 2 0 2 1 1 - 2 1 9

Geier, et al., 2008 2 2 2 2 2 - 2 2 14
Grant & Branch, 2005 2 1 2 1 1 - 2 1 10
Hertzog, 2007 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 12
Kaldi, Fillipatou & Govaris, 2011 2 1 2 1 2 - 2 2 10
Mergendoller & Maxwell, 2006 2 2 2 2 1 - 2 2 13
Mioduser & Betzer, 2007 2 1 2 2 1 - 2 1 11
Tal, Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006 2 1 2 2 1 - 2 1 11
5
Table 2. Summary information for articles included in the
literature review.
Author(s) Location School
Setting
Focus of Study Findings
Alacapinar,
F. (2008)

Turkey Public, 5th Quasi-Experimental,
Qualitative: The effects of
project-based learning (PBL)
on cognitive and
psychomotor achievements
and affective domain.
Data collection: Video,
interviews, psychomotor
instrument.
Students in the experimental group showed gains
in achievement, and in cognitive and
psychomotor domains. Students enjoyed the
project work and noted improved self-
confidence, creativity, ability to plan and develop
ideas, problem-solving skills, and the benefits of
working in groups.
Aral, et al.
(2010)
Turkey Public, K Quasi-Experimental: The
effects of project-based
instruction on learning
outcomes. Data Collection:
BBCS-R, a measure of basic
concepts, for kindergarten
Students in the experimental group showed
slightly greater gains after weekly PBL
instruction over 12 weeks. Results on the BBCS-
R were not strongly indicative of difference,
however.
Baumgartne

r, et al.
(2008)
United
States
Charter,
9th
Qualitative: Examined
whether PBL would increase
students’ knowledge of
scientific investigation and
foster positive attitudes about
the content. Data Collection:
Pre/post self-reporting of
content knowledge, essays,
field journals.
Students reported increased content knowledge,
and understanding of the processes of scientific
investigation. Student comments reflected a
change toward more positive views by the
conclusion of the project.
Beneke &
Ostrosky
(2008)
United
States
Public,
Pre-K

Qualitative: Explored
preschool teacher perceptions
of PBL and the responses of
their students. Data
Collection: Pre/post
interviews
All teachers reported positive views of PBL.
Most felt that their students were successful,
noting improved interest and motivation, a shift
from functional to representational play, and
fewer disciplinary issues. The projects offered
ways for differently-abled students to serve as
experts in certain areas. Most teachers felt there
were benefits in bringing "real" objects into the
classroom for play and construction.
Bicaki &
Gursoy
(2010)
Turkey Private,
Pre-K
Quasi-Experimental: The
effect of PBL on specific
developmental areas in
preschool children. Data
Collection: Pre/post testing
on the Brigance Early
Development Inventory II
and retention test.
The children in the experimental group scored
higher on the posttest on the overall scores of the
Brigance II, more specifically in the areas of

receptive and productive language area A follow
up test indicated that these gains were long-term.
Margaret Holm
6
Cheng, et
al. (2008)
Hong
Kong
Public,
7th-9th
Quantitative: The effect of
achievement level and group
heterogeneity on group
process and self-efficacy in
PBL. Data Collection:
Questionnaire of group- and
self-efficacy.
The quality of group process was determined to
be a predictor of self-efficacy in PBL for both
high and low achieving students. Group makeup
did not appear to be a predictor for efficacy for
high or low achieving students.
Chu, et al.
(2011)

Hong
Kong
Public, 4th Mixed Methods: The effects
of combining a collaborative
teaching approach with
inquiry project-based
learning. Data Collection: Pre
and post intervention student
questionnaires and semi-
structured parent and student
interviews.
Collaborative and project-based approaches had
a positive effect on student development of
information literacy and information technology
(IT) skills. Students also reported that the IT
skills they learned had a discernible application.
Duncan &
Tseng
(2010)
United
States
Public, 9th Mixed Methods: To
document the development
and pilot implementation of a
PBL biology unit. Data
Collection: Video/audio,
student artifacts, observation,
curriculum-based measures.
Substantial general gains in student learning of

content concepts, although the depth and detail
of what was learned was less than researchers
had anticipated. When compared to achievement
results in a related study, PBL students showed
improved understanding overall.
Faris (2008) Qatar Private,
9th
Qualitative: To determine if
PBL affects student
perceptions of group work,
content and PBL itself. Data
collection: Questionnaire,
observations.
Students viewed group work more positively and
the subject matter more favorably after
participation in a project-based science unit.
Geier, et al.
(2008)
United
States
Public,
7th-8th
Quasi-Experimental: To
compare student science
achievement under PBL to
achievement under traditional
instruction. Data Collection:
Standardized assessments in

science.
PBL was shown to be more effective in
delivering content. Researchers point out that this
study was conducted within a wider school
reform, and that other factors may also have
contributed to the results.
Grant &
Branch
(2005)
United
States
Private,
8th
Qualitative (Case Study): To
explore how individual
differences and abilities
(multiple intelligences) were
employed in the completion
of projects. Data collection:
Interviews and project
artifacts.
PBL was found to offer flexibility in allowing for
the expression of individual differences and
preferences in project development. Some
multiple intelligence domains were not employed
in the completion of the projects. Students cited
practical reasons.

