EFFECTIVE PROJECT-BASED LEARNING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

STRATEGIES FOR INCREASING STUDENT SUCCESS AND BUILDING TEACHER

CAPACITY IN 21ST CENTURY SKILLS

A Dissertation

Presented to the

Faculty of the Graduate School

At Evangel University

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Education

By

Sally J. Ricker

Dr. Matt Stringer, Dissertation Chair

 2

Dissertation Committee Approval

The undersigned, appointed by Ed.D. Program Coordinator, have examined the dissertation

entitled:

EFFECTIVE PROJECT-BASED LEARNING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

STRATEGIES FOR INCREASING STUDENT SUCCESS AND BUILDIN G

TEACHER CAPACITY IN 21ST CENTURY SKILLS

Presented by Sally Jane Ricker,

a candidate for the degree of Doctor of Education,

and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance.

____________________________

Professor Dr. Matt Stringer

____________________________

Dr. Amanda Adams

____________________________

Dr. Hope Gallamore

 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Foremost, I thank God for the privilege of living in a country where I am free to pursue my

dreams. His hand has been on this dissertation and I pray that he will continue to bless this work.

Thanks to my husband for embracing project-based learning with me. Even with glazed

eyes, you never wavered in your support. Thank you to my children who have loved me through

this journey.

Thanks to my mom for being my biggest cheerleader and to my brother who helped with

many edits along the way.

Thank you to my advisor, Dr. Stringer, for being patient with me and guiding me in the right

direction. Thanks to my committee members Dr. Adams and Dr. Gallamore. You both made me a

better writer and learner.

 4

Abstract

The new 21st century global economy favors highly skilled, highly educated workers.

School districts across the country are looking for ways to teach and assess competencies as

outlined in the 21st century framework (Wagner, 2014). Forward thinking school districts are

choosing to implement the effective instructional approach of project-based learning (PBL) to

address the needs for U.S. students to be globally competitive. Changing teacher-centered

classrooms to students driving their own education has translated into a major overhaul in how

professional development is administered (Almulla, 2020). The purpose of this study is to explore

best practice in teacher training for implementation and ongoing support for project-based learning

instruction and 21st century competencies in three Midwest CAPS school districts. Constructivist

learning theory and experiential learning theory were used to frame the study. Research questions

were created to gather perceptions based on best practice of PBL professional development to

support instructional methods and 21st century skills and its role in increasing student achievement.

The research questions focused on gathering perceptual data on supporting and implementing PBL,

student achievement, and barriers to effective PBL teacher training. This qualitative study used

surveys and focus-group interviews to gather perceptions of CAPS instructors. Data and discussion

of the findings would benefit districts seeking to develop or strengthen CAPS instructors’

professional development to support student learning. Participants uncovered that CAPS programs

were either lacking in PBL teacher training or the professional development being offered was

inadequate. Participants expressed frustration and confusion in their PBL teacher training and

preferred a mentor over a coach for instructional support.

 5

Table of Contents

CHAPTER1: INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study .................................................................................................................9

Design of Study..............................................................................................................................16

Problem Statement .........................................................................................................................16

Conceptual Underpinnings of the Study ........................................................................................17

Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................................19

Research Questions ........................................................................................................................19

Limitations ...................................................................................................................................20

Assumptions.................................................................................................................................20

Definition of Terms......................................................................................................................21

Significance of Study...................................................................................................................23

Summary ......................................................................................................................................23

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction.................................................................................................................................25

21st Century Skills ......................................................................................................................27

Constructivist Theory..................................................................................................................30

Experiential Learning Theory .....................................................................................................33

Project-Based Learning...............................................................................................................36

Challenges with PBL ..................................................................................................................39

Professional Development ..........................................................................................................40

Instructional Coaching ................................................................................................................42

 6

Instructional Coaching and Student Achievement.....................................................................…46

Summary .....................................................................................................................................47

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Introduction.................................................................................................................................48

Research Questions .....................................................................................................................49

Design for the Study ...................................................................................................................49

Participants..................................................................................................................................50

Focus Group Interview Participants.......................................................................................51

Design for Acquisition of Data ....................................................................................................52

Evidence of Sources.....................................................................................................................53

Instrumentation and Protocols .....................................................................................................54

PBL Teacher Training Survey .....................................................................................................54

Open-ended Interviews ..........................................................................................................54

Data Analysis ...............................................................................................................................55

Research Question 1...............................................................................................................56

Research Question 2...............................................................................................................56

Research Question 3...............................................................................................................56

Summary .....................................................................................................................................57

CHAPTER 4: PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS

Introduction.................................................................................................................................58

Data Collection ..........................................................................................................................59

Setting .....................................................................................................................................60

Participants............................................................................................................................. 61
 7

Protocol ................................................................................................................................. 61

Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 62

Research Questions .................................................................................................................... 70

Research Question 1.............................................................................................................. 71

Research Question 2.............................................................................................................. 73

Research Question 3.............................................................................................................. 77

Summary .................................................................................................................................... 81

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION

Introduction................................................................................................................................... 83

Design and Procedures.................................................................................................................. 84

Summary of Findings................................................................................................................. 85

Discussion of Major Themes ..................................................................................................... 87

Implications for Practice .......................................................................................................... 103

Limitations ............................................................................................................................... 109

Recommendations for Future Research .............................................................................. 109

Summary ................................................................................................................................. 111

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................113

APPENDIX A ..............................................................................................................................128

PBL Professional Development Administration Permission Request-Email Script

APPENDIX B ............................................................................................................................. 129

PBL Teacher Training Research Study Participant Recruitment Email Script

APPENDIX C ............................................................................................................................. 130

PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online Survey

 8

APPENDIX D ............................................................................................................................. 133

Email to set up interviews

APPENDIX E ............................................................................................................................. 134

PBL Teacher Training Individual Interview Questions

 9

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

The technology explosion, which occurred in the last two decades of the twentieth century,

forever changed society, industry, economy, and education. A chain of communication events was

initiated with the dissolution of Southwestern Bell Corporation telecommunication giant. The

breakup brought innovation and competition in new technologies and platforms (Swanson, 2014).

In 1984, Motorola produced the first consumer cell phone, and the remainder of the 1980s

brought the development of Windows, Internet Explorer, Network File System,

PowerPoint, and the World Wide Web. The 1990s launched dial-up modem technology, Browsers,

email, Google, Wi-Fi, and smartphones. The new millennium brought Apps and Facebook (GCN

Staff, 2007). The effects of the digital revolution, otherwise known as the third industrial

revolution, produced a ripple effect through education as Generation Y grew up in a digitally

disrupted world (Weinberger, 2007).

As industry and corporate America quickly adopted, changed, and implemented the newest

technological advancements to prepare for global economic competitiveness, educators searched for

ways to respond to the new, fast-paced, digital world. Academic leaders wrestled with how to adopt

a new set of skills into an already stretched curriculum and struggled with providing teachers with

the high-quality professional development needed to deliver these new multi-dimensional

competencies (Blinder, 2008). How students can succeed in the 21st century has been a topic of

interest since at least the early 1990s. In 1991, the United States Department of Labor formed the

Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS). This task force was charged

with examining the demands of the workplace and whether young people in the U.S. are capable of

meeting those demands. Schools were deemed not to be moving fast enough or far enough to
 10

prepare students for the new workplace (Marzano & Heflebower, 2011). The first effort was to

define 21st century skills and the role schools should play in teaching them. Additional efforts by

focused, specific interest groups for success in the computer-aged world, combined with SCANS,

formed the precursors to the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, a national organization that

advocates for 21st century readiness for every student. Partnering with education, business,

community, and government leaders, educators created a framework of the 21st century modern

school; this framework employs both individualized and large-scale approaches to assessment and

applies rigorous content with real-world relevance while focusing on cognitive, affective, and

aesthetic domains (P21 Framework Definitions, 2009; Marzano & Heflebower, 2011; Secretary’s

Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills, 1991).

Convinced that our best schools were not making adequate gains to prepare students for the

workforce or higher education, Wagner (2014) addressed three serious questions in critical

discussions with educators and policy makers from around the world:

1) What skills are needed for young persons in this new economy?

2) What must educators do to meet students’ needs within the 21st century framework?

3) How can education move from an antiquated status quo of factory-style schooling to one of

innovation and problem-solving?

Wagner (2014), concluded that the American curriculum and current pedagogy were not relevant

for the 21st century competitive global economy (pp. 251-253). According to the National

Education Association (NEA), educators must prepare students for a new global society, teaching

the core subjects while incorporating the Four Cs: critical thinking, communication, collaboration,

and creativity within the curriculum (Van Roekel, 2010). The NEA added that new tools are
 11

necessary to support classroom teachers, and ongoing training is needed to support professionals as

they implement new strategies in the classroom (Van Roekel, pp. 5-7).

Reimagining a new set of skills and student outcomes in the classroom requires a shift from

old paradigms of “chalk and talk” teaching to flexible classrooms, whereby students take

responsibility for their own learning (Kagan, 2004). “Since education standards and the purposes of

education are changing, curriculum frameworks, instructional methods and assessment strategies

must also change” (Saavedra & Opfer, 2012, p. 12). One such change in instructional methods,

which fosters 21st century competencies through a method of inquiry, is project-based learning

(Buck Institute for Education, 2017).

Project-based learning (PBL), or problem-based learning, are instructional methods that

focus on the development of knowledge from the perspective of an active learner and reflects a

constructive-development theory. While problem-based learning generally focuses on a one student

and one single, technical-skill problem developed from lecture content, project-based learning

usually encompasses a collaborative team and customized real-world problems with multiple

student solutions (Buck Institute of Education, 2017). For this study, references to PBL will refer to

project-based learning.

The early twentieth century provided a glimpse of PBL as progressive educator and

forward-thinker, William Kilpatrick, espoused problem-solving in his Project Method essay

(Money-Frank, 2000). Kilpatrick was the first to evidence inquiry study in 1918 as a method to

“foster student motivation by encouraging students to freely decide the purposes they wanted to

pursue” (Larmer et al., 2015, p.27). Kilpatrick’s project methods caught the attention of American

educators for more than a decade; however, outspoken critics of his student choice project method

caused his ideas to fall into disfavor. A resurgence of PBL occurred in 1969 when McMaster’s
 12

University Medical School made its curricular transformation to PBL, with over 500 higher

education facilities and a handful of secondary schools following suit (Servant-Miklos, 2019).

“Problem-based learning is one promising approach focused on integrating skills and knowledge in

an academic setting. It has roots in medical education for almost 50 years with demonstrated

effectiveness” (Ungaretti et al., 2015, p. 21). PBL has been shown as an effective way to develop

21st-century skills (Buck Institute for Education, 2017).

Problem-based learning is characterized as a student-centered approach that supports

instructional demands of the 21st century reform standards, providing students with real-world

problems driven by stimulating, open-ended questions (Boss, 2011). According to the Buck

Institute for Education (2017), “Project-based learning can help students be successful in today’s

rapidly changing and complex world, by developing a broader set of knowledge and skills as well

as improving academic achievement” (Research Studies section, para.1). PBL provides

opportunities for students to develop problem-solving, critical thinking, communication, and

collaboration skills and the ability to work independently, effectively, confidently, and responsibly

while managing time. PBL requires two transformations: one in curriculum and the other in

instruction, as the teacher assumes the role of facilitator, enabler, or activator (David, 2008;

Gallagher, 1997; Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Savery & Duffy, 1995).

Evidence has shown that based on a constructivist-development theory, learning in PBL is

initiated by activating students’ prior knowledge and building meaningful connections between the

existing knowledge and new content (Jumaat et al., 2017). PBL is effective in helping students learn

both discipline-based content and higher-order thinking skills, including problem-solving, critical

thinking, and decision-making (Glazewski & Ertmer, 2010; Savery, 2006; Moust et al., 2005;

Simons & Ertmer, 2005). Research also suggests that through experiential learning PBL is an
 13

effective teaching method as it connects students’ experiences to real-world problems, provoking

serious thinking and knowledge acquisition. However, even with research promoting PBL inquiry

classrooms, teachers with little or no professional support in project-based learning were, at best,

only as effective as the traditional teaching methods (Kramer, 2014). According to Hattie (2003),

the single most powerful influence on student achievement is the teacher. “I therefore suggest that

we should focus on the greatest source of variance that can make the difference--the teacher. We

need to ensure that this greatest influence is optimized to have powerful and sensationally positive

effects on the learner” (Hattie, 2003, p. 3). In The Global Achievement Gap, Wagner (2014) stated,

Preparing 21st century learners starts with preparing 21st century teachers. In this

paradigm shift from teacher-centered pedagogy to learner-centered instruction, the

teacher needs to be supported as new roles, responsibilities and strategies are acquired,

applied, and evaluated. Significant changes in practices at the school and classroom levels

need to occur in order for teachers to adopt new teaching approaches and technologies into

the already existing curriculum. (p.8)

Changing to a PBL school does not always guarantee success. Many districts are struggling

with the transition of the teacher from a traditional lecturer to the role of facilitator of learning

(Charner & Medrich, 2017). According to Dalrymple et al. (2006), a better understanding of

teaching and learning practices is critical when major curricular or pedagogical change takes place

at an institution. Organizations that have embarked on major curricular reform point out the

importance of faculty development in the process. Assuming all educators are skillful in teaching

methods to which they are not accustomed can be detrimental to implementing a PBL curriculum

(Buck Institute for Education, 2017). Researchers in PBL Core Skills for Faculty Development

Workshop found that changes in school curriculum necessitate support for faculty so that they can
 14

become familiar with the rationale underpinning this type of pedagogy and experience teaching and

learning strategies associated with effective PBL implementation. (Dalrymple et al., 2006).

As districts move forward in PBL training for staff, deliberate attention to the integrity of

the professional development process must be considered as teachers acquire expertise in this new

method for teaching 21st century skills. According to Galbo (1998), the “sitting and getting” of

district-wide faculty training sessions from the old model of professional development left

participants unable to apply new skills or knowledge once they returned to the workplace (para. 5).

Instead, professional development should address the teacher's needs, focusing on their unique

personal experiences and self-directed learning styles. Darling-Hammond et al. (2009) suggested

that in order for professional development to have an impact on teaching and learning, it must

consist of roughly 50 hours in a specific area (p. 25). Initiatives such as the Every Student Succeeds

Act, 2015; Individuals with Disabilities Act, 2004; Race to the Top Act, 2011; and Reading

Excellence Act, 1999, have emphasized the need to support teachers’ use of evidence-based

practices for improving student learning and behavior. According to Denton & Hasbrouck (2009),

these initiatives have established coaching as a key element in driving school reform and providing

sustained, individualized professional development (as cited in Kurz, Reddy, et al., 2017).

Instructional coaching is a partnership between teachers and coaches (Knight, 2011).

Coaching is an evidence-based approach to professional development, which has proven to be an

effective form of support for implementing new instructional practices (Devine et al., 2013). As on-

site professional developers provide on-the-spot practical differentiated assistance to teachers,

instructional coaching methods have proven to support teacher development and student

achievement (Devine et al., 2013).

 15

Coaching has its institutional roots in supporting literacy instruction in the 1990s (Galey,

2016). Driven by standards-based education reform, instructional coaching programs grew in

mathematics and other subjects as research showed that effective instructional coaching supported

changes in classroom instruction and increased student achievement (Galey, 2016; Quintero, 2019).

Currently, no standard model or definition exists for the role of an instructional coach. Coaching

models vary in purpose and practice to meet the needs of each district using available resources.

“Instructional coaches, in their varied functions, can be valuable change agents in school”

(Wolpert-Gawron, 2016, p. 56). The main goals of instructional coaching are to improve instruction

using highly effective, evidence-based practice and improve learner academic and behavioral

outcomes. Drawing from research that has supported coaching as an effective form of professional

development, coaching has been widely embraced in a host of learning environments. Many

different models of professional development now exist as coaches fill a wide range of

responsibilities for school districts. This improved form of sustained, intensive professional

development is linked to improved instructional quality when essential elements of effective

coaching practices remain consistent across coaching models (Galey, 2016; Darling-Hammond et

al., 2009).

A technical consultant from the American Institutes of Research offered a framework for

effective coaching practices synthesized from various coaching models. According to Pierce (2014),

commonalities exist across descriptions of coaching, however individual coaches often show great

variation in how they approach working with teachers. Focused on specific practices from many

successful coaching models and linked to improved teacher practice and student outcome, this

framework included the following effective practices: observation, modeling, feedback, and alliance

(Pierce, 2014). Coaches collected data through classroom observations related to best practice
 16

(Pierce, 2014). According to Pierce (2014), observational modeling by coaches gave teachers the

opportunity to emulate these practices. An additional active ingredient of instructional coaching was

an emphasis on positive feedback throughout the coaching process, which included joint planning

and reflective discussion of teacher practice (Pierce, 2014). The fourth effective practice, considered

by many researchers to be the cornerstone of productive coaching, is alliance, or relationship building

(Pierce, 2014). These practices aided in the success of instructional coaching. “Education holds a

clear affinity for coaching as a method for improving teacher practice and learner outcomes” (Pierce,

2014, p. 1). Research suggests that blending high-quality professional development in the form of

instructional coaching, or the use of coaching methods within a PBL constructivist framework, can

be the best practice for achieving 21st century global competency (Galbo,1998; Harris, 2014; Savery

& Duffy, 2001; & Dalrymple et al., 2007).

Design of Study

This qualitative case study explored and described best practice for implementing PBL to

support 21st century skills. In response to research compiled from business leaders and institutions

of higher learning, school districts and teachers are being asked to strengthen the competitiveness of

the 21st century workforce (Rios et al., 2020). This study focused on identifying effective PBL

practices, implemented through professional development, that lead to increased teacher

implementation and student engagement which support 21st century skills. This research helped

determine the best PBL teacher training practices by surveying PBL teachers.

Problem Statement

School districts across the country are looking for ways to reimagine education to teach,

assess, and address the 4 C’s as outlined in the 21st century framework (Wagner, 2014). Forward-

thinking school districts are choosing to implement the effective instructional approach of PBL to
 17

address the need for U.S. students to be globally competitive. Changing teacher-centered classrooms

to students driving their own education has translated into a major overhaul in how professional

development is administered (Almulla, 2020). PBL professional development designed to adopt PBL

pedagogy into current curriculum is a specific professional learning experience that supports 21st

century skills. The purpose of this study was to add to the knowledge base and aid school districts in

decision-making about best practice in professional development for PBL to produce highly effective

teachers and students for the twenty-first century.

Conceptual Underpinnings of the Study

Developing 21st century learners will result in moving away from traditional modes of

teaching and curriculum. Classrooms that once hosted the teacher as the deliverer of information and

instruction will be transformed for vibrant engagement, whereby the learner becomes the problem

solver and initiates his or her own learning (Almulla, 2020). Twenty-first Century Framework

addresses a world that is changing and will continue to do so dramatically throughout the 21st century.

It also identifies the skills teachers and learners need to succeed in a new global, interconnected

society. This study analyzed the best practice of PBL teacher training to support 21st-century

learning, utilizing the constructivist-development theory and experiential learning theory.

Constructivist Learning Theory

“All proposals for education reform include professional development as a significant

element in promoting change” (Guskey, 1994). For the purpose of this study, PBL professional

development viewed through the lenses of constructive-development theory and experiential

learning theory were used. Pioneering work by Joyce and Showers in the 1980s helped to build the

theory and practice of teacher training using aspects of the coaching model as well as some of the

first empirical evidence of its promise (Kraft et al., 2017). The coaching process is characterized as
 18

one where instructional experts work with teachers to discuss classroom practice in a way that is

individualized, intensive, sustained, context-specific, and focused (Kraft et al., 2017). Spelman and

Rohlwing posit that coaching must take into account that 21st century teaching has shifted the focus

of learning from what a person knows to how a person knows (Rohlwing & Spelman, 2013, Ch.

12). Kegan (1994) referenced this shift as the constructive-development theory, which states that

the systems by which individuals make meaning, grow, and change throughout a lifetime. This

theory implies that individuals must be considered as the educational system designs professional

development programs to support and challenge adult learners (Drago-Severson, 2011).

Experiential Learning Theory

Project-based learning is a constructivist educational approach that organizes curriculum

and instruction around carefully crafted “ill-structured” problems (Barrows, 1988). According to

Richardson (2003), in constructivism, it is thought that individuals create their learning based on

previous experiences and knowledge in an active and authentic learning environment. Additionally,

PBL is an experiential learning method whereby students engage in new experiences, reflect on the

process, critically think about the results, and act upon them. According to the Partnership for 21st

Century Skills (2009), there is widespread consensus that our education and workforce

development systems are failing to adequately prepare all students and workers with the essential

21st-century skills necessary for success in a global economy. A fresh approach in education is

needed that recalibrates workforce preparation to the demands of the 21st century economy built on

information, knowledge, innovation, and creativity (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2009).

Project-based learning professional development serves as a means of developing and encouraging

skills characteristic of 21st century learners. A review of research in the areas of project -based

learning, application of knowledge, and 21st century learners indicated that several aspects of
 19

project-based learning might play a prominent role in increasing achievement for both public school

systems and students alike (Trimble, 2017).

Purpose of the Study

The 21st century global economy favors highly skilled, highly educated workers. Employers

expect graduates to enter the job market with the skills necessary to be productive employees

(Hodge & Lear, 2011). Although technological advances forced changes in job opportunities,

education has not adequately transformed to meet the current needs of employers (Bellanca, 2010;

Elmore, 2014). Many studies endorse project-based learning as a specific instructional strategy to

support 21st century competencies, but there have been few studies regarding PBL teacher training

to support PBL instruction. The purpose of this qualitative case study was to create a starting point

of deductive research by examining and exploring the impact PBL teacher training has on teacher

instruction and student achievement for ongoing support for PBL implementation and 21st century

competencies.

Research Questions

The gaps in the existing research literature and the purpose of the study led to the following

research questions:

1. What are CAPS instructors’ perceptions of best practice in professional development for

supporting and implementing PBL in the classroom?

2. What are CAPS instructors’ perceptions of best practice in PBL teacher training to support

student achievement and 21st century skills?

3. What factors were barriers to professional development in PBL implementation in the CAPS

program according to CAPS instructors?

 20

Limitations

This qualitative study provided an in-depth examination of best practice in implementing

project-based learning through the use of professional development to support 21st century skills.

Data collection, constrained by time and activity (Creswell, 2003), took place over a period of four

weeks. Other programs and practices that occurred at other points during the year were not

observed. This study was limited by the number of PBL teachers within the CAPS program.

Observations were subject to the researcher’s interpretations and inherent bias. Another

possible limitation of the study was that the researcher is a CAPS instructor and knows several of

the teachers surveyed; however, Hatch (2002) supports establishing a relationship with participants

to conduct a study. According to Harris (2015), “The past relationship, now more distant, may have

benefited the response rate rather than negatively influence the data, yet the limitation must be

acknowledged” p. 60). Another potential factor that may limit the study is the participant’s ability

or willingness to answer the questions precisely or truthfully (Harris, 2015).

Assumptions

“There is no paradigm solution to the elimination of error and bias. Different forms of

research may be prone to different sources of error, but clearly none are immune” (Norris, 1997,

p.173). An assumption underlying the study is that participants will accurately recount their project-

based learning professional development and honestly describe events. Furthermore, it is assumed

that the researcher will accurately record statements from the participants. Another underlying

assumption in this study is that every teacher involved has practiced the same type of project-based

learning and has an understanding of 21st century skills. A detailed account of teachers’

experiences should reveal any discrepancy in project-based learning pedagogy and 21st century

competencies. Participants were made aware of the confidentiality of the survey and results.
 21

Definition of Terms

In this section key terms that were used throughout this study are defined. The definitions

are unique to the academic setting. An understanding of these terms is essential for comprehending

this study.

CAPS

The Center for Advanced Professional Studies is a non-profit organization focused on

developing 21st century skills through profession-based learning (real-world projects through

collaboration with community and business partners). The CAPS Network partners with students,

teachers, post-secondary institutions, and industries.

Inquiry-based learning

Inquiry is a multifaceted activity that involves making observations; posing questions;

examining books and other sources of information to see what is already known; planning

investigations; reviewing what is already known in light of experimental evidence; using tools to

gather, analyze, and interpret data; proposing answers, explanations, and predictions; and

communicating the results. Inquiry requires the identification of assumptions, the use of critical and

logical thinking, and consideration of alternative explanations. Scientific inquiry refers to the

diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world and propose explanations based on the

evidence derived from their work (National Academy Press, 1996, p.21).

Instructional Coach

An instructional coach can be broadly defined as a person who works collaboratively with a

teacher to improve that teacher’s practice and content knowledge, with the ultimate goal of

improving student achievement (Yopp, Burroughs, Luebeck, Heidema, Mitchell & Sutton, 2011).
 22

Professional Development

Professional development is synonymous with staff development, professional growth,

teacher development, teacher training, in-service education, human resource development, and

career development (National Staff Development Council, 2006). For this study, professional

development will describe training sessions and tools used to improve the quality and effectiveness

of teaching.

Problem-based learning

A teaching method which take a single subject, using shorter steps in less time, finds an

answer to a scenario or case. Problem-based learning is less focused on an authentic outcome or

real-life situation.

Project-based learning

“A teaching method in which students gain knowledge and skills by working for an

extended period of time to investigate and respond to an authentic, engaging and complex question,

problem or challenge” (Buck Institute for Education, 2017, para 1).

Twenty-first century skills

Skills required by the learners to cope with the realities and conditions of the 21st century

that are different from the previous century in terms of their focus on technology, digital work, and

more generally, on the meaning and application of knowledge. Twenty-first century skills

encompass such basic skills as critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, communication,

collaboration, innovation, teamwork, decision making, leadership, knowledge application, self -

direction, and learning how to learn (Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2009; Organization of

Economic Cooperation and Development, 2006; Wagner, 2014).

 23

Significance of the Study

Today’s students need to be proficient not only in areas of core curriculum, but also in areas

of critical thinking, communication, creativity, and collaboration to be prepared for the demands of

the workforce. PBL, a student-centered and evidence-based pedagogy, has been proven to better

prepare students for competition in the modern world by interconnecting content knowledge and

21st century skills (Walton, 2014). School districts are looking for effective professional

development to support and sustain teachers through the transition from classroom teacher to PBL

instructor. This study investigated best practice of PBL teacher training to support instructional

methods and 21st century skills and its role in increasing student achievement.

Summary

A review of current literature reveals that the United States is falling behind in necessary

skills to be competitive and globally connected in commerce. Outsourcing of American jobs is

leaving higher education and public schools scrambling to develop 21st century learners and

teachers. Although pockets of schools across the country have addressed the need to align

curriculum to include both content knowledge and 21st century competencies, the majority of

public schools are looking for guidance and directives in best practice for professional

development; moreover, they are looking for training to increase teacher capacity and instructional

methods that support students 21st century workforce skills. One viable solution is to focus

professional development on an inquiry-based method such as PBL. The purpose of this qualitative

study of best practice in project-based learning was to explore the impact of professional

development on PBL instructional methods and student outcomes while supporting the 21st century

framework.

The next chapter of this study is a review of the related literature. Chapter Three is
 24

description of the research design. Chapter Four contains a data analysis. Lastly, Chapter Five

includes a summary, conclusion, and recommendation.

 25

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Introduction

“The future U.S. workforce is here--and it is woefully ill-prepared for the demands of

today’s (and tomorrow’s) workplace” (Casner-Lotto, 2006, p.9). According to a survey of human

resource professionals, “The U.S. is not doing enough, fast enough, to prepare for a vibrant

economic future for our children and our nation” (Casner-Lotto, 2006, p. 7). Echoes from over a

decade ago still ring true today. Ericksen (2020) stated, “Unfortunately, only 11 percent of business

leaders agree that today’s college graduates have the skills needed for today’s dynamic workforce”

(What do Employers Think of 21st Century Skills section, para. 4). According to Rose, the weakest

top skills across nine industries (according to line managers) were problem solving and critical

thinking. A report from top executives from around the country underscored the importance of

preparing our students for global competitiveness: “The business community must speak with one

voice: new entrants to the U.S. workforce must be equipped with the basic knowledge and applied

skills necessary to be competitive in the global economy of the 21st century” (Casner-Lotto, 2006,

p.8). This resounding call for an increase in workforce readiness has our current educational system

leaders stepping back and asking if this 150-year-old factory model of education is the best solution

to prepare our children for their futures (Care et al., 2018; Wagner, 2014; Meeder & Pawlowski,

2019). In navigating and adapting to these new challenges, schools are revamping how they think

about teachers and learners in their districts, particularly how teachers are trained to deliver both

content and 21st century competencies, such as critical thinking, creativity, communication, and

collaboration.

According to Bellanca and Brandt (2010), schools must embrace a new pedagogy that will

engage 21st century students and enable them to acquire and master 21st century skills. According
 26

to Pearlman (2006), what is needed is “a new type of instruction that better reflects the goals we

want each student to achieve, demonstrate, and document” (para. 13). Advocates for 21st century

skills favor inquiry; student-centered instructional methods, such as project-based learning (PBL),

to deliver on the demands of 21st century reform. Through PBL, teachers can embed all the learner

outcomes: content, the Four Cs (critical thinking, collaboration, creativity, and communication),

and authentic assessments (Buck Institute for Education, 2017). “In the future, children must enter a

workforce in which they will be judged on their performance. They will be evaluated not only on

their outcomes, but also on their collaborating, negotiating, planning, and organizational skills”

(Bell, 2010, p.43). PBL is an effective, inquiry-based instructional strategy that prepares students to

meet the rigors of 21st century competencies while developing a repertoire of skills they can use

successfully (Bell, 2010; Learning Environments: A 21st Century Skills Implementation Guide,

2009). Proponents calling for curriculum changes encourage schools, districts, and states to

advocate for the infusion of 21st century skills into education and provide the tools and resources to

help facilitate and drive change (Learning Environments: A 21st Century Skills Implementation

Guide, 2009). One such resource to help drive this change in public schools is coaching, a specific

form of professional development to support teachers in the classroom while implementing new

strategies. According to the National Center for Education Statistics (2021), by the 2015-16 school

year, sixty-six percent of public schools had a general instructional coach on staff (p. 1). PBL,

supported by instructional coaching, is a promising combination to support 21st century teaching

and learning (Rader, 2020).

This literature review will address the following topics: the importance of 21st century

skills; the importance of PBL to support 21st century learning; key components of PBL; challenges

with PBL; professional development; instructional coaching; best practice of instructional coaches;
 27

instructional coaching and student achievement; constructivist-development strategies; and

experiential learning theory.

Importance of 21st Century Skills

The movement toward 21st century skills, which has been addressed by many groups such

as government entities, private organizations, the business community, education leaders, and

policymakers, defines a powerful vision for 21st century education to ensure every child’s success

as citizens and workers in the 21st century (21st Century Skills, Education and Competitiveness: A

Resource and Policy guide, 2008). “21st-century learning matters more today--a lot more--than

when we started the conversation” (Kay, 2019, as cited in Boss, 2019, para. 5). Ken Kay, co-

founder of P21, started the 21st century skills conversation in the 1990s (P21, 2009). Since then,

there has been an urgency for school districts to address changes in curriculum and instructional

methods to produce information that has meaning and value for students. Industry and the corporate

world are asking schools to rethink how we teach to prepare our youth to be globally competitive.

“We have known for years what kids need to know and be able to do in the 21st Century”

(Pearlman, 2006, p. 101). The Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS)

report “What Work Requires of Schools: A SCANS report for America 2000” concluded in their

study that a three-part foundation was necessary for students to succeed in the future workplace:

basic skills, thinking skills, and personal qualities (SCANS, 2001). The basic skills encompass

reading, writing, mathematics, speaking, and listening. The thinking skills include making

decisions, solving problems, being creative, knowing how to learn, and reasoning. The last

foundation competency, personal qualities, require individual responsibility, self-esteem,

sociability, self-management, and integrity (SCANS, 2001). By 2002, the Partnership for 21st

Century Skills (P21) updated the SCANS report to include assessment and feedback as an integral
 28

part of the 21st century framework (“Learning for the 21st Century” (2002). Preparing students to

be successful in a world that has changed dramatically will require schools to integrate knowledge

and skills while making education relevant and meaningful. Students and teachers need a new set of

skills to be successful (Simons & Ertmer, 2006; Ravitz, 2010; Pierce, 2014).

“Today’s education system faces irrelevance unless we bridge the gap between how students

live and how they learn” (Learning for the 21st Century, 2002, p.4). A profound change must take

place in instructional methods, curriculum frameworks, and assessment to move from an outdated

teaching model, whereby students acquire teacher-specified knowledge and skills, to a

constructivist model of learning where a student’s knowledge is a function of one’s prior

experiences (Alesandrini & Larson, 2002; Jumatt et al., 2017). Educators must teach students to

think and know how to use knowledge and skills to problem solve. Teachers must be inspired,

trained, and supported to use the best instructional methods available to motivate and equip students

to transfer knowledge to meet the challenges for jobs that have not yet been created (Wagner,

2014). By way of experiential learning, teachers can engage learners through experience to be

actively involved in their education (Gaveillet, 2019). Transforming the 20th century school model

to one that supports 21st century learning is a challenge for school districts, administration, and

teachers across the country.

Supporting 21st century learning starts with 21st century teaching. The outdated

transmission model of instruction promotes rote memorization and suppression of creativity while

hindering higher order thinking and self-directed learning (Mpho, 2016; P21, 2021). A post-

transmission pedagogy, which supports the constructivist-development strategy and experiential

learning is necessary to develop skills to increase problem-solving, interconnectedness, and a

collaborative learning environment necessary to achieve 21st century competitiveness (Mpho,

 29

2016; Jumaat et al., 2017). This paradigm shift from a teacher-centered environment to student-

centered learning leads to a constructivist classroom, whereby “Learning becomes more of a shared

activity where knowledge is constructed by both the teacher and the learners rather than transmitted

by the teacher” (Mpho, 2016, p. 13).

A restructuring of the classroom--putting students at the center of learning with the teacher

taking the role of facilitator--provides students an opportunity to have a choice in their education

(Buck Institute for Education, 2017; Almulla, 2020). “It’s important to give students influence over

how and what they learn in the classroom. Teachers should structure learning scenarios that equip

students with opportunities to strengthen their autonomy, competence, and relatedness” (Parker et

al., 2017, p. 1). Education reform, inclusive of complexity and diversity, allows students to

showcase their potential, deepens learning, and builds capacity in problem-solving (Wagner, 2014;

Saavedra & Opfer, 2012). One such effective instructional reform, which crosses over into all areas

of traditional academic studies and covers all 21st century competencies, is project-based learning

(PBL).

As school districts attempt to intensify teaching reform initiatives, PBL students have

outscored their traditionally-taught peers in standardized testing (Geier et al, 2008). Empowering

students to produce projects based on inquiry questions promotes social learning, accountability,

and goal setting (Gavillet, 2019). PBL is an instructional approach that teaches 21st century skills

embedded in the curriculum through inquiry-based projects. PBL has proven to be most effective

when supported through ongoing professional development. Ravitz et al. (2012) stated PBL

supported by extended and high-level professional development can have an impact on 21st century

skills without sacrificing rigor.

 30

“There is increasing evidence that professional development programs, including those for

teachers, are more effective when they involve intensive forms of support” (Devine et al., 2013, p.

1126). Asking teachers to adopt a new teaching strategy can be met with a fair degree of resistance

if the intention of the new instructional method is not clearly revealed. Buyin from teachers for a

new program requires administration and professional development teams to consider adult learning

as instructors try to make sense of new teaching and learning experiences. Constructivist-

development and experiential learning theories are both rooted in the idea of adults making sense of

new information through hands-on experiences.

“There is increasing evidence that professional development programs, including those for teachers,

are more effective when they involve intensive forms of support” (Devine et al., 2013, p. 1126).

Asking teachers to adopt a new teaching strategy can be met with a fair degree of resistance;

however, “Instructional coaching can support schools in implementing new teaching practices in a

sustained way” (Devine et al., 2013, p. 1126). According to Knight (2011), instructional coaching

ensures the high-quality implementation of new teaching practices. Through coaching, PBL can be

successfully adopted, supported, and implemented as a research-based teaching practice to

ultimately improve student achievement in the 21st century.

Constructivist Theory

Constructivism is the belief that learning is a journey of discovering meaningful information

whereby individuals become sense-makers of new knowledge through cognitive processes, asking

questions, investigating, interacting with others, and reflecting on experiences (Jumaat et al., 2017;

Richardson, 1997). Constructivism is a theory of learning in which a construction of knowledge is

developed based on real-life interactions and hands-on experiences encountered with real-world

problems. “Individuals create their own new understandings, based upon the interaction of what
 31

they already know and believe, and the phenomena or ideas with which they come into contact”

(Richardson, 1997, p.3).