7
Gultekin
(2005)
Turkey Public, 5th Quasi-Experimental,
Qualitative: To determine the
effects of project-based
instruction on learning
outcomes for 5th grade social
studies students. Data
Collection: Achievement
testing, interviews.
Students in the project-based class showed
greater academic gains than their traditionally
taught peers. Gains were also noted in higher
order thinking and research skills. Students
reported positive views of project-based learning,
the content, and their efforts in completing the
work.
Hertzog
(2007)
United
States
Public, 1st Qualitative: To document

how a project-based approach
was implemented in two first
grade classrooms and to
identify benefits and barriers.
Data Collection: Interview
and observational data.
Teachers had difficulty implementing the project
approach because of their beliefs regarding
teaching and children, and felt ambivalent about
devoting time to projects instead of other types
of instruction. District and school policies and
curriculum also acted as constraining factors.
Both teachers made a shift toward more student-
centered activities, even when they were not
engaged in formal project based units. Both
teachers noted greater engagement when students
were doing projects.
Mergendoll
er &
Maxwell
(2006)
United
States
Public,
12th
Qualitative: To compare the
relative effectiveness of
traditional and project-based
instruction in 12th grade
social studies. Data

Collection: Quick Word Test-
Level 1, Interest survey on
Economics, survey on group
work, measure of problem
solving ability, curriculum-
based measure on the content.
Quantitative analysis of student achievement
yielded modestly higher achievement in the PBL
group. Students who scored in the mid to low
tertiles on the Quick Word Test showed the
greatest gains in content learning; these gains
were not particularly significant on the group
scale, but at the student level, translated to about
one-half grade difference, suggesting potential
use of PBL as a means of heightening
achievement in students who struggle with
traditional methods. PBL was also found to
foster relatively higher interest in the subject
matter.
Mioduser &
Betzer
(2007)
Israel Public,
11th-12th
Quasi-Experimental: To
determine the effect of PBL
on high achieving students'
academic performance, skills
acquisition and attitudes
toward technology, in
comparison to students in

technologically-focused
schools. Data Collection:
Pre/post national exam on
content, survey, observations,
rating scale.
Students in the experimental groups, and girls in
particular, showed higher gains in academic
content knowledge when compared to the
traditionally taught students. Students in the PBL
group also showed greater improvement in their
attitudes toward technology. The researchers
conclude that PBL has the potential to increase
academic attainment and to foster greater student
engagement in the subject matter.
Margaret Holm
8
Tal,
Krajcik, &
Blumenfeld
(2006)
United
States
Public,
7th-8th
Qualitative: To document
instances of good teaching in

PBL. (Student outcomes were
reported as part of this study).
Data Collection: Interviews,
observations, student
achievement data on course
content.
PBL yielded greater student performance on
posttests when compared to other classrooms
taught by less skilled teachers, suggesting that
teacher skill is an important factor in the success
of project-based instruction, contributing to
classroom management, planning, positive
interactions, high expectations, open-ended and
student centered questioning. Suitable curriculum
materials and solid teacher content knowledge
are also keys in the success of PBL.
Discussion
Examination of the included studies yielded a number of areas
of interest. These areas include
comparisons to traditional lecture-based instruction, effect on
student attitudes and self-perception,
developmental effects, effects on diverse learners, teacher
attributes, and the overall quality of the
identified research studies.
Overall Quality of the Research
Given the constructivist theoretical underpinnings of project-
based instruction, it is perhaps not surpri-
sing that only a third of the identified studies offered
comparative data as a major component
(Alacapinar, 2008; Aral, Kandir, Ayhar, Yasar, 2010; Bickaki &
Gursoy, 2010; Fillipatou & Govaris,
2011; Geier, et al., 2008), and a handful of other studies some