The ideas that shaped constructivism can be dated to classical antiquity, going back to

Socrates and his famous line of questioning. Socrates drew answers from his students that

challenged their viewpoints and questioned the consequences of their assumptions-- assimilating

knowledge into deeper learning (Richardson, 1997). Building on the idea of inquiry interaction

between the student and the instructor, the philosophical founder of constructivism, John Dewey,

called for education to be grounded in real-life experiences. “If you have doubts about how learning

happens, engage in sustained inquiry: study, ponder, consider alternative possibilities and arrive at

your belief grounded in evidence” (Dewey, n.d.; as cited in Reece, 2013, p.320). Dewey based his

theory on two principles, continuity and interaction, whereby effective learning required students to

use previous experience and background knowledge to create new meaning. Dewey believed the

individual development of a person’s intelligence was guided by two processes: assimilation and

accommodation. Used simultaneously, assimilation uses the environment to place information into

pre-existing cognitive structures, and accommodation is the process of changing cognitive

structures to make sense of the environment. These ideas, followed by others from Montessori,

Vygotsky, Bruner, and Ausubel, contributed to the constructivist theory (Ultamr, 2012, Huitt &

Hummel, 2003).

According to Dewey (1938), progressive education is a “product of discontent with

traditional education” (as cited in Williams, 2017, p. 92). Over a hundred years later, educators are

feeling discontent with traditional education once again, searching for best practice to meet the

expectations of a changing world. Constructivists agree that the transmission model of teaching

“promotes neither the interaction between prior and new knowledge nor the conversations that are
 32

necessary for internalization and deep understanding” (Richardson, 1997, pg.10). The outdated

traditional model of teaching focused on the following ideas: subject and content mastery with a

primary function of passing the knowledge to the next generation; conforming students to a set of

standards and rules of behavior for a moral education; and the general rules for classroom,

curriculum, advancement in the class, and behavior was at the discretion of the teacher (Ultamr,

2012). Dewey’s progressive model of education changed the dynamics of the classroom. The

principles of constructivism promote participatory learning:

Building the idea of individualist development instead of the idea of top-down forcing;

embracing behavioral freedom (democracy) as opposed to practice external discipline;

practicing active education instead of passive learning from teachers and texts; embracing

the thought of learning to use skills and techniques as a means to achieve one’s goal instead

of isolated learning by practice; taking advantage of the current opportunities and benefiting

from these in the best way possible, thus becoming acquainted with an ever-changing world

(societal needs), rather than focusing on stationary goals while preparing for a distant future

(Dewey, 1998, pp. 22-23).

Preparing students for a student-centered classroom meant the development of a constructivist

classroom.

“The constructivist approach posits a radical departure from traditional teaching practices”

(Alesandrini & Larson, 2002, p. 118). Switching from a traditional mode of teaching to a

constructivist classroom model of learning requires firsthand experiences from both the teacher and

student. Often, teachers take on the role of a constructivist activity, such as PBL, without having

ever participated in a constructivist-type classroom. According to Alesandrini & Larson (2002),

“Teachers, however, often learn without doing when it comes to learning about constructivism and
 33

related teaching methods” (p. 118). The best way to learn about constructivism is through

modeling. According to Alesandrini & Larson (2002), most of the teachers who actively engaged in

a bridge-building activity reported that the constructivist modeling helped them understand the role

of the teacher and the student in this activity. The modeling was found useful or extremely useful

by 82 percent of the participants.

“Constructivism is a theory that describes learning, not a method of teaching” (Kemp,

2011). Understanding and applying the constructivist underpinning of PBL methods enables

teachers to analyze how learners construct knowledge. By using constructivism as a learning

theory, teachers are able to examine their teaching and learning situations, reflect on their goals of

teaching, and adopt new pedagogical practices to increase learning potential. When preparing a

classroom for the constructivist model of PBL, both the teacher and the student need an

understanding of the theory behind the journey of learning. For an instructor to be capable of

turning a descriptive theory of learning into the practice of teaching, the instructor should have an

understanding of PBL by doing and by utilizing an expert model. “We believe that, to do this well,

teachers need an equally sophisticated and ambitious set of learning experiences” (Grossman et al.,

2019). In other words, instructors who have experience of PBL, can then model for students with

confidence.

Experiential Learning Theory

A shift in focus from content mastery to life-long learning skills to support 21st century

competencies has given educators a new perspective on learning and development. According to

Kolb and Kolb (2009),

Experiential learning theory draws on the work of prominent twentieth century scholars who

gave experience a central role in their theories of human learning and development—
 34

notably John Dewey, Kurt Lewin, Jean Piaget, William James, Carl Jung, Paulo Freire, Carl

Rogers, and others—to develop a dynamic, holistic model of the process of learning from

experience and a multi-linear model of adult development (p. 43).

Experiential Learning (EL) is a teaching philosophy with the purpose of engaging learners through

experience, learning through action and self-reflection to cultivate new opinions, applicable not

only to educational settings but across all arenas of life (Gavillet, 2018; Kolb & Kolb, 2009;

Kincheloe & Horn, 2007). Experiential learning integrates the work of the above-mentioned

scholars around six propositions which they all share: learning is a process; all learning is re-

learning; learning requires a resolution of conflicts; learning is holistic; learning is a synergetic

transaction between the environment and the learner; and learning is a process of creating

knowledge (Kolb, 2014). Experiential learning “is a holistic theory that defines learning as the

major process of human adaptation involving the whole person” (Kolb & Kolb, 2009, p.43).

Experiential learning has its roots in many cultures and religions, where symbolic circles

represent the cycle of learning (Kolb & Kolb, 2009). This cyclic pattern, an eternal process of

endings becoming beginnings, over and over, reflects dual polarities whereby this circulation about

an axis represents all sides of one’s personality becoming involved in the integration of information

(Kolb & Kolb, 2009: Gavillet, 2018). Kolb (2014) linked Dewey’s assumptions of providing

students with unique experiences that provide for continuity and interaction to education focused on

cognition through a four-stage cycle. According to Kolb’s cyclic model (Figure 1), learning occurs

in four stages, and it is in this overlap between stages where four learning styles occur. The four

stages of learning in EL are concrete experiences, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization,

and abstract experimentation (Kolb, 2014; Kincheloe & Horn, 2007).

 35

Experiential learning theory defines learning as the process whereby knowledge is created

through modification, variation, and revision of experiences. “Knowledge results from the

combination of grasping and transforming experience” (Kolb, 1984, p.41). This transformation

process begins with a concrete experience. These immediate experiences are the basis for reflection.

These observations are then assimilated into abstract concepts, tested in new experiences, then,

once again reflected upon, followed by new information being assimilated (Kolb, 2014; Gavillet,

2018). According to biologist James Zull, “This process of experiential learning is related to the

Figure 1: Experiential learning cycle

process of brain functioning … In other words, the learning cycle arises from the structure of the

brain” (Zull, 2002, p. 18).

Additionally, as learners make their way through the four stages of learning in the

experiential learning model, each person prefers a specific style of learning based on hereditary

differences, life experiences, and environmental demands (Kolb & Kolb, 2009). These preferred

learning styles are influenced by education, personality type, and career choice. The four learning
 36

styles associated with experiential learning are diverging, assimilating, converging, and

accommodating (Kolb & Kolb, 2009). An individual with a diverging style of learning is best at

viewing immediate experiences from many different points of view. This learner would perform

best in situations that called for a brainstorming session (Kolb & Kolb, 2009; Kincheloe & horn,

2007). A learner with an assimilating style of learning is best at putting a wide range of information

into brief, logical form. Assimilators are more concerned with theories and abstract concepts and

less focused on people. An individual with a converging style of learning is best at finding practical

uses for ideas and abstract concepts. These learners are most concerned with finding solutions to

problems. And finally, individuals with an accommodating learning style learn best from a hands-

on experience. These learners enjoy challenging, new explorations (Kolb, 2014; Gavillet, 2018;

Kincheloe & Horn, 2007). One way of engaging students in experiential learning is through project-

based learning.

Importance of PBL

“We need to prepare our students to practice in a world we can’t imagine“ (With PBL,

Missouri Went From Follower to Leader, 2018, June 6). According to Brende (2019), fifty-four

percent of employees will require significant reskilling or upskilling by 2022 to meet 21st century

expectations and the demands of a changing job market. “Education is and will remain critical for

promoting inclusive economic growth and providing a future of opportunity for all” (Brende, 2019,

para. 3). Education can bridge the gap between current skills, pedagogy, and the next generation of

employees. A research-proven, inquiry method of curriculum reform designed to close the skills

gap between 20th century instruction and 21st century competencies is project-based learning.

PBL, which has become influential throughout medical education, was first implemented at

a medical school in 1969. (Servant-Miklos, 2018). Based on Jean Piaget’s constructivist approach
 37

to learning and John Dewey’s action-knowledge, problem-solving experiences, medical doctors at

McMaster University Medical School provided an “educational experience that would send ripples

through higher education beyond the confines of the medical world” (Servant-Miklos, 2018, para.

1). McMaster’s authentic, hands-on model of research and learning has become the most significant

innovation in medical schools in the past fifty years. The success of McMaster’s pioneering MD

programs became known as project-based learning (PBL) and has since spread to over 500 higher

education institutions, including a few K-12 schools across the United States (Servant-Miklos,

2018)The 1960s PBL experience evolved to gain adoption and integration into business models and

other non-medical fields (Servant-Miklos, 2018). According to Bell (2010), “Project-based learning

(PBL) is an innovative approach to learning that teaches a multitude of strategies critical for success

in the 21st century” (p. 39). PBL is a student-driven, teacher-facilitated approach to learning

through student choice of projects. Individual learning styles and preferences, as well as

collaboration or independent work environments, provide a deeper learning, greater understanding

of the topic, and an increase motivation to learn (Bell, 2010; Buck Institute for Education, 2017).

PBL is a proven, researched-based inquiry model of learning.

As the education pendulum swings back from the era of extreme test preparation under No

Child Left Behind, adoption of PBL is becoming more mainstream around the country as public

schools change their teacher-focused curriculum to a student-centered, self-directed learning

approach of hands-on, active research and authentic problem solving (Kaechele, 2018). Though

several problem-based learning variations and models exist (Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Savery, 2006), the

PBL model examined in this study was based on a review of research by the Buck Institute for

Education (BIE, 2017) and Thomas (2000).

 38

Key Components of PBL

Markam et al. (2003) defined standards-focused, project-based learning as “a systematic

teaching method that engages students in learning knowledge and skills through an extended

inquiry process structured around complex, authentic questions and carefully designed products and

tasks” (p. 4). Shifting education paradigms will require a remix of student and teacher

responsibilities. For schools to do this, research suggests they shift from teacher-directed, whole-

group instruction to a learner-centered, collaborative culture, which designs new learning standards

emphasizing projects, authentic assessments, rubrics, and an environment that stimulates vibrant

engagement, not simply achievement (Bellanca & Brandt, 2010; Pearlman, 2006). The uniqueness

of PBL as an effective form of instruction to support 21st century skills has five critical criteria that

differentiate this instruction from other forms of inquiry-based pedagogy and traditional classroom

projects. These include centrality, focus question, constructive investigations, autonomy, and

realism (Thomas, 2000; BIE, 2017). The first criterion is one in which PBL is central, or

embedded, into the content: it is not a peripheral extension of a lesson. The project becomes the

curriculum and the central teaching strategy (Almulla, 2020). The second criterion is the focus

question, or problem, which drives the student to orchestrate an intellectual purpose for their

research, culminating in a product at the end of the PBL (Bellanca & Brandt, 2010). The third

criterion involves transforming and constructing knowledge through investigation: developing new

understandings and skills through problem-solving, decision-making, and design (Boss, 2019). The

fourth criterion allows for more student choice, autonomy, and responsibility than traditional modes

of instruction or projects. PBL projects are not scripted or teacher-led and do not have

predetermined outcomes (Buck Institute of Education, 2017). Finally, PBL is realistic, not school-

like. Students in PBL programs are challenged with authentic, not simulated, problems, and they
 39

find solutions that have the potential to be implemented (Thomas, 2000; Buck Institute of

Education, 2017).

Challenges with PBL

With greater (or expanding) international acceptance, PBL has become an instructional

strategy to address the skills needed to be 21st century savvy. Equipping students with applied,

investigative learning and the ability to troubleshoot in the real world, PBL has removed the all too

familiar student question, “Why do I need to know this?” However, even with the potential benefits

of PBL being substantial, implementing PBL does not come without its challenges. Research on

PBL can be unclear and limited when it comes to implementation (Murray & Savin-Baden, 2000).

Research demonstrates that effective implementation requires a significant shift in practice

for most teachers. The process of changing traditional teaching methods, whereby the teacher

transmits knowledge through direct instruction to the teacher being a facilitator of the student

learning process, is challenging. Difficulties arise when instructors are required to adopt new

learning methodologies. Teachers lacking a vision for PBL find the transition challenging as

students drive their own learning through inquiry, and concerns about measuring the very benefits

that characterize PBL are a struggle (Nariman & Chrispeels, 2015; Özel, 2013; Saye & Brush,

2004).

Additional challenges of implementing PBL include addressing the time, energy, and

cognitive demands required by a project-based learning curriculum (Saye & Brush, 2004; Bell,

2010). Student success in PBL demands that the teacher facilitate dialogue, provide continuous

feedback, support integrating technology, and initiate inquiry processes while continuing to address

state standards and testing requirements (Buck Institute of Education), 2017). Teachers also

struggle in the design process, choosing between pre-packaged PBL lessons or altering existing
 40

curriculum (Saye & Brush, 2004; Buck Institute of Education, 2017). Other challenges of

implementing PBL include managing unpredictable learning environments, developing disciplinary

and critical thinking skills, and learning how to ask meaningful questions to engage students in the

process of inquiry. Even teachers motivated to use PBL can find these issues a struggle without

effective implementation and continued support (Saye & Brush, 2004).

Context factors, such as school culture, administrative support, and a lack of skilled

facilitators can cause additional barriers, even opposition, to project-based learning implementation.

According to Holm (2011), project-based learning offers highly desirable benefits such as improved

content learning, higher levels of engagement, and more positive perceptions of subject matter.

However, there remains a limited number of fully realized project-based learning teachers in public

schooling. The changes needed for the successful implementation and adoption of PBL to support

21st century skills will be in the form of teaching and learning methods, supported by ongoing

professional development (Barron & Darling-Hammond, 2008).

Professional Development

Supporting teachers with the cognitive demands, organization, student-teacher role

adjustments, and existing classroom norms is imperative to the successful implementation of PBL

(Buck Institute of Education, 2017; Simons & Ertmer, 2006). It is essential to account for the

opinions of teachers when effectuating a change: teachers possess valuable insight into what will or

will not work in the classroom based on their experiences within the classroom (Kelly & Knight,

2019). Teachers who will support 21st century skills in their classroom must become change agents,

lifelong learners who can problem-solve with their colleagues and apply new practices in the

classroom (Lunde & Wilhite, 1996). Those engaged in professional development activities aiming

to encourage change need to consider these challenges (Guskey, 2000).

 41

Ongoing learning is a critical element of continuous improvement for teachers (Barber &

Mourshed, 2007). “The most effective way to deliver sustained and substantial improvements in

outcomes is through sustained and substantial improvements in instruction” (Barber & Mourshed,

2007). Unfortunately, too many professional learning activities are disconnected from teachers’

actual practice and school improvement goals. Traditional forms of professional development lack

the necessary components needed to prepare teachers to become facilitators for 21st century

competencies (Cohen & Hill, 2000; Croft et al., 2010; Kennedy, 2016.) Professional development

courses designed to encourage change and address challenges of project-based learning are no

guarantee that teachers will actually implement what they have learned from those courses.

Difficulties arise when teachers are asked to implement new practices; many teachers are slow to

implement new practices or choose not to implement them at all. Buly et al. (2006) cautioned that

“Fewer than 10% of teachers actually implement instructional innovations following workshops or

in-service experiences” (p.27). Still further, the question arises regarding how to effectively impact

the instruction of a large number of teachers.

Effective professional development should provide a meaningful impact on teacher learning

and promote improvement in classroom practices. School districts must understand what it takes to

improve instruction and adopt high-quality, meaningful professional development (Barber &

Mourshed, 2007). Hanover Research prepared a review to support school districts in evaluating best

practice in professional development, ensuring an effective investment of resources and teacher

time. As outlined by Buckner (2019), the following researched-backed vital activities must be

included for professional development to qualify as highly effective: incorporate ongoing support to

sustain teachers as they implement and reflect on new skills in the classroom; include collaboration

and multiple opportunities for active learning; use professional learning communities (PLCs) and
 42

coaching partnerships to deliver professional development; make content directly relevant and

applicable to teachers’ classrooms; create choice and an environment conducive to experimentation,

modeling, and growth mindset; and use an evaluation framework to track the program.

Instructional Coaching

Instructional coaching is among the fastest-growing forms of support for teachers’

professional learning and educational reforms to support 21st century skills (Darling-Hammond et

al., 2018). Instructional coaching as a form of professional development has emerged as a viable

alternative to typical, isolated workshops, providing rich learning opportunities, affecting school

culture, promoting reflection and decision-making, honoring adult learning, and creating an

environment that supports significant change (Kraft et al.,2018; Polly et al.,2013; Spelman et al.,

2015). This ongoing, site-specific, learner-centered approach to professional development, which

supports teachers in their daily work, has been shown to support students’ academic improvement

and teachers’ development of new instructional practices. Twenty-first century teaching

expectations include integrating college and career readiness standards, producing higher-order

thinking, and incorporating social-emotional learning into the curriculum while educating students

with a wide range of knowledge, skills, and needs. Instructional coaching done well can reach these

improvement goals that have an unmistakable positive impact on students’ lives (Galey, 2016; Kane

& Rosenquist, 2018). Mangin and Dunsmore (2014) maintained that coaching used as professional

development supports systemic reform and builds collective capacity as staff adopts new innovative

instructional practices.

The Role of an Instructional Coach

“Education holds a clear affinity for coaching as a method for improving teacher practice

and learner outcomes” ("Bringing 21st”, 2018, p.1). Gaining popularity since their inception under
 43

the G.W. Bush administration and the No Child Left Behind initiative, reading instructional coaches

have proven effective. Adopting instructional coaches across disciplines has been established as a

viable federal reform for improving teacher quality and student learning (Galey, 2016).

With the staffing rate of instructional coaches doubling from 2000 to 2015 (Quintero, 2019),

schools across the country are examining the multiple roles of instructional coaches. Currently, no

standard model exists for the role of an instructional coach; however, successful models are

emerging. The instructional coaching concept, developed by Beverly Showers and Bruce Joyce in

1980, has been further developed by experts in the field of coaching (Hanover Research, 2014).