lesser degree of comparative analysis
(Faris, 2008; Krajcik, Neill & Reiser, 2007; Mergendoller &
Maxwell, 2006; Tal & Krajcik, 2006). The
remaining studies, comprising a majority of those identified,
provided information that was more
descriptive and qualitative in nature. It is interesting to note
that most of the quantitative, comparative,
studies originated outside the United States (Alacapinar, 2008;
Aral, Kandir, Ayhan, Yasar, 2010; Bicaki
& Gursoy, 2010; Faris, 2008; Gultekin, 2005; Kaldi, Fillipatou
& Govaris, 2011), raising the possibility
that the predominance of qualitative studies is a result of this
review’s self-restriction to studies
published in English. The multi-national nature of this grouping
of studies posed additional challenges
due to ambiguous translations, and internal reference to
citations that were not available in English, for
clarification.
Project-Based Learning and Traditional Lecture-Based
Instruction
Although descriptive studies of project-based learning provide
important information on participant
perspective and experience, studies that compare project-based
learning to traditional instruction offer
factual insight into the relative value of project-based
instruction as a means of reaching student mastery
of curricular content and process skills. Overall, comparative
studies identified for this review found
project-based learning to be an effective means of teaching both
content information and related skills.
Students in project-based classrooms exhibited greater gains in
content knowledge than their
traditionally taught peers (Baumgartner & Zabin, 2008; Duncan
& Tseng, 2010; Geier, et al., 2008;
Gultekin, 2005; Kaldi, Fillipatou & Govaris, 2011;

Mergendoller & Maxwell, 2006; Mioduser & Betzer,
2007; Tal, Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006). Gains were also higher
in the areas of process and group skill
development and information literacy skills when compared to
lecture-based classrooms (Baumgartner
& Zabin, 2008; Cheng, Lam & Chan, 2008; Chu, Tse & Chow,
2011; Kaldi, Fillipatou & Diamanto,
2011; Mergendoller & Maxwell, 2006; Mioduser & Betzer,
2007).
9
Effects on Student Attitudes and Self Perception
Many of the qualitative studies in this review sought to
illuminate student reactions to participation in
project-based instruction, and to create a window to some of the
less-tangible effects of learning through
projects. In all studies where student attitude was examined,
project-based learning was perceived
positively by participants, and described as fostering greater
engagement with the subject matter.
Students reported enjoying the active, hands-on approach to
content, as well as improved perceptions of
the subject matter. (Barron, et al., 1998; Baumgartner & Zabin,
2008; Beneke & Ostrosky, 2008;
Blumenfeld, et al., 1991; Chu, Tse, & Chow, 2011; Faris, 2008;
Hertzog, 2007; Hmelo-Silver, Duncan,
& Chinn, 2007).
Developmental Effects

Two studies focused upon the comparative effects of project-
based instruction versus traditional
instruction on early concept development in preschool children
(Aral, Kandir, Ayhan & Yasir, 2010;
Bicacki & Gursoy, 2010). While the sample sizes for each study
were relatively small, in both cases,
project-based instruction was found to result in greater
developmental growth in language and concept
development than traditional instruction.
Effects on Varied Learners
Several studies looked at the effects of project-based learning
on categories of learners or learner
characteristics that are associated with school failure in
traditional classroom situations. Beneke and
Ostrosky (2008) examined teacher perceptions of how project-
based instruction affected diverse learners
in seven preschool classrooms. Teachers reported that the real-
world focus of the projects allowed
students who did not generally shine in academic discussions to
share their knowledge about subject-
matter that was familiar and accessible. Teachers in this study
also reported a reduced need for
disciplinary actions during project-based study, citing increased
student engagement as the chief reason.
Additionally, several studies indicated that the beneficial
academic effects of project-based instruction
were most pronounced for middle- to low-achieving students
(Mergendoller & Maxwell, 2006; Tal,
Krajcik and Blumenfeld, 2006).
Teacher and Setting Attributes
A number of researchers focused on identifying the specific
teacher skills, expectations, and other
attributes that might be contributing to the success of project-
based instruction. Duncan and Tseng

(2010) found that good classroom management skills, solid
content knowledge, the ability to set clear
learning goals, the ability to anticipate difficulties, willingness
to support students on an as-needed basis,
an understanding of individual differences, and a positive and
encouraging approach to interactions with
students were all important. Consisting predominantly of skills
already known to enhance student
achievement regardless of educational setting or specific
teaching methodology, this list raises the
possibility that much of the success in project-based learning is
not due to the core values or practices
unique to student-centered instruction, but rather that teachers
simultaneously implement a variety of
evidence-based practices – in other words, that good teaching
transcends methodology.
The fact that project-based instruction requires multiple and
fundamental shifts in classroom
practices is highlighted by teachers’ reactions to it. Across a
number of studies, teachers expressed
reservations about putting project-based instruction into place
because of the changes it required in the
way they taught, the materials and resources they offered, and
in the way they prepared and planned for
instruction. Both Beneke & Ostrosky (2008) and Hertzog (2007)
cited teacher resistance as a limiting
factor in student success and overall effectiveness of project-
based instruction; similarly, Mergendoller
and Maxwell (2006) found that teacher expectations regarding
the potential of project work and teacher
Margaret Holm