Though specific strategies differ, common themes present in each coaching model include

modeling, guided practice, application, and feedback. As research in processes and strategies of

coaching emerges, school districts will be able to choose one model, or a hybrid one, that fits a

particular need. According to Quintero (2019), “There is a consensus that instructional coaches

need to combine teaching and content expertise with strong interpersonal and organizational

abilities as coaches attempt to improve teacher’s practice while navigating complex relationships

between policy mandates, school administrators, and wary teachers” (para. 6).

Best Practice of Instructional Coaches

Instructional coaches are gaining popularity in school districts as leaders scramble for ways

to improve teacher quality and implement 21st century instruction. Coaches have become the link

between district policy reform and the actual integration of newly learned strategies in the

classroom (Reddy et al., 2016). Instructional coaching positions that play the role of professional

sense-makers are being created in school districts across the country to develop expertise in content

areas that can be translated into effective classroom practice and increased student achievement

(Domina et al., 2015). The lack of research on the role of instructional coaches has left coaching
 44

open to interpretation, and many assigned to the position find themselves wearing too many hats

and ineffective as change agents. According to Wren and Vallejo (2009), “It is appropriate to expect

coaches to take on a few different responsibilities as instructional leaders, but those roles should be

relatively few, very clear, and highly prioritized.”

Expected to lead school reform efforts, instructional coaches need essential factors in place

to be effective in bringing a change in teacher practice, teacher efficacy, and student achievement.

Working with more than 150,000 coaches from around the world, Kelly & Knight (2019) identified

seven factors necessary for coaches to deliver high-quality, purposeful training that can maximize a

teacher’s and a student’s potential: partnership, coaching process, teaching strategies, data

gathering, communication, leadership, and system support. Working within the Impact Cycle model

of instructional coaching (Knight, 2017), teachers identify, learn, and improve instruction while

goal setting and modifying teaching practice as needed. “Look honestly at where you are and say

‘that’s not perfect, it’s good, but I can do better.’ It’s not an easy thing to admit there’s room for

improvement and coaches are people who facilitate that difficult and important kind of growth”

(Knight, 2017, 2:36).

Kelly and Knight (2019) offered the following seven factors for great instructional

coaching. First, a partnership must exist; one that fosters equality between the teacher and the coach

with the understanding that “everyone is not the same but everyone counts the same” (Thomas,

2018, para.4). The coaching partnership should allow for choice and voice, where ideas and

emotions are valued by both partners, and the ultimate decision about best practice is left to the

classroom teacher. A time for reflection and dialogue is necessary for building strong relationships,

with conversations going in both directions, discussing strengths and weaknesses as partners move

forward in the coaching process to develop best instructional practice. Second, the coaching
 45

experience should have a clearly established process for guiding the teacher and coach to reach the

intended instructional goals. The Impact Cycle is one such process of identifying, learning, and

improving as the teacher and coach work through the goals. “The process provides structure to

ensure that essential tasks are being addressed, but also leaves room for adaptation to suit the

specific needs of each teacher, coach and situation” (Kelly & Knight, 2019, para.4). Third, a coach

should provide teachers with an assortment of high-impact teaching strategies, the resources to

support those new strategies, and modeling guidance for teachers to hit targeted goals. Modeling

and adapting new practices into a content-specific curriculum is an integral part of the coaching

process. According to Poglinco and Bach (2004), “Of all the techniques coaches employ, modeling

instruction in individual classrooms is most likely to result in modifications in instructional

practices and adherence to the instructional delivery formats” (p. 399). Fourth, gathering data to

measure student achievement and student engagement is essential for coaches and teachers to

monitor goals and progress. Creating a data-driven culture using assessments, data analysis, and

action plans for changing instruction will empower schools to achieve significant gains in student

achievement. “Without an action plan, data is meaningless” (Bambrick-Santoyo, 2007, p.44). Fifth,

conversations between coaches and teachers need to take place in a setting “in which teachers feel

comfortable saying what they think” (Knight, 2011, p. 21). The process in which listening and

asking questions occurs allows coaches to create the best fit for each classroom teacher. Great

coaches “want to know what the teacher thinks, not guide the teacher to see what they see. They

stop persuading, and they start learning” (Knight, 2011, p. 22). Sixth, leaders lead by example.

Show a teacher an excellent model side-by-side to their practice and that teacher will find the gaps

and modify lessons. “Across disciplines, masters succeed by harnessing the impact of impeccable

modeling” (Bambrick-Santoyo, 2019, p. 19). Lastly, support from administration is critical to the
 46

success of instructional coaches. Leaders need to be intentional about providing instructional

coaches with clear goals and the necessary time to work with teachers: time to work through the

Impact Cycle and develop relationships that build teacher efficacy, which leads to increased student

achievement. “There are countless elements that can influence an instructional coaching program,

but these seven factors have proved to be the most essential to ensure effective coaching, and

improved instruction” (Kelly & Knight, 2019, para. 13).

Instructional Coaching and Student Achievement

The ultimate aim of any professional development program is to improve student learning.

Engaging in one-shot professional development workshops has had little impact on teacher quality

and produced minimal change in teacher practice (Harwell, 2003). The failure of traditional

professional development programs has resulted in research in educational reform initiatives

focusing on result-driven outcomes. (Quintero, 2019). One such reform, instructional coaching, is

impacting both teaching and learning.

Coaching, in duration, is believed to have more success changing teaching practices than

traditional professional development activities such as in-service days and courses taught by

academics with no applied focus. According to Joyce and Showers (2002), coached teachers

practice new instruction strategies more frequently, adapt new skills more appropriately, and are

more likely to guide students through new models for comprehension. Research gathered in a three-

year study by Charner and Medrich (2017) and a meta-analysis of over 1,300 studies by the

Institute of Education Sciences (Schroeder et al., 2007) found that teachers were in agreement that

instructional coaching improved student achievement. Sustained instructional coaching impacted

student achievement. Students had a better understanding of concepts and retention of information

and were able to demonstrate individual thinking. Substantial gains were made in standardized test
 47

performance, exceeding the non-coached counterpart students. “Instructional coaching done well,

and done systematically and in a consistent fashion, changes teaching and helps improve student

learning” (Charner & Medrich, 2017, p.8).

Summary

“The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those

who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn” (Ribeiro, 2020, para. 1). Society is evolving at a rapid pace,

and the skills needed to keep current with industry will require a new vision in education, a new

curriculum across the content area, and new instructional strategies to support teachers. Workplace

expectations are changing and putting demands on educators to use innovative approaches to

prepare students to meet the demands of employers. “We need to change how we’re learning and

how teachers are teaching” (Ribeiro, 2020, para. 6). PBL and content instructional coaching are

garnering increasing attention as a means to promote student success and support teachers during

this education reform movement. Thomas (2000) noted that although no universally accepted model

exists for PBL, a specific set of criteria separates PBL from other inquiry-style learning. According

to Thomas (2000), PBL projects support the constructivist model of student-centered learning,

involving transformation and construction of knowledge. The constructivism-theory approach to

instruction guides both the teacher and the student through this process of bridging content and the

4Cs (collaboration, communication, creativity, and critical thinking), emphasizing collaborative

student-led learning while supporting coaching methods. Additionally, PBL projects support the

experiential learning theory, transforming knowledge through experience, reflection, thinking, and

acting. Through construction and reflection, teachers are gaining confidence, increasing student

achievement, and becoming change agents in their districts. The influence of coaching methods can

be far-reaching in a 21st century PBL classroom.

 48

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Introduction

In this chapter, the researcher described the rationale for conducting the study, the design of

the study, and the methods in which the data were collected and analyzed. The purpose of this

interpretive/constructivist, qualitative method design is to create a starting point of deductive

research by examining and exploring the impact PBL teacher training has on teacher instruction and

student achievement. The study qualitatively examined the perceptions of PBL teachers on best

practice of PBL professional development. Additionally, the researcher interviewed PBL teachers

to assess the impact of PBL teacher training on promoting the acquisition of 21st century skills for

students.

The researcher chose a qualitative study to evaluate best practice in PBL professional

development at the Center for Advanced Professional Studies (CAPS) program. According to

Creswell (2012), the purpose of qualitative research is to explore a deeper und erstanding of a

particular phenomenon. The interpretivist/constructivist researcher relies upon the participants’

views of the problem being studied and recognizes the impact of their experiences throughout the

process (Creswell, 2012). This study focused on identifying effective practices in PBL training that

lead to student success and increased instructional capacity. Thus, the research can have immediate

benefits for education.

PBL teachers from the CAPS program were given an electronic survey via Google forms.

Qualitative data analysis was performed by looking for common themes or issues in the survey and

interview questions (Patton, 2014; Norris, 1997).

The focus of this qualitative study was to understand the experiences and perceptions of

professional development for supporting PBL teachers and implementing PBL curriculum. 21st
 49

century teaching and learning requires reformed instructional methods that will prepare students for

global competition. The researcher used methods of empirical inquiry to investigate contemporary

teaching methods within a real-life context to gain insight and understanding into best practice for

acquiring 21st century skills.

Chapter three outlines the research questions and methodology that guided this qualitative

study. The target population, sampling techniques, and other related methods are explained to

describe the participants in this qualitative study. The procedure to collect data and the construction

of interview questions are detailed in the latter part of chapter three, followed by an explanation of

the data analysis used in the study.

Research Questions

The primary research questions for this qualitative study were as follows:

1. What are CAPS instructors’ perceptions of best practice in professional development for

supporting and implementing PBL in the classroom?

2. What are CAPS instructors’ perceptions of best practice in PBL teacher training to support

student achievement and 21st century skills?

3. What factors were barriers to professional development in PBL implementation in the

CAPS program?

Design for the Study

The focus of this qualitative research study was to understand teachers' perceptions,

feelings, and experiences regarding the implementation and effectiveness of PBL teacher training to

support 21st century learning. An interpretive, qualitative approach was chosen so that respondents

were free to disclose their experiences and reveal their opinions about the topic in their classroom

setting (Creswell, 2014). The researcher was the instrument of data collection through closed-item
 50

questions, open-ended survey questions, and interviews. The data collection guided the design of

the study.

As defined by Creswell (2014), “Qualitative research is interpretive research; the inquirer is

typically involved in a sustained and intensive experience with participants” (p. 237). The teachers

were selected using single-stage sampling for open-ended surveys and purposeful sampling

methodology for collecting focus group data. Conclusions drawn and judgments made regarding the

research will depend on what has been sampled. “Purposeful sampling involves selecting

information-rich cases to study, cases that by their nature and substance will illuminate the

evaluation question being investigated” (Elliot, 2014, 29:10). The researcher collected data through

open-ended questions and surveys. The surveys contained semi-structured responses as well as

Likert scale questions. Data collection and the constructivist epistemological approach to the

analysis of the findings of this study lead to multiple constructed realities which can only be

understood from their context.

Participants

The population for this study was composed of high school CAPS instructors from three

Midwest school districts. The PBL instructors represent all CAPS program strands in urban and

rural school districts. The high school in district number one has an enrollment of 994 students with

56 teachers. The graduation rate is eighty-four percent, with a free and reduced lunch population of

sixty-two percent. One CAPS instructor from this district participated in the study. District number

two has an enrollment of 735 students with 49 teachers. The graduation rate is eighty-seven percent,

with a free and reduced lunch population of 63%. Five instructors participated in this study from

this district. District number three has an enrollment of 7,588 students and 376 teachers. The

graduation rate is ninety-four percent, with a free and reduced lunch population of 51%. Three
 51

CAPS instructors from this district participated in the study. The CAPS strands include Medicine

and Health, Business and Entrepreneurship, IT and Software Solutions, Engineering and

Manufacturing, Bioscience, Human Services, and Food Service.

The researcher chose members of the CAPS program based on their knowledge and

experience with PBL. Instructor qualities for the CAPS program include having a project

management mindset, being a growth facilitator, and having thinking, engagement, and great

communication skills (CAPS Network, 2022). Purposeful sampling method (Elliot, 2014) allowed

for an information-rich data analysis. The participants constructed knowledge and meaning from

their own experiences in the classroom.

Focus Group Interview Participants

Data were collected through three focus group interviews. The participants were selected by

purposeful sampling (Elliot, 2014). According to Creswell, “Draw a sample that can best

understand the research problem we’re looking at” (2022, 16:29). One focus group consisted of

three participants, a second group consisted of two participants, and a third group consisted of one

participant. The CAPS program in district one is two years old. The only participant from this

district has been teaching for six years, two being in CAPS. The participant’s title is Business

Strand Instructor. The CAPS program in district two started in 2014. Two instructors from this

district participated in the interview process, one of whom is new to teaching and CAPS. Making a

switch from corporate America to public schools, this participant is the instructor for the Business

and Technology Strand. The other instructor has been in education for thirty-seven years. Having

been a teacher and administrator, this instructor came out of retirement to lead CAPS in the Teacher

Education Strand. The CAPS program in district three began in 2014. Three instructors participated

in the interview process from this district. One instructor has been teaching for fourteen years,
 52

including two years in CAPS, and was named “teacher of the year” for her school district. This

instructor’s title is Medicine and Health Care Strand Instructor. The second instructor has been

teaching for seventeen years and has been a part of CAPS for one year, teaching the Engineering

and Manufacturing Strand. The third instructor has taught for twenty-one years and has been a part

of CAPS for one year as the Business and Entrepreneur Strand teacher. Interviews were held in a

natural educational setting at each CAPS campus. The purpose of the interview was to gain insight

and understanding of teachers' experiences in PBL professional development.

Design for Acquisition of Data

The researcher used single-stage sampling to collect survey data. A complete list of the

population to be surveyed was made available to the researcher (Creswell, 2014). After Research

Review Board approval and permission granted from each school district, a Google Forms survey

was sent to CAPS instructors two weeks prior to the focus group interviews. Data was collected and

organized using Google forms and Google Sheets. Results were analyzed from the surveys.

Participants were chosen for focus groups through purposeful sampling (Creswell, 2022).

The researcher set aside two weeks to visit three CAPS campuses and to collect data through

interviews. Participants were emailed two weeks prior to the site visit with an invitation and a

description of the study. The participants’ interview email included a statement of confidentiality,

consent to be surveyed, and the intended use and scope of results from the findings. Participants

were sent follow-up emails and phone calls as reminders and confirmation of the campus interviews

(Huebner & Zacher, 2021). Three participants were interviewed in two of the focus groups, and

one participant was interviewed in a third focus group. The researcher used survey responses and

focus group interviews to find common and emerging themes in the data to provide insight into best

practice for PBL professional development.

 53

Evidence of Sources

Data were collected from open-ended survey questions and semi-structured interviews. The

researcher surveyed data from CAPS teachers on best practices for implementing and supporting

teachers in acquiring 21st century skills. The researcher conducted interviews in a standardized

open-ended method to collect perceptions data regarding PBL teacher training and its impact on

best practice and student achievement. The use of semi-structured interviews is superbly suited for

examining uncharted territory, with the potential to uncover significant issues within the study

(Newcomer, 2015). The following sections provide specific data collection procedures for

interviews and processes monitored to ensure the rights and welfare of the subjects in the study.

Data Collection Procedures

Data collection took place over one month on three CAPS campuses. The researcher was

granted approval from her university’s Research Review Board as well as from CAPS program

directors. The researcher focused on introductions with the participants to provide an adequate

environment to elicit truthful responses and reflections. The researcher used single-stage and

purposeful sampling to collect data from CAPS teachers (Elliot, 2014). Data were collected using

the PBL Teacher Training Online Survey created by the researcher and administered to PBL

teachers. Data were collected and organized via Google Forms and Google Sheets. Data were

analyzed following the collection of results.

Additionally, the researcher used purposeful sampling to conduct interviews with focus

groups chosen based on the survey responses. Interviews took place over two days, one day on each

campus. Semi-structured questions were created by the researcher for the participant interviews.

Informed consent was given with survey participation, and semi-structured interviews were audio-

recorded with permission from the participants. Handwritten field notes completed by the
 54

researcher recorded the participant’s responses. In a cooperative process, the transcription of the

interview and empirical material interpretation was shared via Google Forms with the participant to

verify the analysis for accuracy. The subjects provide feedback and suggestions to improve further

and strengthen the findings of the study (Payne & Storbacka, 2009).

Instrumentation and Protocols

The researcher used an online Google Form survey consisting of Likert Scale and open-

ended questions to gather data from participants. A Likert five-point scale, one being least

important and five being most important, was used “to measure attitude in a scientifically accepted

and validated manner (Joshi et al., 2015, p.397). Additionally, focus-group interviews were

conducted to gather more specifics from participants. The research questions focused on participant

perspectives of professional development to support PBL. The research seeks to find emerging

themes to provide insight into PBL teacher training.

PBL Teacher Training Survey

The researcher designed a survey with Likert Scale and open-ended survey questions to

collect participant perceptions of best practice in PBL teacher training. The survey was organized

into four sections: training procedures, student outcomes, acquisition of 21st century skills, and

instructional capacity. Data were collected to address each of the research questions and coded

according to the predetermined themes, as well as additional emerging themes (Creswell, 2014).

Open-ended Interviews

In order to provide in-depth analysis, and uncover prevalent trends and underlying

motivations, additional data were collected using in-person, semi-structured interviews (Green &

Thorogood, 2004). Approval was given by the CAPS Network Coordinator to interview teachers. A

PBL teacher email was then sent to three CAPS campuses encompassing grade levels eleven and
 55

twelve. Six teachers were interviewed, three from one campus, two from another, and one

participant from a third campus. Emails were sent to gain interview appointments. An interview

question guide, based on the results of the survey questions, provided the dialogue between the

researcher and the participant. One hour was set aside for each focus group to explore the thoughts,

feelings, and beliefs about best practice for PBL professional development. Semi-structured

interviews provide an effective and feasible research method for collecting data in a qualitative

research study (Creswell, 2012).

According to Patton (2014), choosing the best interview questions can capture the

participants' perspectives and experiences while highlighting a program’s effectiveness. Interviews

were semi-structured and recorded, ensuring confidentiality. Interviews were conducted to evaluate

best practices in PBL teacher training. The evaluative application of semi-structured interview

questions is appropriate for this case study in order to evaluate individual outcomes, document

program progress and quality, and assess the real needs of the teachers (Patton, 2014).

Data Analysis

The data collected in this study were analyzed to determine the most effective PBL training

to increase both teacher capacity in instructional methods and student achievement. The PBL

Teacher Training Online Survey was assessed using the Likert scale and analysis of open-ended

questions. Latent content analysis was used to reveal a link between the results and their context

from the data using emerging and predetermined themes (Bengtsson, 2016). Predetermined themes

were noted in questions eight through ten, and thirteen through nineteen. The predetermined themes

include PBL training procedures, teacher instructional capacity, student achievement, and

acquisition of 21st century skills. The researcher chose a coding method to categorize data into

predetermined themes, emerging themes, and the relationships between them.

 56

A survey using Google forms was administered to the PBL teachers to determine

perceptions of PBL teacher training on student achievement, teacher practice (Knight, 2011), and

barriers to successful PBL professional development.

Research Question 1

1. What are a CAPS instructors’ perceptions of best practice in professional development for

supporting and implementing PBL in the classroom?

The researcher used coding, emergent themes, and categorical analysis (Creswell, 2014)

from the PBL Teacher Training Online Survey questions one through thirteen and Individual

Interview questions twenty-three and twenty-four to determine the factors that contributed to

successful PBL professional development to support classroom instruction according to PBL

teachers. Likert scale data were analyzed.

Research Question 2

2. What are CAPS instructors’ perception of best practice in PBL teacher training to support

student achievement and 21st century skills?

The researcher used coding, emergent themes, and predetermined themes (Creswell, 2014)

from the PBL Teacher Training Online Survey questions fourteen through eighteen and Individual

Interview question twenty-five to determine the perceived effectiveness of PBL professional

development on improving teacher practice to increase student success according to PBL teachers.

Likert scale data were analyzed.

Research Question 3

3. What factors were barriers to professional development in PBL implementation in the

CAPS program?
 57

The researcher used coding, emergent themes, and predetermined themes (Creswell, 2014)

from the PBL Teacher Training Online Survey questions nineteen through twenty-two and

Individual Interview question twenty-six to determine barriers to effective PBL teacher training.

Likert scale data were analyzed.

Summary

This chapter outlined the collection and analysis of data in a qualitative study in regard to

PBL teacher training in the CAPS program in three Missouri school districts. Designing curriculum

to support 21st century skills and providing support for teachers to learn new pedagogies has

educators under pressure to find best practice in professional development and teacher practice. The

researcher planned to use the data from this research to identify best practice in PBL teacher

training to support teacher practice, student achievement, 21st century skills, and identify barriers to

PBL implementation.

The methodologies of constructivist inquiry and experiential learning provided data about

the in-depth, real-world experiences of the effective practices of PBL professional development.

These experiences revealed perceptions, attitudes, and expectations of PBL professional

development regarding teacher practice and student achievement. This research addresses a gap in

the literature about the effectiveness of PBL teacher training. An explanation was offered for the

data collection and analysis procedures that guided this qualitative case study. Ultimately, data

analysis determined if PBL professional development improved teacher practice and student

achievement to support 21st century learning.

 58

CHAPTER 4: PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS

Introduction

Preparing students to be competitive in the 21 st century has been a topic of interest since

1990 (GCN Staff, 2007; Weinberger, 2007; Blinder, 2008; Swanson, 2014). Demands of the

workplace have placed pressure on academic leaders to adopt new teaching methods, shifting away

from the traditional style classroom and moving towards student-centered learning (Barron &

Darling-Hammond, 2008; Almulla, 2020). One such instructional method, which fosters 21 st

century competencies through a method of inquiry, is project-based learning.

Project-based learning (PBL) is an instructional method that focuses on the development of

knowledge from the perspective of active learning, by engaging and motivating students through

real-world problems (Jummat et al., 2017). PBL is effective in helping students learn both

discipline-based content and higher-order thinking skills, such as critical thinking and problem-

solving (Glazewski & Ertmer, 2010; Savery, 2006). As school districts move forward to integrate

this evidence-based learning method into the curriculum, the PBL professional development

process must be considered as traditional classroom teachers transition into 21 st century PBL

facilitators of learning. In order to gain an understanding of best practice in project-based learning

professional development, three districts were chosen to be studied that participate in the Center for

Advanced Professional Studies (CAPS). The CAPS Network is a national project-based learning

program whereby students partner with businesses and community leaders to solve real-world

problems. This PBL professional-development data gathered from CAPS instructors will give

insight into the impact of teacher training on PBL instructional methods and student outcomes

while supporting the 21st century framework. The constructivist-development theory and

experiential learning theory provided the basis for interpreting the data gathered from participants.

The districts being studied participate in CAPS to provide students with the opportunities to acquire
 59

the skills needed to be workforce ready. The intent of this qualitative study was to evaluate the

impact of PBL teacher training on teacher capacity and student achievement to support 21 st century

competencies in three schools supporting PBL programs. The following research questions were

created to guide the investigation.

1 What are CAPS instructors’ perceptions of best practice in professional development for

supporting and implementing PBL in the classroom?

2 What are CAPS instructors’ perceptions of best practice in PBL teacher training to support

student achievement and 21st century skills?

3. What factors were barriers to professional development in PBL implementation in the CAPS

program, according to CAPS instructors?

The remaining sections of chapter four include a detailed description of the data collection,

interview procedures, and in-depth analysis of data obtained from the surveys and in-person

interviews. The Data Collection section describes the setting of the study, the participants of the

study that provided data, and the data instruments and protocols used to collect the data. The Data

Analysis section describes how the data were synthesized into emergent themes and used to address

the research questions. Finally, a summary is provided to review the findings of the data.

Data Collection

Three Midwestern school districts that participate in the CAPS program were chosen as the

setting for the collection of data to support this qualitative study. CAPS instructors’ perceptions and

best practices of project-based learning professional development were collected through a survey

containing both open and closed items, as well as through semi-structured, open-ended focus group

interviews. Participants and school districts were chosen using purposeful sampling. Purposeful

sampling involves identifying and selecting participants who will make the most of limited
 60

resources (Creswell, 2014). For the researcher to begin data collection, district permission was

obtained from each CAPS school in which the study was being conducted. Initial contact was made

with the director of each CAPS program to gain consent to conduct the study and to gather

participant email addresses. Consent from directors was gained via email. Once contact information

was received, the researcher emailed the purpose of the study and informed participants of possible

focus group interview requests. The researcher informed the participants that the surveys would

remain anonymous and that no personal or educational information could be traced back to an

individual. The PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online Survey was sent to participants and

collected for two weeks. Participants were allowed to edit responses but could only complete one

survey.

After collecting the surveys, participants were contacted to set up focus group interviews on

each of the three campuses. Interviews were recorded and transcribed for accuracy using the

interview protocol. Participants were given the opportunity to check the transcriptions for accuracy.

Setting

This study was conducted in three Midwest CAPS school districts. These districts being

studied were chosen due to the project-based learning, professional development curriculum

platform (CAPS) being offered. CAPS programs being studied are located at partnering business

sites. Each program has a varying number of instructors, dependent upon the size of the CAPS

program at each district. Students in the CAPS program are traditionally juniors and seniors and are

enrolled in the program for two hours a day.

One of the school district’s CAPS program strands is located within a museum in the

downtown area. Students have a private room and easy accessibility to other local businesses. This

program has two instructors and ten students.

 61

Another school district’s CAPS program is located in a collaborative co-working space

downtown. This program also has two instructors and ten students, represents both strands offered

in this CAPS program, and is in an ideal location for partnering with businesses.

The other school district’s CAPS program strands are spread over three locations. Students

and instructors meet in a local hospital, a technical school, and an innovation park downtown. This

program has six instructors and approximately 30 students.

Participants

Participants for this study were purposefully selected from CAPS school districts. Since the

researcher was looking for professional development data from project-based learning programs, all

participants taught at least one CAPS course during the 2022-2023 school year. The CAPS directors

in each school district provided contact information for participants.

Data Instruments and Protocols

Perceptual data were gathered through the PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online

Survey and focus group interviews. The survey collected both open-ended and closed-item

responses to address each research question. Interviews were conducted to gather more specific

responses from the participants.

PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online Survey (Appendix C)

The PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online Survey was created using Google Forms

and was sent to participants via email containing a link to the survey. The three districts provided

eight instructors’ names to complete the survey.

The survey was divided into five sections. Three of these were not used to provide data but

to deliver necessary information regarding the survey to the participant. Section one provided the

participants with the purpose of the study. Section two outlined a participant’s informed consent
 62

and directions for taking the survey, and section three provided the researcher’s contact information

to ask questions prior to completing the survey.

Sections four and five were used to collect perceptual data using both open-ended and

closed items. Closed responses, using a Likert scale, contained statements related to each research

question. Participants were asked to select a response based on their level of agreement with each

statement, ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Open-ended responses were optional,

and there was no limit on response length.

Interviews

The interviews were conducted at the CAPS instructors’ worksites. Each survey participant

was asked to join the focus group interviews to gather specifics related to each research question.

An interview protocol was created with specific guiding questions for participants at each CAPS

worksite. The researcher began the interviews with questions about each participant’s background

in education and project-based learning. Once introductions were made, each interview protocol

had a list of questions that aligned with specific research questions.

Data Analysis

Data were collected from a variety of sources to analyze the research questions. Data

analysis began with reviewing the closed items on the survey; then, the researcher analyzed the

open-ended items to look for themes. Closed items were analyzed by percent positive, then an

average percentage was calculated for each item. The open-ended responses from the PBL Teacher

Training Research Study Online Survey were analyzed to look for common and emerging themes.

Common words or statements provided ideas that addressed the research questions. Responses from

the open-ended survey questions and interviews were used to provide descriptions in response to

the research questions.

 63

PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online Survey Closed Item Analysis

The PBL Teacher Training Survey was divided into the following sections: Supporting and

Implementing Project-based Learning, Student Achievement, and Barriers to Effective PBL

Teacher Training. Closed items sections were focused on collecting overall perceptions for each

question. Participants responded to stem statements for each section, choosing options ranging from

strongly agree to strongly disagree. These closed items were analyzed based on percent positive

feedback for each stem. Participants’ selections of strongly agree or agree were considered positive

responses. Percent positive percentages were based on the total number of positive responses

divided by the total number of responses. Percent positive for stem statements supporting research

questions one and two were calculated and recorded below in Figure 2.

PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online Percent of Positive Responses

Percent
Research Question/Section Item Stem Positive
The PBL professional development staff clearly
defines the PBL process. 62.50%
The PBL professional development staff are experts
in their field. 37.50%
The PBL development staff focuses on relationship
building. 50%
The PBL development staff is interested in listening
to you as they provide instruction. 37.50%
Research Question 1: Supporting In your PBL professional development, you have
and Implementing Project-based choice and a voice in what you learn and how you
Learning learn it. 50%
You feel your relationship with your PBL
professional development staff is a partnership and
not evaluative. 62.50%
You feel you can trust your PBL professional
development team. 50%
The PBL development team has a deep
understanding of the instructional practices that
they share with you. 50%
 64

Supporting and Implementing Project-based Learning Average Percent Positive 50%

The teaching practices that the PBL professional
development team shares effectively address your
needs and the needs of your students. 37.50%
Adequate time is given for you and the professional
development staff to meet and discuss lessons and
student work. 62.50%
Research Question 2: Student You and the PBL professional development staff
Achievement discuss goals through identifying, learning, and
improving the instructional methods. 37.50%
Your teaching practices have improved as a result
of PBL professional development. 37.50%
PBL teacher training focuses on and models the 4Cs
to support 21st century skills: critical thinking,
collaboration, communication, and creativity. 62.50%
Student Achievement Average Percent Positive 47.50%

Figure 2. Closed survey responses were reported as a percent positive and averaged for stem
statements supporting questions one and two.
________________________________________________________________________________

Open-Item Analysis

Open-ended survey items and interview transcripts were analyzed for patterns and trends to

support each research question. Responses were read and reexamined to grasp the participants’

perceptions and to identify emerging themes. Recurring responses to the open-ended survey were

color-coded, looking for near or exact words or phrases. Categories were then developed from

grouped responses. Emergent themes were established based on the coding and naming of these

categories. Participants’ responses related to each theme were counted and totaled. The survey-

responses count was based on specific words or phrases used by the participants to describe the

emerging theme. Additionally, interview responses were examined, looking for similar words and

phrases to align with the emergent themes. Interview responses were calculated based on words or

phrases provided by the interviewees that addressed the research questions. Responses were
 65

recorded based on the number of times the interviewees discussed the emergent theme. Figure 3

records the frequency of participant responses based on the emerging themes.

Emergent Themes within Survey and Interview Responses

Survey Interview
Response Response
Emergent Theme Words/Phrases Count Count
Survey Questions 20-21: Supporting and Implementing Project-based Learning & Interview
Questions focused on Research Question 1
Lack of Training (LT) No Training, No Clue, None, Flying Blind 6 9

Inadequate Training Not Beneficial, Poor Training, Not 5 5

(IT) Effective
What training should On-Going Training, More Training,
6 21
look like (WS) Summer Work, Mentors, Flexible
PBL Implementation
Clearly Defined, Effective, Differentiated 5 7
(PBLI)
Feedback (F) Whole Team, Networking, Collaboration 5 8

Program Expectations Clearly Defined, Goals, Clear 4 15

(PE) Expectations, Flexibility
Survey Questions 22-23: Student Achievement & Interview Questions focused on Research
Question 2
Evidence (E) No Evidence Seen, No Data, None 4 4

Transfer of Knowledge, Professional-

Application (A) 1 4
Based Learning Model
Higher Level, Increase Interest,
Engagement (En) 3 5
Longer/Deeper Retention of Information
What Do Students Want, Student Choice, 6
Reflection (R) Student Confidence, Fail and Try Again
Challenge, Rubrics, Ahead of Classmates, 10
Evaluation (Ev) Observations, Conversations
Survey Question 24: Barriers to Effective PBL Teacher Training
No Coaches, Coaches Without 3
Coaching (C) Knowledge
Limited Training, Minimal, No Specific
Training (Tr) Professional Development, Lack of 4 6
Modeling
 66

Too Much On Their Plate, No Experience

in Project-Based Learning, CAPS Pushed 4
Administration (Ad) Aside
Finding Meaningful Projects, Resources,
Projects (P) 6
Lack of Resources, Creating Projects
Time To Prepare Lessons, Scheduling
Time (T) Team Meetings, Similar Strands, 2 7
Digital/Online Communication
PBL Integrity Taught As A Structured Process, PBL as 3 5
(PBLIn) Art Form, Thinking PBL

Figure 3. Frequency of responses for each emergent theme.

Emergent Themes by Section. Open items on the survey were organized into three

categories; supporting and implementing project-based learning, student achievement, and barriers

to effective project-based learning training. Interview questions were also aligned to these

categories. Themes emerged from the open-item responses from the survey. The themes from

Figure 3 are organized and described below.

Supporting and implementing project-based learning. The supporting and implementing

category of the open-item analysis unveiled six themes: lack of training (LT), inadequate training

(IT), what training should look like (WTSL), PBL implementation (PBLI), feedback (F), and

program expectations (PE). Data collected during the interview also supported these themes.

The term lack of training was chosen to represent ideas uncovered during analysis. One-half

of the participants had no formal PBL training. No training, flying blind, and self-taught were terms

used to describe PBL training. This theme was mentioned 6 times in the open-ended survey

questions and 9 times in interviews.

Inadequate training was chosen as a category to represent words and phrases like not

effective, too rigid, and poor training. Participants recounted “one-time wonder” professional
 67

development training without any follow-up or extended support to implement new strategies. This

theme was mentioned 5 times in the open-ended survey questions and 5 times in interviews.

What training should look like is an additional theme for support and implementation of

project-based learning. This category garnered the most responses as participants were able to

express the need and type of training for each strand of CAPS. Mentors, instead of coaches, were

mentioned most often when participants discussed on-going support. Mentors, acting as buddies or

sounding boards, were more appealing and less threatening to participants. Participants described

bouncing ideas off of mentors and receiving feedback without being evaluated. Terms and phrases

such as modeling, authentic instruction, master teachers, and “see it in action” were repeated 6

times in the open-ended survey questions and 21 times in the interviews.

PBL implementation was chosen as a category to represent repeated works like clear,

effective, and defined goals. One participant described the process as “covering the big rocks” when

training and implementing PBL in professional development. In other words, cover the most

important steps to see the big PBL picture and fill in the tiny details later. These terms were

repeated 5 times in the open-ended survey questions and 7 times in interviews.

Another emerging theme for supporting and implementing PBL was feedback. whole team,

collaboration, and networking were terms used by participants to describe the type of feedback that

would be beneficial in PBL. One participant expressed interest in a “What Works Conference” for

instructors to share-out ideas in PBL that drive success in the CAPS programs. These terms were

repeated 2 times in the open-ended survey questions and 5 times in the interviews.

Program expectations was the last emerging theme from the supporting and implementing

PBL section found in the investigation. Participants mentioned clearly defined, less rigid, and

flexibility. Participants noted that expectations of the PBL programs often changed with a change of
 68

leadership. It was also noted that PBL program directors were often not master teachers and were

ill-equipped to lead PBL discussions. The term clear expectations was mentioned 4 times in

interviews.

Student Achievement. The student achievement category of the open-item analysis and

interview data revealed 5 themes: evidence (E), application (A), engagement (En), reflection (R),

and evaluation (Ev). These themes were repeatedly mentioned by participants in both the survey

and interviews when asked about best practice in PBL teacher training for supporting student

achievement and 21st century skills.

Evidence was chosen as a category to represent repeated words like no data, conversations,

and challenge. Participants new to CAPS found it difficult to show evidence of student

achievement, while instructors with more experience were able to show evidence of student success

through conversations with CAPS student alumni. This theme was mentioned 4 times in both the

survey and interviews.

The second theme that emerged in the student achievement category was application. This

theme was mentioned 1 time in the survey and 4 in interviews. Real-world transfer, correlations in

learning, and competitions were repeated words and phrases aligned to this theme. Participants

described students transferring knowledge from core classes to CAPS projects and vice versa.

Instructors also indicated a need for competitions within the CAPS organization as a way for

students to exercise their critical thinking skills.

The third theme related to student achievement that emerged was engagement. Participants

mentioned higher level, deeper retention, and spark for learning. Terms related to engagement were

repeated 3 times on the survey and 5 times in interviews. Participants mentioned students caring
 69

about their projects and the ability of students to describe their projects in great detail several

months later.

Reflection was another theme that emerged related to student achievement. Terms such as

student choice, fail and try again, and student confidence were used to describe student reflection

on PBL projects. Participants describe students not doing well during a project presentation but

gaining confidence with the support of teammates and trying again with success. The term

reflection was selected to represent this theme and was mentioned 6 times in interviews.

The last theme that emerged related to student achievement was evaluation. Challenge,

rubrics, and observations were repeated words that represented the category of evaluation.

Participants reported that CAPS alumni return to share stories of using communication and critical

thinking skills acquired in CAPS in college or study-abroad experiences. Alumni also express that

their skills are superior to their peers in post-high school academic settings. The theme was

mentioned 10 times in the interviews.