10
views of student abilities and limitations were directly
connected to student learning outcomes, and
concluded that not all teachers might be well-suited to project-
based instruction. Hertzog (2007)
recommended that professional development occur over an
extended period with follow-up and
mentoring to facilitate success for both teachers and students.
While it is tempting to blame teachers who are reluctant to
adopt project-based instruction, it is
important to note that such teachers may be reacting to genuine
factors in their schools or setting that
can make adoption of new teaching methodologies genuinely
difficult. In an educational system that
seems chronically short of personnel and funds, little is known
about the cost of pursuing a project-
based approach in terms of time, resources, balance with other
school and system demands, teacher
workload, and the interaction between project-based instruction
and other requirements, such as teaching
to standardized tests, that are placed on educators. As in many
areas of educational achievement,
systems variables have their own effects. Ravitz (2007)
surveyed teachers from a variety of high schools
that were using project-based approaches. Not surprisingly,
achievement was higher in schools where
the systems and policies aligned with project-based ideals were
higher. The optimal application of
project-based instruction requires change not only in the
classroom, but at school and system levels to
optimize effectiveness (Barron, et al., 1998; Blumenfeld, et al.,
1991; Duncan and Tseng, 2010; Geier, et
al., 2008; Ravitz, 2007).

It is notable that nearly all the project-based instruction in a
single content area reported in these
studies occurred in the content areas of social studies or
science. Given that the first application of
problem-based instruction as a classroom teaching tool
originated in the medical sciences (Knoll, 1997),
the continuing connection with science is not surprising. In
regard to social studies, one can speculate
that it offers a flexibility to choose topics and themes which are
easily adapted for project work, as
opposed to subject areas that are more systematically introduced
and might require a somewhat different
approach in order to develop successful project-based activities.
Conclusion
Overall, studies conducted over the last ten years confirm
earlier, generally positive findings (Thomas,
2000; Barron, et al., 1998) regarding the efficacy of project-
based instruction. Project-based instruction
in prekindergarten through 12th grade has yielded improved
content learning, higher levels of
engagement and more positive perceptions of the subject matter.
With such a clear research base in
support of its effectiveness, project-based methods appear to
offer the possibility of success both overall
and to a broader range of students than traditional lecture-based
instruction.
Research clearly indicates that project-based learning is
beneficial, with positive outcomes
including increases in level of student engagement, heightened
interest in content, more robust
development of problem-solving strategies, and greater depth of
learning and transfer of skills to new
situations (Hmelo-Silver, 2007; Thomas, 2000; Barron, et al.,
1998). With renewed emphasis being

placed on the basics of education, and increasing pressure to
streamline instruction and teach to specific
standards, the idea that the most effective instruction for these
goals is also one that fosters depth of
learning and engages students on a personal level is quite
appealing.
In order to retain the beneficial aspects of project-based
instruction and avoid the confusion that
occurred in the mid 20th century when increasing numbers of
theorists promoted related methodologies,
but failed to prescribe adequate practical information to support
successful long-term practice (e.g.,
Mayer in 2008), research that seeks to clearly distinguish
between effective and ineffective elements of
project-based instruction should continue. Areas in particular
need of further exploration include how
11
and when project-based instruction is most appropriate, how
school structures and policies might be
adjusted to best support teachers and learners, and how to
maintain content integrity and meet federal
and state learning standards while incorporating the authenticity
of real-world issues and ideas.
Project-based methodology offers highly desirable benefits, yet
implementation poses some
practical difficulties within the current context of American

classrooms. What is needed is a realistic
approach that encourages teachers to incorporate successful,
proven elements of project-based learning
into classroom practice. Researchers should continue to refine
understanding and respond to the
practical challenges of this teaching method.
Acknowledgement
Dr. Naomi Schoenfeld of Rivier College provided editing advice
and technical assistance in preparing
the tables for publication. Comments or inquiries about this
article can be made via email to
[email protected]
References
References marked with an asterisk are those included in the
research literature review.
*Alacapınar, F. (2008). Effectiveness of project-based learning.
Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 32,
17-35.
*Aral, N., Kandir, A., Ayhan, A. B., & Yaşar, M. C. (2010).
The influence of project-based curricula on six-year-
old preschoolersʼ conceptual development. Social Behavior and
Personality: An International Journal,
38(8), 1073-1079. doi:10.2224/sbp.2010.38.8.1073.
Barron, B., Schwartz, D., Vye, N., Moore, A., Petrosino, A.
Zech, L., Bransford, J., and the Cognition and
Technology Group at Vanderbilt University, (1998). Doing with
understanding: Lessons from research on
problem-and project-based learning. The Journal of the
Learning Sciences, 7(3&4), 271-311.
*Baumgartner, E., & Zabin, C. (2008). A case study of project-