Barriers to PBL Teacher Training. The last section of the survey and interview focused

on barriers to PBL teacher training. This section revealed six themes: Coaching (C), training (Tr),

administration (Ad), projects (P), time (T), and PBL integrity (PBLIn).

Data collected from the survey revealed the theme coaching. The terms no coaches and

coaches without knowledge were repeated 3 times in interviews. Participants expressed opinions of

dislike towards coaching for PBL training. These participants felt that coaches already wore too

many hats and were not experts in PBL methodology.

The term training was chosen to represent repeated ideas uncovered during an analysis of

barriers to PBL teacher training. Limited training, lack of modeling, and handbooks were used

several times when inquiring about barriers to PBL training. One participant shared her opinion of
 70

“one-hit wonders,” referring to PBL conference training whereby instructors receive one day of

training without any assistance in implementation from the training, follow-up support, or reflection

of the training. This theme was mentioned 4 times in the survey and 6 times in interviews.

Administration was chosen as a category to represent repeated words like too much on their

plate, no experience in PBL, and CAPS pushed aside. One participant commented, “Districts

already mandate so much professional development.” Participants shared that CAPS teacher

training was on the back burner because the program is successful without training. This theme was

mentioned 4 times in interviews.

Projects was another problematic area causing barriers to PBL teacher training. The phrases

finding meaningful projects, lack of resources, and creating projects were repeated 6 times in

interviews. Participants shared their frustration in finding quality projects, differentiated projects,

and a lack of training in creating projects from current curriculum.

The term time was chosen as a category to represent repeated words and phrases like time to

prepare lessons, networking, and scheduling team meetings. Participants often described the lack of

time to meet with other same strand CAPS instructors, given the distance between project sites.

This theme was mentioned 2 times in the survey and 7 times in interviews.

PBL integrity was another barrier to PBL teacher training. Phrases such as PBL as an art

form, adjusting to PBL thinking, and taught as a structured process were repeated 3 times in the

survey and 5 times in interviews. Participants shared that steps of the authentic PBL process must

be maintained and part of the PBL training,

Presentation of Findings

The purpose of this study was to investigate CAPS instructors’ perceptions of best practice

in PBL teacher training to support implementation and student achievement. Participants’ responses
 71

were gathered using the PBL Teacher Training Research Survey, containing both closed and open

items, and focus group interviews. The following sections will discuss the research findings for

each research question based on the collected and analyzed data.

Research Question 1

What are CAPS instructors’ perceptions of best practice in professional development for

supporting and implementing PBL in the classroom? This section focused on PBL teacher training

and its impact on teacher capacity and buy-in. Overall, it was found that little to no PBL teacher

training was available, and for the districts that did provide training, the quality was poor, and that

training was, therefore, ineffective.

Beginning with a closed-item analysis of the PBL Teacher Training Research Study Survey,

CAPS instructors' perceptions were gathered to determine the level of agreement with each

statement. The survey yielded results of 50% under the supporting and implementing section of the

survey. Interview responses were used to provide specifics regarding the impact of PBL

professional development on teacher instruction to support 21 st century competencies. Additionally,

six themes emerged from the open-item analysis that focused on best practice in PBL professional

development. The following sections will discuss findings and themes related to research question

1: lack of training (LT), inadequate training (IT), what training should look like (WS), PBL

implementation (PBLI), feedback (F), and program expectations (PE).

Lack of Training (LT) Lack of PBL teacher training emerged as a theme during the

investigation. One-half of the participants responded that they had never received any formal PBL

professional development. The terms no training, no clue, and flying blind were mentioned by 6

survey participants and 6 interview participants, indicating a need for PBL teacher training.
 72

One participant stated, “I have had no specific PBL training. I feel like I am flying blind.” In

total, 87.5% reported having no training or training that occurred many years ago. In general,

participants expressed the need for specific training for CAPS.

Inadequate Training (IT). Another theme that emerged when participants were asked

about teacher training to support PBL instruction was inadequate training and trainers. Participants

with any PBL teacher training experience stated that the professional development was inadequate.

One participant stated, “My teacher training talks about PBL in a broad sense, but I really don’t

know what it looks like in effective ways. I also don’t have a clue how to implement it.”

The survey results supported this statement, with only 37.5% of participants agreeing or

strongly agreeing that PBL professional development staff are experts in their field. Also, only 50%

of participants agreed or strongly agreed that the PBL development team deeply understands the

instructional practices they share with staff. A survey respondent stated, “It has been several years

since I have had any official PBL training; most of what I learn I have learned through my own

research.” Not beneficial, poor training, and not effective were mentioned 5 times in the survey and

9 times in 6 interviews. Another participant stated, “It would also be helpful to only have master

teachers facilitating PBL training, instead of someone that started as a teacher but moved to district

support within the first few years of teaching.”

What training should look like (WS). What training should look like emerged as a theme

during an analysis of this study. This theme builds on best practice for supporting and implementing

PBL in the classroom. Thirty-seven and a half percent of survey participants agreed or strongly

agreed that the PBL development staff is interested in listening to CAPS teachers as they provide

instruction. One CAPS instructor stated, “Variation in implementation and less of a focus on a rigid

structure of PBL design is ideal. Instructors need more time to develop units and reflect on their
 73

effectiveness.” Phrases such as more training, mentor, flexible, and summer work were mentioned 6

times on the survey and 21 times in 6 interviews. According to one participant,

I did PBL training and learned the “right” way to implement PBL. Then I later did another

PBL training in which I learned that the “right” way I learned last time was a different

model and that the updated model using a different resource was the real “right” way. Both

models seemed flawed. My professional opinion is that this was because there is no “right”

way to do PBL, and the rigid structures of both models were not realistic and did not best

support authentic student engagement and inquiry. Flexibility would be beneficial.

PBL Implementation. PBL implementation emerged as a theme during investigation.

Sixty-two and a half percent of survey participants agreed or strongly agreed the PBL professional

development staff clearly defines the PBL process. One participant stated,

Gathering bits and pieces, or nuggets, of information throughout the trainings is helpful. The

specific process was not helpful, but I always get little ideas here and there that I can use.

The networking with other educators was also very helpful.

The terms clear expectations, clearly defined, and flexibility were mentioned by 3 survey

participants and 4 interview participants. One participant explained in their response, “There should

be no set model or preconceived ideas about teaching PBL. Teachers should learn about inquiry and

experiential learning and apply this to their instruction.”

Research Question 2

What are CAPS instructors’ perceptions of best practice in PBL teacher training to support

student achievement and 21st century skills? This section was focused on understanding how PBL

professional development impacted student achievement. Survey questions focused on PBL teacher

training practices that give students the necessary skills to be workforce ready.
 74

Beginning with the closed-item analysis of the PBL Teacher Training Research Study

Survey, CAPS instructors’ perceptions were gathered to determine the level of agreement with each

statement. With an average of 47.5% positive, it could be concluded that teachers are not sure how

to measure or gather student improvement data in their CAPS programs. Open-ended survey

responses and interviews identified related themes when asked about evidence of student

achievement. Thus, five main themes emerged: evidence (E), application (A), engagement (En),

reflection (R), and evaluation (Ev). Each theme will be discussed separately.

Evidence (E). When asked what type of evidence is seen in the classroom for increasing

student achievement in the CAPS program, a wide array of answers were given (such as district

data, observations, conversations, and engagement in projects). Thirty-seven and a half percent of

survey participants agreed that the professional development team effectively addresses the needs

of the students. One participant stated, “I have not seen any data, so I don’t know if our program

has increased student achievement.” Another participant noted,

I do not have specific evidence that PBL professional development increases student

achievement, but I do feel that projects, in general, increase student interest and

engagement, which likely improves student achievement. I do find project-based learning to

be critical; I just don’t think that the professional development I have experienced regarding

PBL has been very beneficial.

Other instructors chose to view this question from their observations. One participant stated, “Their

higher level of engagement leads to longer and deeper retention of information.” Another

participant expressed it this way,

I have seen my students take the skills and knowledge they have acquired in a traditional

classroom and apply them to real-world problems. They begin to see the correlation between
 75

their learning and real-world issues/professions. I believe it gives them a new spark for

learning.

The CAPS program continues to follow high school graduates and their progress through surveys.

One instructor reported about an alumnus, “One of my former students went to Korea for a year and

a half and expressed to me that the skills she learned in CAPS helped her immensely. She said she

was far ahead of her classmates.”

Still, other instructors are having difficulty with student evaluation and providing evidence

for student achievement. One participant remarked, “This is a challenge. I try to have a rubric for

everything. We are currently looking into more certifications that will help with objective

evaluations.” And finally, one participant expressed,

I think this has been one of my biggest challenges, and one of the things I have developed is

simple, daily goals and achievement documentation. I find this holds them accountable, and

I can use this document for grading what they are getting done since they are often working

on different projects and at different paces.

Application (A). The application of methods learned in PBL teacher training is the crux of

implementing this inquiry process. Applying what instructors learn from professional development

or by trial and error leads to reflection and evaluation. One participant stated, “First-year CAPS

instructors should spend the school year being the student to understand the process.” Implementing

new ideas learned in training or from a colleague are applications of knowledge that will push

facilitators to capacity. One participant stated, “My students present every other week. I have

created monthly projects for my students on top of their site projects. These keep them sharp, and

their skills increase rapidly.”

 76

According to the survey results, 37.5% of the participants agree that the professional

development staff adequately discuss goals through identifying, learning, and improving the

instructional methods. One participant noted, “I have struggled with a change in identification of

our program. We started as project-based learning, then we changed to problem-based learning, and

now at GO CAPS, we are profession-based learning. These changes can cause confusion in

implementation.”

Engagement (En). Keeping students engaged in learning, which can lead to student

success, is the primary focus of educators. Closed-item analysis revealed that 62.5% of survey

participants agreed or strongly agreed that PBL teacher training focused on critical thinking,

creativity, collaboration, and communication was linked to student achievement. One participant

stated, “CAPS projects might not hit every standard, but CAPS students can think and process

information.” Bridging state standards and 21 st century skills is a concern for administration and

teachers, especially regarding state testing. According to one participant, “Test scores will take care

of themselves. We can’t do 100 science standards a year. Instead, let’s pick the ones to be problem-

solvers.”

Reflection (R). A time for reflection for students and instructors in the CAPS program is

essential for developing a great program. Choice and voice allow students to move outside of their

comfort zone and explore new ideas. A safe learning environment allows for reflection and new

perspectives. According to one participant,

When I first talk to students, I ask them what they want to teach in the education strand.

Sixty-six percent want to work with lower elementary students. After spending two days

with every grade level, I ask the question again. ‘Where do you want to spend more time?’
 77

After reflection, some students preferred to go back to the middle school instead of lower

elementary. These are lightbulb moments for my students.

Closed-item analysis revealed that only 37.5% of survey participants agreed that teaching

practices have improved due to PBL professional development. Components such as reflection are

missing from teacher training. According to another participant, “I am figuring out what works

through trial and error. This program is powerful, and the best reflection comes from graduates who

return and share their success stories.”

Evaluation (Ev). The evaluation process is imperative to check for student progress.

Closed-item analysis revealed that 37.5% of survey participants agreed that PBL professional

development effectively addressed the needs of the instructor and the students. One participant

stated, “Most of my evaluations are through observation and conversations with students. Projects

have rubrics—which are sometimes broad to allow for the vast individuality of the topics/projects.”

Rubrics were mentioned 6 times during interviews, and one participant explained,

When I heard there was a CAPS hub of resources, I thought it would be a place where I

could find instructional material, lessons, project ideas, etc. I did not find that. I would like

to see some rubrics available for instructors for grading professionalism.

Research Question 3

What factors were barriers to professional development in PBL implementation in the CAPS

program? This section focused on the difficulties of providing effective teacher training for CAPS

instructors to support student achievement. Survey questions focused on barriers within classrooms,

throughout the district, and professional development outside the district. Overall, it was found that

many barriers exist within the CAPS program even though the program is still successful, according

to participants.
 78

Beginning with the open-ended survey responses, each participant expressed different

barriers within their program, specific to their CAPS strand and district support. Six barriers

emerged during the analysis that address this question. The following sections will discuss findings

and themes related to question 1: Coaching (C), Training (Tr), Administration (Ad), Projects (P),

Time (T), and PBL Integrity (PBLI).

Coaching (C). Coaching emerged as a theme in the interview analysis after several

participants expressed opinions toward coaches and PBL teacher training. One participant stated,

“Coaches are already doing too many functions in a district. We had coaches move into positions of

PBL coaches in our district without any knowledge of PBL.” Another participant responded, “No

one coached in general. They are spread too thin. The district uses them to fill in every gap, and

they no longer serve their purpose as instructional improvement coaches.”

Instead of coaches, several participants expressed the need for mentors in CAPS. According

to one participant, “Having a mentor would be beneficial in so many ways. This mentoring would

be more of a buddy system. I could ask them, ‘How did you solve this issue?’ or ‘Are you having

problems with this area?’ A mentor is more of a friendship and not too threatening.” Another

participant stated, “A mentor is a sounding board for ideas.” However, one participant said, “Some

mentors become rigid. They say, ‘We’ve never done it like that,’ and this can decrease the

flexibility and authentic experiences.”

Training (Tr). Another theme that emerged when participants were asked about PBL

professional development barriers was training. The most notable response from the participants

was a lack of training, or poor training, across each of the CAPS programs. One participant

explained this in their response,

 79

It’s hard to take people seriously that have spent fewer than five years in the classroom,

teaching real students, especially when they don’t model the techniques in the PD course

they are teaching. This is especially true when they communicate the approach as a

systematic and specifically structured process instead of an art form that demands fluidity,

responsiveness, and a great deal of flexibility.

Another participant weighed in on district teacher training, “Districts already have so much man-

dated professional development. PBL teacher training would be one more hoop.” Another

participant revealed,

In our district, we are lucky to get to do some CAPS professional development separate

from the rest of the regular classroom instructors. However, getting together with others

who teach a similar strand is difficult. Other than the summer CAPS Huddle, I don’t know

of any specific CAPS professional development.

One participant received high-level PBL professional development in Oklahoma through the

National Science Foundation training. This training was followed by three years of ongoing

support. This participant noted, “This training was years ago. I rely on this knowledge and my years

of experience as an instructor and as a past administrator to guide my CAPS teaching.”

Administration (Ad). Administration emerged as a theme during the analysis of interviews.

Administration causing barriers to PBL teacher training was expressed 4 times during interviews.

One participant revealed,

As a past administrator, I can say for certain that principals already have too many balloons

in the air. Most administrators don’t have experience with PBL. If there are no complaints

coming from the CAPS instructors and enrollment is good, then administration assumes the

program is running well, and they leave it alone.” One participant added, “This is my first
 80

year of teaching CAPS. I have had to figure it out mostly on my own through research. I

would very much like for administration to provide on-going PD for CAPS.

Projects (P). Another theme that emerged during interview analysis was projects. Finding

projects, or creating projects, is the driving force for CAPS. Participants mentioned projects 6 times

in interviews. According to one participant, “Honestly, finding projects has been difficult. We had

more come in at the end of the year, but at the beginning of the year, it was extremely difficult.

Having some training on creating projects when there aren’t any would be helpful.” Another

participant explained, “I would like more training on how to differentiate within projects. I want to

explore how to use a project in multiple ways for students with varying interests.”

Time (T). Time emerged as a theme during the investigation, mentioned 7 times in the

interviews. Finding time for professional development, reflection, and finding projects were all

concerns and barriers to effective PBL teacher training. One participant revealed, “Professional

development for PBL should occur in all summer months, not just in August. Summer PD should

provide the modeling for teachers so these instructional methods can be applied and analyzed at the

beginning of the school year.” Another participant shared, “I wish there were time to record the

projects from beginning to end. These records would be valuable training tools.” Time spent in

professional development training was also a concern. One participant shared, “Once a year PBL

teacher training is not enough. Teachers need fresh perspectives and stuff they can use in their

classrooms on the same day they attend PD.”

PBL Integrity (PBLI). Project-based learning is unique and has five unique criteria that

differentiate it from other inquiry-based learning. These criteria are centrality, focus question,

constructive investigations, autonomy, and realism (Thomas, 2000; BIE, 2017). According to one

participant, “One-hit-wonder conferences won’t get it. Integrity issues in PBL need to be addressed
 81

in teacher training. Project-based learning professional development must focus on all the

components.” Another participant added, “Variation in implementation and less of a focus on a

rigid structure of PBL design is necessary. Projects should flow.”

New instructors may not understand project-based learning integrity. One participant

revealed, “Two new teachers are struggling. They are still in lecture format—still trying to teach

like a regular classroom.” Another participant added, “Administrators have to pick the right

teachers for CAPS instructors and for leading professional development. If they buy in, others will

follow. These are the instructors that can lead teacher trainings, build relationships, and maintain

PBL integrity.”

Summary

Developing 21st century learners to meet the needs of our globally connected society is

transforming curriculum in many school districts. Employers expect graduates to enter the job

market with the skills necessary to be productive employees (Hodge & Lear, 2011). Project-based

learning is a specific instructional methodology CAPS instructors use to address these needs. This

qualitative study collected CAPS instructors’ perceptions of effective PBL professional

development strategies to support and implement PBL and increase student achievement.

Data was collected via the PBL Teacher Training Research Study Survey and focus group

interviews. The survey contained closed-ended Likert scale questions as well as open-ended

questions that allowed participants to explain in more detail about their PBL teacher training.

Interviews were conducted on each CAPS campus to gather more specifics about each research

question. Data from each research question was analyzed, beginning with the closed items and

ending with emerging themes from the open-item questions.

 82

Answers to research question one revealed that 50% of participants agreed or strongly

agreed that PBL professional development is effective in supporting and implementing PBL in a

CAPS classroom. Open-ended data revealed that 50% of the CAPS instructors were receiving no

PBL teacher training, and the other 50% of participants felt that the training was not effective. The

data also revealed that CAPS instructors were interested in ongoing training, clearly defined PBL

implementation methods and expectations, networking, and collaboration.

Research question two focused on the impact of PBL teacher training on supporting student

achievement and 21st century skills. Five themes emerged when seeking to understand the

effectiveness of PBL professional development on student success. Evidence, application,

engagement, reflection, and evaluation themes uncovered that student success is measured by

longer and deeper retention, observations, conversations, transfer of knowledge, and student

confidence.

Research question three was directed at finding barriers to PBL teacher training. Five

themes emerged to address issues in establishing effective PBL professional development.

Coaching, training, administration, projects, time, and PBL integrity themes uncovered areas that

caused frustrations and confusion in PBL teacher training. Additionally, it was found that mentors

were preferred over instructional coaches to provide a PBL “buddy” and sounding board.