based instruction in the ninth grade: a semester-
long study of intertidal biodiversity. Environmental Education
Research, 14(2), 97-114. doi:
10.1080/13504620801951640.
Berends, H., Boersma, K. and Weggeman, M. (2003). The
structuration of organizational learning. Human
Relations, 56:9 1035-1056.
*Beneke, S., & Ostrosky, M. M. (2008). Teachers’ views of the
efficacy of incorporating the project approach
into classroom practice with diverse learners. Young Children,
(1), 1-9.
*Bicaki, M., Gursoy, F. (2010). A study on the effectiveness of
project-based education. International Journal of
Academic Research, 2(5), 379-388.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J. S.,
Gudzial, M., & Palinscar, A. (1991). Motivating
project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the
learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3&4),
269-398.
Borgatta, C.G. & Corsini, R.J. (1964) Quick Word Test. New
York: Harcourt, Brace and World.
Bransford, J. Ed.(2000) How People Learn: Brain, Mind
Experience and School. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy of the Sciences.
Brigance Early Development Inventory-II. (2010). North
Billerica, MA: Curriculum Associates.
Bruner, J.S. (1961) The art of discovery. Harvard Educational
Review, 31, 21-32.
Chang, L.-C., & Lee, G. C. (2010). A team-teaching model for
practicing project-based learning in high school:

Collaboration between computer and subject teachers.
Computers & Education, 55(3), 961-969. doi:
10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.007.
Margaret Holm
12
Cheng, R. W.-yi, Lam, S.-fong, & Chan, J. C.-yan. (2008).
When high achievers and low achievers work in the
same group: the roles of group heterogeneity and processes in
project-based learning. The British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 78(Pt 2), 205-221. doi:
10.1348/000709907X218160.
Chu, S.K.W. & Tse, S.K. & Chow, K. (2011). Using
collaborative teaching and inquiry project-based learning to
help primary students develop information literacy and
information skills. Library and Information Science
Research, 33, 132-143.
David, J. (2008). What the research says about project-based
learning. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 81-83.
Duncan, R. & Tseng, K. A. (2010). Designing Project-based
instruction to foster generative and mechanistic
understandings in genetics. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 45(8), 922-939.
*Faris, A. (2008). The impact of project-based learning on the
students’ attitudes towards science among nine
graders in Hamza independent school. Analysis, 1-8.
Farkas, A. (2010). Projectpedagogy - Interpretations and

background principles. Education, 7(4), 30-37.
Fink, A. (2005). Conducting Research Literature Reviews From
Internet to Paper. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
*Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S.,
Fishman, B., Soloway, E., et al. (2008). Standardized
test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science
curricula in the context of urban reform. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 922-939. doi:
10.1002/tea.20248.
*Grant, M. M., & Branch, R. M. (2005). Project-based learning
in a middle school: Tracing abilities through the
artifacts of learning. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 65-99.
*Gultekin, M. (2005). The effect of project based learning on
learning outcomes in the 5th grade social studies
course in primary education. Educational Sciences, Theory and
Practice, 5(November), 548-557.
*Hertzog, B. (2007). Transporting pedagogy: Implementing the
project approach in two first-grade classrooms.
Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(4), 530-564.
Heyl, A. (2008). Fostering engagement for students from low-
socioeconomic status backgrounds using project-
based mathematics. Review Literature and Arts of the Americas,
(May), 1-34.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007).
Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and
inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark
(2006). Response, 42(2), 99-107.

*Kaldi, S., Filippatou, D., Govaris, C. (2011). Project based
learning in primary schools: effects on learning and
attitudes. Education, 39(1), 35-47.
Kilpatrick, W.H. (1918). The project method. Teacher’s College
Record, 19, 319-335.
Kirschner, P. A., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance
during instruction does not work: An analysis of
the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based,
experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Learning,
41(2), 75-86.
Knoll, M. (1997). The Project Method: Its Vocational Education
Origin and International Development. Journal
of Industrial Teacher Education, 34(3), 59-80.
*Krajcik, J., Neill, K. L. M. C., & Reiser, B. J. (2007).
Learning-goals-driven design model: Developing
curriculum materials that align with national standards and
incorporate project-based pedagogy. Science. doi:
10.1002/sce.
Lam, Shui-Fong; Cheng, Rebecca Wing-Yi; Choy, H. (2010).
School support and teacher motivation to
implement project-based learning. Learning and Instruction, 20,
487-497.
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against
pure discovery learning? The case for guided
methods of instruction. The American Psychologist, 59(1), 14-9.
doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14.
Mergendoller, J.R. (2006) Project Based Learning Handbook,
2nd edition. Novato, CA: Buck Institute for

Education.
*Mergendoller, J. R., & Maxwell, N. L. (2006). The
effectiveness of problem-based instruction: A Comparative
study of instructional methods and student characteristics. The
Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based
Learning, 1(2), 49-69.
Meyer, D., Spencer, C., Turner, J. C. (1997). Challenge in a
mathematics classroom: Students’ motivation and
strategies in project-based learning. The Elementary School
Journal, 97(5), 501-521.
13
*Mioduser, D., & Betzer, N. (2007). The contribution of
Project-based-learning to high-achievers’ acquisition of
technological knowledge and skills. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education, 18(1), 59-
77. doi: 10.1007/s10798-006-9010-4.
Mitchell, S., Foulger, T. S., Wetzel, K., & Rathkey, C. (2008).
The negotiated project approach: Project-based
learning without leaving the standards behind. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 36(4), 339-346. doi:
10.1007/s10643-008-0295-7.
Moylan, A. (2008). Learning by project: Developing essential
21st century skills using student team projects.
International Journal, 15(9).

Papert, S. (1980) Mindstorms: Children, computers, and
powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of
the child. New York: Oxford University Press.
Prince, M., & Felder, R. (2007). The many faces of inductive
teaching and learning. Journal of College Science
Teaching. March/April, 14-20.
*Ravitz, J. (2008). New tech high schools: Results of the
National Survey of Project Based Learning and High
School Reform. Conducted by the Buck Institute for Education.
Online
http://www.newtechnetwork.org/sites/default/files/news/new_te
ch_bie_survey_results8-08.pdf, 1-4.
Ravitz, J. (2010). Beyond changing culture in small schools:
Reform model and changing instruction with project
based learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 85, 290-312. doi:
10.1080/0161956X.2010.491432.
Scarbrough H , Bresnen, M., Edelman, L., Laurent, S., Newell
S. and Swan, J. A. The processes of project-based
learning: An exploratory study. Management Learning, 35
(2004). 491-506.
*Tal. T. & Krajcik, J. & Blumenfeld, P. (2006). Urban schoolsʼ
teachers enacting project-based science. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 43(7), 722-745.
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based
learning. Online. Retrieved June 24, 2011, from
http://www.bobpearlman.org/BestPractices/PBL_Research.pdf.
Tsang, E. (2007). Organizational learning and the learning

organization: A dichotomy between descriptive and
prescriptive research. Human Relations, 50, 73-89.
____________________________
§ MARGARET HOLM, M.A., M.Ed., is a doctoral student at
Rivier College. She is Curriculum Coordinator for Language
Arts and Social Studies, K-8 for the Bedford, NH School
District. Her current research interests include project-based
and
cooperative learning, literacy development and writing
instruction. She lives in Londonderry, NH, with her very
supportive
husband and is mother to three exceptional daughters. She
began her educational journey at California State University,
Los Angeles, but has been a New Hampshire resident since
1984. In addition to her interest in all things educational,
Maggie is an avid cook, collector of children’s picture books,
gardener and potter.
http://www.newtechnetwork.org/sites/default/files/news/new_te
ch_bie_survey_results8-08.pdf�
http://www.bobpearlman.org/BestPractices/PBL_Research.pdf�
Running head: INQUIRY-BASED PROJECT PLAN &
RATIONALE 1
INQUIRY-BASED PROJECT PLAN & RATIONALE 16

Inquiry-Based Project Plan & Rationale
Inquiry-Based Project Plan & Rationale
1. Kindergarten.
2. Arctic Animals.
3. My class of students will consist of kindergarteners.
Kindergartens have a general awareness of various types of
animals. However, they have limited knowledge on why certain
animals live in specific areas while others live in completely
different regions. They might have visited the normal zoos that
have animals that live in tropical areas but do not understand
why they do not have arctic animals that they might have seen
on television, for instance, polar bears and arctic foxes. They do
not understand how such animals survive in very cold areas
characterized by snow. Also, they do not understand how
national parks are operated and the way security is afforded to
the animals that live in them. Therefore, I intend to teach them
about how national parks operate, how the animals survive in
the cold, and the diverse personnel that are responsible for the
management of a national park. From penguins, to harp seals, to
arctic foxes, and polar bears. I believe that teaching my students
about the various animals that populate the arctic or polar areas
can extend each if their learning into multiple and diverse
content areas. Although lessons, which focus on arctic animals,
might appear as only falling under the discipline of science,
such forms of nature based activities might also entail creative
movement, art, and literacy. Rather than only dealing with only
one content realm, I will utilize the arctic animals into study
areas that encourage creative and critical thought.
4. While observing my students, I noticed that during their play
time, they sometimes mimic animals that they observe in
television or zoos. However, their knowledge on the various
types of animals with regards to climate is inhibited by their
experience and age. Especially for the arctic animals, they have