Chapter 5 provides further discussion of the study’s findings. The researcher will present an

overview of the emerging themes related to the research questions. Chapter 5 will include

recommendations for future studies.

 83

Chapter 5: Discussion

Introduction

The 21st century global economy favors highly skilled, highly educated workers (Hodge &

Lear, 2011). In order to prepare students to be globally competitive, school districts and teachers

must switch from traditional, outdated modes of instruction to classrooms engaged in vibrant

learning and problem-solving. Today’s students must be proficient in content and workplace skills,

including communication, collaboration, creativity, and critical thinking (Wagner, 2014). Public

schools are looking for guidance and support for professional development training to increase

teacher capacity and instructional methods that support 21 st century competencies. A fresh approach

in education is necessary to develop the skills characteristic of 21 st century learners. One such

instructional method designed to support the 21 st century framework is project-based learning.

Three Midwestern school districts participating in the CAPS program were chosen for this

study. These CAPS programs support 21st century learning for both the instructor and student. The

programs are placed within working businesses, and students are either in 11 th or 12th grade, with a

few exceptions. These programs have been around for at least eight years, and CAPS continues

expanding across the nation and the globe. While many researchers believe these project-based

learning programs to be highly effective in engaging and motivating students to become critical

thinkers (Jummat et al., 2017), there is little evidence to verify best practice in professional

development to support student achievement and build teacher capacity. Currently, a national CAPS

curriculum or instructor’s guide for facilitators is not available, and a once-a-year Summer Huddle

for instructors is the only professional development available through CAPS. School districts are

free to develop their own teacher training or not, and programs are not tied to any particular CAPS

curriculum. School districts have complete autonomy in building their own CAPS program.
 84

The purpose of this qualitative study was to use CAPS instructors’ perceptual data to

evaluate the impact PBL teacher training has on teacher instruction and student achievement for

ongoing support for PBL implementation and 21 st century competencies.

Design and Procedures

The study was designed to collect perceptions of CAPS instructors to evaluate best practice

in PBL professional development. Data were collected using an online survey and focus group

interviews. One month was set aside to collect data using instruments designed for the study.

Permission was granted to complete the study through the university’s Research Review Board

(RRB) and the cooperating school districts.

The PBL Teacher Training Research Study Survey (see Appendix D) was created for the

study and sent to eight CAPS instructors from three school districts. The researcher worked with

CAPS site directors to collect contact information for instructors. The survey contained closed and

open-ended questions to gather participants’ perceptions of PBL teacher training. Participants

voluntarily completed the surveys and gave their informed consent within the survey.

Semi-structured, focus group interviews were conducted with each CAPS program. The

interview questions focused on supporting and implementing project-based learning, student

achievement, and barriers to effective PBL teacher training. Interview questions were conducted to

elicit specific details and perceptions that address PBL teacher training. Interviews were recorded

using an iPhone and transcribed for accuracy. Follow-up with participants allowed for review of the

transcriptions and clarification of statements.

Survey data from closed items were analyzed, looking for overall instructor perceptions of

PBL teacher training. Repeated words and phrases were uncovered during analysis of open items

and interview transcripts, leading to the identification of emerging themes in the study. Findings
 85

from the study were organized by research question and presented in chapter four. The summary of

the findings can be found in the following section.

Summary of Findings

The study examined the perceptions of best practice in PBL professional development for

CAPS instructors to produce highly effective teachers and students for the twenty-first century. The

three research questions were addressed by data collected from surveys and interviews. Perceptions

of best practice in PBL professional development to support both students and teachers in 21 st

century skills were analyzed through the lenses of constructivist-development theory and

experiential learning theory. According to the constructivist theory, “individuals create their own

new understandings, based upon the interaction of what they already know and believe, and the

phenomena or ideas with which they come into contact” (Richardson, 1997, p.3). Participants’

perceptions of best practice in PBL professional development were based on their own experiences

from teaching in the classroom. Through the experiential learning cycle, individuals create

knowledge by grasping and transforming experiences (Kolb & Kolb, 2009). The themes that

emerged in the study were reflective of these theories.

Each research question was analyzed using the data collected during the study. Eight CAPS

instructors were surveyed from across three programs using the PBL Teacher Training Research

Study Online Survey. Of the eight participants surveyed, 75% returned the survey completed. Six of

the participants that completed the survey were interviewed in focus groups.

For question one, the researcher used categorical analysis, coding, and emergent themes

(Creswell, 2014) from the PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online Survey questions four

through eleven, seventeen, twenty, twenty-one, and Interview Question numbers one through four

to determine best practice in supporting and implementing project-based learning according to

 86

CAPS instructors. Likert scale data from survey questions four through eleven were reported in

Figure 1 in Chapter Four. Analysis of survey questions revealed that 50% of participants agreed or

strongly agreed that PBL professional development provides support and implementation strategies

needed to build teacher capacity. Lack of training, inadequate training, what training should look

like, PBL implementation, feedback, and program expectations were all mentioned several times in

the open items and indicated as impacting PBL teacher training. One participant noted in the

interview, “It has been several years since I have had any official PBL training, and most of what I

know I have learned through my own research.”

For research question two, the researcher used categorical analysis, coding, and emergent

themes (Creswell, 2014) from the PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online Survey questions

number twelve through sixteen, eighteen, nineteen, twenty-two, twenty-three, and Interview

Questions five through nine to determine best practice in PBL teacher training to increase student

achievement. Likert scale data from survey questions revealed that 47.5% of participants agreed or

strongly agreed that their current professional development staff provides the tools necessary to

increase student success. The following emerging themes appeared concerning PBL teacher training

and its impact on student achievement: evidence, application, engagement, reflection, and

evaluation. All participants revealed that district data was unavailable or did not exist, to correlate

student achievement for CAPS students in relation to standardized test scores or retention of

information. However, participants were able to describe very specific moments of learning,

retention of information, and reflection by CAPS students, and through constructive learning and

experiential learning the instructors concluded that deep and meaningful learning is occurring in

each program studied.

 87

For research question three, the researcher used categorical analysis, coding, and emergent

themes (Creswell, 2014) from survey question number twenty-four and Interview Question number

ten to determine the barriers to effective PBL teacher training. The following emerging themes

appeared as stumbling blocks to successful PBL professional development: coaching, training,

administration, projects, time, and PBL integrity. The majority of participants chose not to answer

this question on the survey; however, this interview question received the highest number of

responses. Instructors felt comfortable sharing ideas and needs for their programs. The researcher

concluded that the constructivist-development mindset of a teacher and the methodology of

experiential learning provides the reflection, analysis, and evaluation needed to develop meaningful

PBL teacher training.

Discussion of Major Themes

While investigating CAPS instructors’ perceptions of PBL professional development on

teacher capacity and student achievement, themes emerged that provided insight into teacher

training experiences (or lack of), student achievement evidence, and barriers to effective PBL

training. Six themes emerged from research question one, five from research question two, and six

from research question three.

Themes for Research Question 1

Lack of Training. The theme of lack of training emerged when participants were asked about

factors that contribute to successful PBL teacher training and how we better prepare new teachers to

instruct in the CAPS program. This theme supports findings from the closed -item analysis, with

50% of participants agreeing that PBL teacher training in their respective school districts supports

and develops their instructional methods. Supporting teachers as they navigate new instructional

innovations requires sustained and substantial improvements in instruction (Lunde & Knight, 2019;
 88

Buck Institute of Education, 2017). A survey participant summarized their program's PBL training:

"I have not undergone any PBL training.” Two other participants said they felt like they were

“flying blind.” So, while 50% stated that their program offers PBL teacher training that supports

instructional methods, 4 out of 8 participants revealed that they had never participated in formal

PBL professional development. Participants from two school districts revealed that PBL teacher

training does not exist in their CAPS program. According to Lynch (2022), “Professional

development is meant to be continuous, applicable, and cooperative with a chance for reflection or

feedback” (para.7). Teacher training is essential for new teachers to have the best chance of

succeeding in their professions and for veteran teachers to be able to address new problems in

education. These participants’ perceptions, along with other data, suggest that training is an

essential part of PBL professional development to prepare teachers to become facilitators for 21 st

century competencies.

Inadequate Training. The theme inadequate training developed as a result of asking participants

what changes they would like to see made in their PBL professional development. Five participants

responded to this open-ended survey question. Hattie (2003) suggests, “We should focus on the

greatest source of variance that can make the difference—the teacher. We need to ensure that this

greatest influence is optimized to have powerful and sensationally positive effects” (p.3).

Excellence in teaching remains the most powerful influence on student achievement. Therefore,

high-quality PBL teacher training should be the focus of school districts in the CAPS program.

Administrators should choose experts in project-based learning to serve as mentors and lead

professional development. Expert teachers differ from experienced teachers in the way they

construct knowledge, make unique lesson plans according to students’ needs, and have more

understanding of the how and why of student success.

 89

Regarding PBL training, one participant stated, “I have learned three different ways to do

PBL; every model seems flawed.” Another participant attested that the PBL workshops she

attended were more about celebrating CAPS instead of focusing on instructor training. Another

instructor suggested,

New teachers need intense training with a focus on the “big rocks.” We can’t have “one-hit-

wonder” conferences and not support teachers when they return to the classroom. PBL

training needs to focus on all the components that make PBL different from other types of

inquiry.

The data from eight CAPS instructors find that either no training or ineffective training is occurring

in the three CAPS programs studied. Participants made suggestions for more focused and structured

PBL training and, at the very least, providing any type of training. One participant commented, “I

would just like to have some training.” Administrators should include PBL teacher training in their

district-wide professional development plan.

What Training Should Look Like. Data from this study suggests that PBL professional

development should include ongoing support, summer work to prepare for the start of school,

flexibility in the PBL model, and a mentoring “buddy” system. Participants suggested that a

mentor, rather than a coach, would be beneficial in many ways. One participant added that

mentoring can be a positive experience if flexible and authentic experiences take place in the

relationship. Participants agreed that coaching methods such as modeling, guided practice,

application, and feedback were all necessary for effective PBL teacher training, but the delivery of

these specific instructional strategies should come from a mentor rather than an instructional coach.

According to one participant, “Coaches are already doing too many tasks, and they aren’t trained in

PBL.”
 90

On-going support was mentioned often in the survey questions and interviews. One

participant revealed,

I started my role as a CAPS instructor over the summer. I listened to podcasts, read

handbooks, and went to Summer Huddle, but I still didn’t feel like I had a handle on what

my classroom would look like and what type of projects to do with students.

Another participant stated,

Teachers need to learn one of the components of PBL and immediately get into the

classroom and give it a try. Then, with feedback and additional support, the teacher can try

it again or move on to another component. It’s about having a sounding board to try new

things.

Flexibility was another term mentioned when participants were asked what training should

look like. Flexibility was mentioned 6 times by three participants. Though several project-based

learning variations and models exist (Hmelo-Silver, 2004; Savery, 2006), five criteria differentiate

this instruction from other forms of inquiry learning. These include centrality, focus questions,

constructive investigations, autonomy, and realism (Thomas, 2000; BIE. 2017). Autonomy and

constructive investigations, at their very essence, ensure flexibility in the learning process.

According to the constructivist theory, an instructor will make meaning from teacher training

lessons based on past experience (Ultamr, 2012; Huitt & Hummel, 2003). A participant stated,

“We need teacher training to focus on flexibility in the implementation of projects instead of a rigid

structure, timeline, and benchmarks. Real-world projects move and flow. PBL should be fluid like

that.” According to participants’ perceptions, flexible learning is at the very root of project-based

learning.
 91

PBL Implementation. Another theme that developed during the study was what the

implementation of PBL looks like in the classroom. Participants mentioned this theme twelve times

in the survey and interviews. New instructors mentioned that clearly defined goals and objectives

for CAPS instructors would be helpful, along with videos and resources. One new CAPS instructor

stated, “I have taken teaching guides from other CAPS strands and tweaked them for my use.”

Another participant mentioned the need for effective implementation strategies, adding that too

many times, coaches are moved into positions to lead CAPS teacher training without any PBL

knowledge. In addition, the participant stated, “I have been trained three different times on PBL by

three different professional development staff, using three different models, with each one telling

me that the last model was wrong.”

Ongoing learning is a critical element of continuous improvement for teachers (Barber &

Mourshed, 2007). Unfortunately, too many professional learning activities are disconnected and

lack the necessary components to prepare teachers to become facilitators for 21 st century

competencies (Cohen & Hill, 2000; Croft et al., 2010; Kennedy, 2016). Thus, there is a need for

effective, clearly defined PBL implementation practices with sustained support. Difficulties arise

when teachers are asked to apply new practices; many are slow to try new instructional innovations

(Buly et al., 2006). One participant said, “I would like to see whole team development with clearly

defined program goals. Then, we could work together on our issues.” These anecdotes support the

idea that an implementation procedure, clearly defined processes, and differentiated implementation

techniques would benefit PBL teacher training.

Feedback. The theme of feedback emerged when participants were asked about factors that

contribute to successful PBL training. Feedback was mentioned 13 times in the open-ended survey

questions and interviews. One participant stated, “Useful feedback would be beneficial. This is my
 92

first year teaching CAPS, and I don’t know if I’m headed in the right direction.” Another

participant said, “If we had more time together as strands, we could observe each other and learn

how to give appropriate feedback while watching PBL being modeled.” According to Saye and

Brush (2004), success in PBL demands that the teacher facilitate dialogue and provide continuous

feedback. One participant revealed, “I’m winging it. I don’t know if I’m doing this right. I hope

someone will observe my class and let me know if I am on the right track.” High-quality

professional development should provide built-in time for teachers to reflect, receive input, and

adapt lessons to meet the needs of students (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). Participants in the

study felt that feedback from teacher training staff or a mentor would be beneficial in implementing

project-based learning.

Program Expectations. As an educational initiative grows and develops, the expectations of the

program should evolve with the students and faculty. “The most effective way to deliver sustained

and substantial improvements in outcomes is through sustained and substantial improvements in

instruction” (Barber & Mourshed, 2007). Difficulties arise when teachers are asked to implement

new practices, and traditional forms of professional development lack the necessary components to

prepare teachers to become 21st century facilitators. School districts must adopt high-quality,

ongoing, meaningful, professional development to support educators in new initiatives (Buckner,

2019). One participant said, “We need a semester as an intern to understand how PBL works in

CAPS. Learning how to design and implement it would give us a practice run so the program makes

sense from the beginning.” Another participant added that intense training, covering all bases,

should be followed by “lots of modeling.” Several participants suggested professional development

time spent discussing goals, expectations, and flexibility in the program. One participant added, “It

would be nice to have clear expectations of what the classroom should look like.” This theme struck
 93

a chord with all six interview participants; program expectations was mentioned 19 times. These

participants’ perceptions and other data suggest that program expectations are an integral part of

sustaining a new program.

Themes for Research Question 2

Evidence. The theme evidence developed as a result of asking participants what type of evidence, if

any, they have seen in the classroom that PBL professional development is increasing student

achievement. From the standpoint of a traditional classroom teacher, evidence of achievement often

relates to state test scores. However, in project-based learning, ongoing and informal assessment is

an integral part of monitoring student progress. According to Kingston (2018), “The good news is

that research shows that PBL can promote student learning and may be more effective than

traditional instruction in social studies, science, mathematics, and literacy” (p. 2). The questions

remain regarding what the PBL teaching practice framework looks like and how instructors should

measure project goals, 21st century competencies, and personal development.

Providing teachers with effective PBL training can prepare students for the difficulties and

rich situations of everyday life. According to Almulla (2020), “A significant relation was found

between the PBL method and collaborative learning, disciplinary subject learning, iterative

learning, authentic learning, which, in turn, produced student engagement” (p.1). However, fifty

percent of the survey responders attested that they had not seen any district evidence of CAPS

students increasing achievement on standardized test scores. One participant remarked, “I have not

seen the data, so I don’t know if it has.”

Other participants explained evidence of learning by saying, “I have seen my students take

the skills and knowledge they have acquired in a traditional classroom and apply them to real-world

problems. I am seeing a higher level of engagement and deeper retention of information with PBL
 94

projects.” Another participant stated, “I feel that projects, in general, increase student interest and

engagement, which likely improves student achievement; I find project-based learning critical.”

Another participant revealed that CAPS alumni students reported being ahead of their peers while

studying abroad and in college.

PBL success and achievement can look different for each student. Personal growth in

confidence, creativity, innovation, and presentation skills is more difficult to measure. One

participant commented, “We find this a challenge. I try to have a rubric for everything to show

progress.” Another participant revealed that she finds evidence of student achievement through

conversation and observation. This theme sparked much discussion about evidence of student

learning. One participant asked, “How can we compare standardized test scores with real-world

experiences in CAPS? Maybe that is why we aren’t seeing any district evidence.” According to the

participants’ perceptions, clarification is needed from the district, or possibly the Department of

Education, on evidence of student achievement in CAPS.

Application. Another theme that developed similarly to evidence was application. Five participants

indicated that students were able to apply and transfer 21st century skills from one project to another

or from one project to a regular classroom. Terms such as transfer of knowledge, professional-based

learning, and learning model were mentioned once in survey questions and four times in interviews.

The application of 21st century skills learned in CAPS often takes place after graduation.

One participant stated, “Students are applying what they know in other situations. My students

return for a visit from college or studying abroad, and they tell me how their soft skills are far ahead

of their classmates.” Another participant reflected on a CAPS alumni luncheon, whereby former

CAPS students shared their success stories of stepping ahead of their peers in their career field or in

higher education.
 95

This theme was found to support the constructivist-development theory. Students became

sense-makers of new knowledge through cognitive processes in new roles upon graduation from

CAPS (Jumaat et al., 2017; Richardson, 1997). CAPS alumni were able to reflect on their

experiences and apply their learning to new situations. One participant said, “My student enrolled in

a biomedical course in college, and he let me know that the content was all review. He already

learned that information in the CAPS medical strand.”

Engagement. The theme engagement developed during the study when participants were asked

about PBL professional development and student achievement. The terms higher level, increase

interest, and deeper retention of information were mentioned 3 times in the survey questions and 5

times in interviews. One participant said, “Projects increase student engagement.” Another

participant added that a higher level of engagement leads to longer and deeper retention of

information.

Markam et al. (2003) defined standards-focused, project-based learning as “a systematic

teaching method that engages students in learning knowledge and skills through an extended

inquiry process” (p.4). One participant revealed,

A junior in my education strand was convinced she would work best with second-grade

students. After spending time with students in every grade level, she changed her mind.

Being engaged with middle school students for two days, and after some reflection, she

decided to remain at the middle school for tutoring.