limited knowledge on why they live in polar areas and how they
survive the cold. As for national parks, they also have limited
knowledge on their mode of operation. With this regard, I will
commence my project plan by organizing a trip for the students
to Wapusk National Park.
When we get to the national park, the students will learn that
there are various animals live in this national park. We will then
explore these animals including penguins, harp seals, arctic
foxes, and polar bears. This visit will be to offer the children a
real life experience on how these animals live in the cold
region. At the park, they will be curious about the various
people that work at the national park. They will first meet the
tour guide in his/ her office. I will explain to them that this is
the individual who is responsible for guiding us through the
park and telling us about the diverse animals that we will see in
the park, in addition to the historical data about the park. The
children may ask me about how the tour guide gathers all this
information. This will make us visit the historians' office. The
students will learn the historians' work that is responsible for
compiling reports on the history of the park. Also, the
zoologist, who are responsible for providing information about
the diverse types of animals. As we tour the park, the children
will ask me about what would happen in case we got attacked by
some of the wild animals. I will then take them to the park
rangers’ office so that they can gain valuable insight of how
park rangers help people. Also, I will inform the students that
these rangers are not only responsible for the protection of the
visitors to the park against any harm, but also for ensuring that
the animals are protected against poachers. I will go further
ahead and given them the meaning of poachers as people who
kill the animals so as to sell part of their bodies. I will ensure
that they are aware this is an illegal act that lands people in jail.
When they see the water bodies in the park, they may ask me if
there are life guards similar to what they are used to in
swimming pools. I will take them to the lifeguards' office to
know their job. So, the lifeguards will explain that their mission

is nobody drowns in the lakes or gets attacked by any wild
animals in the area.
The children will also be carious and interested to know how
these arctic animals survive the cold without the need for any
source of warmth such as the way humans rely on warm
clothing or heaters in their homes. After we return to school
from the national park, I will then give them a hand on lesson as
to how they survive. Rather than just talk and give them a
theoretical explanation, I will incorporate the use of a blubber
glove. This will be used to teach them about the animals that
utilize blubber for the purpose of keeping warm. I will use an
ice experiment so as to show them the manner in which blubber
works. I will offer them plastic gloves so as to protect their
hands, then instruct them to place their gloved hands into bags
filled with shortening. In this case, the shortening will be a
representation of the blubber. Their other hands will then be
placed into plain and unfilled bags. Thereafter each of them will
submerge their hands into a prepared ice bath for the purpose of
comparing which of their hands is warmer as compared to the
other. This exercise will be essential in aiding them understand
the reason why most arctic animals have an added layer of fat in
their bodies and how it offers them protection from the cold.
After this experiment, children would ask me about how people
survived in the cold weather in the past. This question will lead
me to create a trip to a museum. So, children will learn how
people can protect themselves from the cold by seeing their
shelter and the heater machine in the past.
The students might then be interested in drawing what they saw
during art class. For this, I will incorporate the use of arctic art
in the classroom. I will hang diverse pictures of the arctic
animals on the classroom wall and ask the students to identify
each of them. Then the students will be required to draw their
own versions and any other things that they remembered about
the trips. They will have to use markers or crayons onto
construction paper. During play time, the students might feel
like modeling the things that they saw on the trip to the national

park. I will help the children construct small models of the
arctic animals they saw in the park, in addition to other things
such as the tour guides, lifeguards, and park rangers. I will
complete the craft by asking them to add habitat components,
and help them to form shoe-box dioramas. Each student can be
invited to paint the desired polar scenes on the insides of shoe
box bottoms through the use of blue and white temperas. After
the paint dries out, the students will be allowed to add their
sculptures on to the three-dimension project.
The children might ask me to read to them stories about arctic
animals. Therefore, I will incorporate literacy learning, and I
will let them choose relevant picture books, which feature arctic
animals. I will explore polar bears with the students through the
use of Where Do Polar Bears Live by Sarah Thompson or
alternatively, I will aid them in discovering different creatures
through the use of Animal Survivors of the Arctic by Somerville
Barbara. The vocabulary of the students during literacy learning
can be enhanced through the creation of a word wall based on
the various books that will be used or from the class discussions
that will feature the arctic animals explored. During recreation
time, the students might feel like re-enacting what they saw at
the park. Based on their interest, acting can be incorporated into
learning in which the students will have to get creative with
respect to the arctic animals seen and their behaviors. After the
visit to the national park and the discussions and activities
carried out in class, I will have the students act or behave
similarly to the way the arctic animals do. For instance,
students can dash around swiftly similarly to the arctic fox or
simply get down on all fours and then lumber around like the
way the polar bear does. Moreover, the children can incorporate
the arctic animal noises that they remember or simply act out
scenes that are realistic and feature the polar animals gently
frolicking in the snow. To make it more interesting, I will invite
the parents to see their children while they mimic the arctic
animals and the national park employees. Also, the parents will
get an opportunity to see their children's drawing and the three-

dimensional objects.
5. National Park Components
· Wildlife habitat
· Lakes and springs
· Tour guide's office
· The historians' office
· The park rangers’ office
· Lifeguards' office
· Food court.
Animals
· Penguins
· Polar bears
· Arctic foxes
· Harp seals
· Peregrine falcons
· Snow geese
National Park Employees
· Tour guides
· Lifeguards
· Park rangers
· Historians
· Zoologists
6.
1) Papers: these will be utilized for drawing purposes so that
the students can illustrate what they saw of the arctic animals at
the national park.
2) Markers and crayons: these will be utilized to color and
emphasize the features of the drawings.
3) Books about arctic animals: these will be utilized in the
classroom to get more in-depth information about the arctic
animals.
4) Pictures: there will be various pictures of the arctic animals
and other features seen at the national park to be used in the
classroom to jog the students’ memories.
5) Plastic gloves, shortening, and bucket of ice: these will be

utilized for the experiment of how blubber is used by animals in
the arctic to protect themselves against the cold.
6) Shoe-box dioramas and blue and white temperas: these will
be used for the creation of the three dimensional project.
7) Animal costumes: these will be worn by the students when
they are mimicking the arctic animals seen at the national park.
8) Props: these will be sued by the students to emphasize the
acting plays when mimicking the arctic animals seen at the
national parks.
9) Computers: these can be used by the children to search for
some of the answers to their queries with the help of the
teacher.
10) National park employees’ costumes: these will be used by
the children to mimic the tour guides, lifeguards, and park
rangers.
7.
1) Field trip to Wapusk National Park: the students will go to
the national park and explore the arctic animals and other
diverse aspects of the park.
Knowledge: The students will learn about the habitat of the
national park including the animals, employees, and other
aspects such as lakes and trees.
Skill: The students will get the opportunity to enhance their
communication skills since they will be asking questions to the
teacher and the tour guide.
Emotion: The students will enjoy their visit to the national park
and get a sense of fulfillment from seeing all the arctic animals
and other things on show.
2) Create a play and act out the diverse aspects of the national
park: the children will mimic both the arctic animals and the
employees of the park so as to re-animate what they saw.
Knowledge: The students will be able to retain most of the
information that they learnt from visiting the park in a fun way.
Skill: The children will gain important motor skills through the
use of the given costumes and props.
Emotion: The children will get excited as they act out and

mimic the arctic animals
3) Draw pictures of the arctic animals and others aspects of the
national park: the students will illustrate whatever they saw on
paper by using markers and crayons.
Knowledge: The students will be able to illustrate what is in
their mind onto paper and in doing so aid in retaining the learnt
information.
Skill: The students will gain fine motor skills from the
utilization of markers and crayons.
Emotion: The students will thoroughly enjoy the exercise of
drawing on paper without any major restrictions.
4) Carry out an experiment: the students will perform a
procedure to find out how the arctic animals protect themselves
from the cold.
Knowledge: The students will gain pertinent information on
how animals in the Polar Regions are able to withstand and
survive the cold.
Skill: The students will gain valuable hands on experience and
learn how to experiment to test out problems.
Emotion: The students will be excited as they will be learning
pertinent knowledge practically rather than theoretically.
5) Carry out a literacy learning session: in addition to learning
about science aspects, the children will also use the opportunity
to enhance their vocabulary.
Knowledge: The students will learn more aspects of the survival
of the animals in arctic regions, in addition to what they already
saw at the park.
Skill: The children will learn communication skills by asking
questions, in addition to learning new words.
Emotion: The children will be interested in gaining more
information to the one that they already have.
6) Crafting of three dimensional objects: the students will get
an opportunity to create models of the arctic animals and
employees seen at the park.
Knowledge: The children will get a practical experience of
crafting the aspects that they saw at the park, which might aid

in the retaining of information.
Skill: The children will gain fine motor skills as the create
models of the aspects seen at the park.
Emotion: The children will be very excited to create models on
their own with minimal supervision.
8.
1) Where Do Polar Bears Live by Sarah Thompson. I will use
this book to help the children understand how polar bears live in
the arctic areas.
2) Arctic Tundra Habitats by Michael H. Forman. This book
offers a realistic insight on the living conditions of the polar or
arctic areas. I will divide this book into some parts. Then, I
will let each student to read one part loudly to their friends.
3) Animal Survivors of the Arctic by Somerville Barbara. I will
read this book out loud to the children so that they can know
about the diverse animals that live in the cold snowy areas.
4) Amazing Arctic Animals by Jackie Glassman. This is another
book that will offer more insight on the types of inhabitants of
the polar areas. I will leave this book in the library section. So,
children can use it when they want to read.
5) Arctic Tundra by Donald M. Silver. This book will give an
emphasis on the living conditions of the polar animals. Firstly, I
will let the students see just the illustration of the book.
Secondly, we will figure out the name of the natural scenes and
the animals without seeing the text. Finally, I will read the story
to them.
9.
· A museum: To learn about how people in the past survived in
the cold.
· The historians' office: To see historians' resources and tools
that they use them to compile reports on the history of the park.
· The park rangers' office: To gain valuable insight about their
job.
10. Habit goal: Children will get more in the habit of asking
questions about things that they do not understand.

First thank you for your work I appreciate it but you misunderstood.docx

First thank you for your work I appreciate it but you misunderstood.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to First thank you for your work I appreciate it but you misunderstood.docx

Similar to First thank you for your work I appreciate it but you misunderstood.docx (16)

More from AKHIL969626

More from AKHIL969626 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

First thank you for your work I appreciate it but you misunderstood.docx