According to CAPS instructors, students are engaged and applying what they learn in CAPS in

real-world situations. Training teachers to look for engagement though conversation, reflection, and

transfer of knowledge should be a part of PBL teacher training to support student success.
 96

Reflection. Another theme that emerged in the study was reflection. This theme was mentioned six

times in interviews. One of the criteria that makes PBL unique is student choice, autonomy, and

responsibility (BIE, 2017). With student choice comes the question of what students want. These

questions lead to reflection and responsibility for the choices made. The terms what students want,

student choice, student confidence, fail, and try again were all mentioned during interviews.

The reflection theme is also similar to the theme of evidence; student growth is measured by

evidence in their application of 21st century skills, and reflection is part of the evidence. One

participant shared,

One of my students failed miserably during a presentation; tears were rolling down his face.

His classmates embraced him, and he gathered himself together and tried it again. This was

a powerful moment for him. What seemed like a small task for the rest of my students was a

huge one for him. He reflected on that first presentation and never struggled again in front

of his peers.

Reflection from an instructor’s point of view, is also linked to student achievement. Student

success in PBL demands that the instructor provides continuous feedback, initiates inquiry

processes, creates new design processes, and manages unpredictable learning environments (Saye &

Brush, 2004). Teachers motivated to use PBL can find these issues a struggle without reflection,

contemplation, and continued support. According to one participant, “We need time to develop new

lessons and time to reflect on their effectiveness.”

Evaluation. Additionally, the study revealed that evaluation was a large part of best practice in

teacher training for supporting student achievement and 21 st century skills. The theme evaluation

was mentioned 10 times during the interviews. Participants revealed the theme of evaluation

through words or phrases such as challenge, rubrics, ahead of classmates, observations, and
 97

conversations during the study. Participants revealed that evaluation was sometimes a challenge for

new CAPs instructors, however. With the development of additional rubrics and open dialogue with

students, participants with experience could describe in detail how evaluations in PBL supported

student achievement.

One participant noted, “My students were able to recount a project in great detail from the

previous semester. When students see the rubrics ahead of time, buy into their project, and

understand what’s being asked of them, they often are harder on themselves than I am.” Another

participant added that returning alumni will often discuss projects from their high school CAPS

experience, recounting specifics sometimes years later. Based on this data, it might be deduced that

evaluation occurs in many forms in project-based learning, each having a lasting impact and being a

necessary component of PBL professional development to support student success.

Themes for Research Question 3

Coaching. The theme coaching developed as a result of asking participants about barriers to PBL

teacher training in their CAPS program. Three participants, all from the same program, commented

on coaching during the interview. Research supports instructional coaching as a form of

professional development, emerging as a viable alternative to typical, isolated workshops, providing

rich learning opportunities, and creating an environment that supports significant change (Kraft et

al., 2018; Polly et al., 2013; Spelman et al., 2015). According to Knight (2011), instructional

coaches collaborating confidentially with teachers help improve teaching and learning, increase

student achievement, and can be an effective form of professional development. Unfortunately,

three participants disagreed with this research concerning coaching and project-based learning

professional development. They posited that the position of coaching and the reality of coaching are

not the same. For many districts, coaching has become a dumping ground for administrative tasks
 98

and duties as assigned. Coaches have become compliance officers for administrators, often

checking pacing guides and evaluating teaching methods instead of building relationships and

focusing on student needs (DeWitt, 2018). This is not to say, however, that the participants do not

support the coaching model. In fact, six of the participants expressed a desire for the common

themes of coaching to be included in PBL teacher training. These themes include modeling, guided

practice, application, and feedback. The participants requested a mentor or buddy instead of a coach

to implement these instructional practices.

Terms such as no coaches, coaches without knowledge, and wear too many hats were

uncovered during analysis. Participants described coaches as being spread too thin and not

understanding PBL methods. One participant remarked, “I’ve seen teachers move into the position

of coaches without any knowledge of project-based learning. We can’t legitimately have an

authentic discussion about PBL when the coach doesn’t know the components of this type of

inquiry.” Another participant said,

No coaches in general. In our district, they are spread too thin. How is one person supposed

to be an expert in everything? Also, I don’t want to be evaluated; I want to have a

conversation about what works and what doesn’t.

Though research shows an increase in instructional coaches being used around the country as

ongoing, cite-specific professional development that supports teachers in their daily work,

participants in the study expressed disfavor for coaching.

Training. According to Darling-Hammond et al. (2017), “Educators and policymakers are

increasingly looking to teacher professional learning as an important strategy for supporting the

complex skills students need to be prepared for further education and work in the 21 st century”

(para. 1). Effective professional development is defined as structured professional learning that
 99

results in new teaching methods and improvement in student achievement (Buckner, 2019).

Effective teacher training that supports collaboration, uses models of effective practice, offers

expert support, incorporates active learning, and provides feedback is the key to implementing new

programs (Darling-Hammond et al. (2017). However, the theme training discovered during the

study revealed that every participant agreed that the lack of training, or ineffective training, was the

biggest barrier to effective PBL professional development. Training, in general, was mentioned a

total of 62 times in the study. Fifty percent of participants revealed they had no PBL professional

development as a CAPS instructor. The other 50% added that the training received in their school

district had occurred years ago, was inadequate, or ineffective. Terms such as limited training, lack

of modeling, and no specific professional development were uncovered during analysis. One

participant stated, “I’ve attended Summer Huddle, but this professional development was more of a

celebration of being in CAPS instead of direct instruction on how to run my program.” Another

participant said modeling was the key to learning how to “do” CAPS.

It was also found that participants preferred a mentor for training. One participant attested,

“A mentor is the key to training PBL. Find the right teacher, the ones who build relationships and

ones that other teachers admire, and let them mentor the novice PBL teachers.”

Another participant added,

We don’t want a coach judging our PBL instruction; we want a sounding board instead. We

need mentors to act as a buddy system. I want to be able to run across the hall and ask, “Did

this work for you?” or “Have you ever tried this?” without feeling like I am being evaluated.

Therefore, it is recommended that school districts provide PBL instructors with a mentoring

program as a means of ongoing professional development to support instruction and student

achievement.
 100

Administration. The theme of administration emerged when participants were asked about barriers

to successful PBL professional development. The term administration was chosen to represent

repeated ideas uncovered during analysis, which included too much on their plate, no experience in

project-based learning, and CAPS pushed aside. These phrases were repeated four times regarding

barriers to effective PBL teacher training. According to one participant with administration

experience,

If there are no complaints coming from CAPS instructors and there is good enrollment,

administration is going to leave the program alone. Districts already mandate so much

professional development for other programs and staff; CAPS ends up getting pushed aside.

Another participant added that administrators do not have time for CAPS teacher training; they

already have too many balloons in the air, and most administrators do not have PBL experience.

So, while administrators from these three school districts support CAPS programs in general

and this inquiry type of learning, it was found that much work needs to be done in the area of PBL

teacher training in all three programs.

Projects. One theme that emerged during data analysis was projects. The term projects was chosen

to represent repeated ideas, which included finding meaningful projects, resources, lack of

resources, and creating projects. These terms were used several times when describing barriers to

PBL professional learning. Participants from two programs were found to struggle with finding

high-quality projects or the knowledge of how to create projects from existing curriculum.

One first-year CAPS participant stated, “I had trouble finding projects this year. I commute

to work, so I am really at a disadvantage with this not being my hometown. I’ve really struggled in

networking, scheduling tours, and finding meaningful projects.”

 101

The creativity and flexibility in PBL lend themselves to unique project situations. One

veteran CAPS participant shared her adoption of vignette-style projects into the curriculum. Each

month her students tackle an individual, theoretical problem and then present solutions to

classmates. These individual projects allow students to work on presentation skills and confidence

while continuing to collaborate on real-world problems with local businesses. Another veteran

CAPS participant from another school district also uses the vignette style of problem-solving for

practice in critical thinking. However, instead of using these internal projects as presentation

practice, these vignette solutions are used for a research and development competition within their

CAPS program.

Based on this data, it might be deduced that instructors new to CAPS might have more

difficulty finding community project partners and unique projects for presentation or critical skills

practice. Therefore, it is recommended that school districts provide new CAPS instructors with

resources, community connections, and curriculum development in order to find or design projects

for project-based learning.

Time. The theme time developed as a result of asking participants about barriers to effective PBL

teacher training. Sixty-two and a half percent of participants agreed that adequate time is given for

discussion of lessons and student work with professional development staff. One first-year

participant stated, “Coordinating time to meet in person with other CAPS instructors from similar

strands is difficult. Our challenge is the distance from others who have CAPS programs—which

means a lot of communication will be in a digital/online platform.” On the other hand, participants

from another district were allowed to take time off and meet with other CAPS instructors within the

district for a day of “what is working for you” professional development. Still, other CAPS
 102

instructors from another district shared that plenty of time was allotted for the development of

curriculum and meeting with other CAPS instructors.

The data suggests that most districts provide adequate time for CAPS instructors to design

lessons, find projects, and meet with other teachers. However, other barriers mentioned , such as

lack of training and difficulty finding projects hinder CAPS instructors from using their time

wisely. It is suggested that additional time should be built into the CAPS program for scheduling

team meetings, collaborating with other school district CAPS programs, and modeling good PBL.

PBL Integrity. Additionally, the study revealed that PBL integrity was an integral piece of PBL

teacher training but is often overlooked. This theme was mentioned three times in the survey and

five times in interviews. Research indicated that the uniqueness of PBL as an effective form of

instruction to support 21st century skills has five criteria that differentiate this instruction from other

forms of inquiry projects. These criteria include centrality, focus question, constructive

investigations, autonomy, and realism (Thomas, 2000; BIE, 2017).

One participant, whose PBL teacher training included the above-mentioned criteria, said

this,

We have to keep all the components in PBL teacher training. Years ago, I went to intense

training in PBL from the University of Oklahoma, followed by two years of support in PBL.

Attention was paid to the major components of project-based learning in that professional

development. I haven’t seen it taught that way since then. Our new teachers are missing big

chunks of PBL.

Another participant stated, “We have new teachers struggling. They are trying to ‘teach’ PBL like a

traditional classroom teacher. They haven’t been shown, or they don’t understand, how PBL

works.”
 103

Data suggests that some of the barriers mentioned in the study could stem from a lack of

PBL integrity in teacher training. It is therefore recommended that school districts provide PBL

teacher training that includes the five criteria of project-based learning for CAPS instructors to

maximize their full instructional capabilities and buy-in to ensure student success.

Implications for Practice

As school districts seek out project-based learning as a new instructional method for

teaching 21st century skills, they should provide PBL professional development, a mentoring

program, modeling, and additional resources for implementation and support for instructors. The

following sections detail the implications for practice that could enhance PBL instructional

effectiveness to increase student success which add to the body of knowledge found in Chapter

Two.

PBL Professional Development to Support Teacher Capacity

Researchers suggest that school districts provide high-quality, ongoing, meaningful

professional development to improve instructional practices (Barber & Mourshed, 2007; Gushkey,

2000; Kennedy, 2016). Additionally, researchers propose to take into account the opinions of

teachers when effectuating change, allowing instructors to use their experiences within the

classroom to provide valuable insight into developing new practices to effectively implement new

educational innovations (Kelly & Knight, 2019; Buly et al. 2006; Buckner, 2019). In order to have

effective PBL professional development for CAPS instructors, the following steps must be taken by

administration and PBL professional development staff.

Best practice in implementing new instructional methods, programs, or education initiatives

is providing an ongoing support system following initial teacher training (Barber & Mourshed,

2007; Buckner, 2019). A response in this study’s teacher survey revealed, “I have no specific PBL
 104

training.” Another instructor commented, “It has been several years since I have had any official

PBL training. Most of what I have learned has been through my own research.” It was found in this

study that school districts offering project-based learning teacher training were doing an inadequate

job in supporting PBL instruction, or worse, school districts were simply not offering any teacher

training for CAPS instructors. The following statement substantiated the need for PBL professional

development, “I don’t feel like I have a handle on what my classroom should look like and what

type of projects I should be doing with my students.” Therefore, it is recommended that school

districts provide sustained PBL professional development for CAPS instructors in order to build

teacher capacity.

PBL professional development should be designed with a teacher’s needs, based on their

experience and expertise, in mind. Teachers new to PBL will need the most support. First-time

CAPS instructors should be taught the five criteria of this unique inquiry teaching methodology

during the summer months, followed by intense training in each of these steps to ensure PBL

integrity. New instructors should be given clearly-defined program goals and implementation

procedures for PBL. Project-based learning modeling should also be effectuated prior to the start of

school, giving new teachers the opportunity to observe experienced teachers, interview students,

collaborate with other CAPS instructors on lessons, and develop relationships with local business

partners. School districts might consider a team-taught classroom for novice PBL instructors during

their first semester of teaching CAPS. This semester of mentoring and modeling for student

learning and PBL pedagogy would provide new instructors with assuredness in the process and trust

in their PBL mentors as they move forward in teaching a CAPS course independently. Participants

in this study echoed these suggestions. A new CAPS instructor said, “At the beginning of the year,

it was extremely difficult to find projects. Having some training on creating projects would be
 105

helpful.” Another instructor commented, “I would like whole-team development with clearly

defined goals for our program. A mentor would be very beneficial as I learn to navigate through

PBL teaching.”

Furthermore, it is recommended that new CAPS instructors continue as mentees, being

mentored by a PBL expert until their level of expertise in project-based learning allows for a

transition into mentorship. Participants in this study expressed a desire to have a mentoring system

with a non-evaluative CAPS colleague acting as a “buddy” for ongoing professional development.

This mentor relationship can create confidence in new teachers and build powerful change agents in

veteran CAPS instructors. One participant said, “No coaches in general; they are stretched too thin

already. A mentorship program would be best with another CAPS instructor acting as a buddy or a

sounding board.” These mentoring partnerships can build teacher capacity much faster than teachers

relying on trial and error during their first few years in CAPS.

Ongoing, effective professional development is essential for veteran PBL instructors as

well. According to one instructor, “The professional development I have attended focused on a rigid

structure of PBL design. Project-based learning doesn’t work like that. We need variation in

implementation, time to develop units and reflect, and time to collaborate.” Experienced teachers in

this study expressed a need for sustained support for developing projects, collaboration time with

other CAPS instructors, and additional training for evaluating projects.

School administrators can start by developing a PBL professional development team

consisting of experienced project-based learning instructors. CAPS programs in districts with only

one or two teachers, too small to support effective professional development, could work with other

schools to develop teacher-training partnerships. Additionally, administrators could attend PBL

 106

workshops and teacher trainings to understand better this type of inquiry investigation for additional

support in the CAPS program.

The PBL professional development staff could organize a summer training, bringing new

and experienced instructors together for full-team collaboration. New teachers could be assigned

mentors, and training could begin with the basics of the student-centered learning model. This shift

in teaching practice that supports 21st century skills will require CAPS instructors to adopt new

teaching practices. The professional development team will lead the instructors through the most

commonly accepted criteria that separate PBL from other forms of inquiry.

According to the CAPS instructors in this study, best practice for teacher training includes

effective, clearly defined implementation procedures; feedback and collaboration opportunities with

other CAPS instructors; flexibility in the development of curriculum; and well-defined program

expectations. Participants stated that current project-based learning professional development lacks

these fundamental teaching strategies.

Therefore, it is recommended that CAPS school districts that want to provide effective PBL

professional development for instructors should consider the components of best practice listed

above. Administrators could promote PBL teacher leaders into professional development staff

members for ongoing support for implementing PBL methodology. Also, districts should seek other

CAPS programs to develop partnerships for additional resources and teacher training.

Development of a CAPS Instructor Manual

As a teacher in a CAPS program, the researcher has had opportunities to discuss with other

PBL instructors from other districts how CAPS instructors are trained and what resources are

available. The researcher often heard sentiments such as the following,

I wish we had an outline of what CAPS professional-based learning should look like. If we
 107

could see a video, read a scenario, or see a list of objectives for projects, I wouldn’t second

guess myself on everything.

Additionally, the researcher is a twenty-seven-year veteran teacher and has been creating PBL

lessons for ten years. While interviewing PBL teachers, it was evident that a few instructors had

never tried PBL until they joined CAPS. Making sense of a new pedagogy through the lenses of

constructivist theory and experiential learning while still holding on to traditional classroom

teaching methods was stretching some educators to frustration.

These factors lead to the question, “Who will write a manual to teach PBL instructors how

to teach these courses?” While investigating this topic, the researcher found a vast amount of

literature on the topics such as using PBL in the classroom, student benefits, student projects, and

timelines, but very little information exists for the kinds of behind -the-scenes elements of PBL

explored below.

PBL instructors are looking for real-world examples of projects and all that those projects

entail. They want answers to questions like these:

• Where can I find new projects?

• How can I turn my old curriculum into PBL projects?

• What does a project look like from beginning to end?

• What kinds of questions should I be asking my students during the project?

• How do I teach content without lecturing?

• How many rubrics do I need?

• How much help will the business partner need to monitor student work?

• When do I swoop in and rescue students when they are off-track?

 108

• What does a top-notch project look like, and what does a failure look like?

• What should PBL look like, and which model should I be using?

These are all questions that could be answered in a PBL instructor’s guide. PBL is just like any

other subject: once you have mastered it, you can effectively teach it.

PBL Professional Development to Support Student Achievement

Student achievement is relatively easy to monitor and assess through standardized state

tests. However, the evaluation of PBL student projects is more challenging and onerous. According

to the instructors in this study, evidence of student success in CAPS is poorly defined, lacking in

assessment processes, and is off administration’s radar. According to one participant in the study, “I

do find project-based learning to be critical; however, I have not seen any specific evidence that

PBL professional development increases student achievement.” Another instructor added, “CAPS

does not have a particular set of assessment tools; instructors develop their own rubrics and grading

system. We are left to our own interpretation of student achievement.”

Therefore, it is recommended that schools wanting to provide PBL professional

development to increase student achievement should equip teachers with the skills and knowledge

of identifying and evaluating all components of PBL projects, the applicable conversation and

observation narratives of student projects to ensure engagement with and retention of project scope

and sequence, and the ability to critique a student’s cognitive practice of transferring knowledge to

demonstrate deep learning.

Administrators need to understand project-based learning in order to be able to advise and

help instructors do the above-mentioned tasks. Many checkpoints need to be in place in PBL to

ensure students and instructors are learning and teaching 21st century competencies. These

processes of evaluating student PBL projects take time, practice, failure, reflection, and wisdom for
 109

teachers to be able to model them for others. Administrators should choose wisely instructors that

exemplify best practice in project-based learning to act as role models, mentors, and PBL

professional development trainers to develop a CAPS team prepared, organized, and equipped to

produce 21st century-ready students. It is also recommended for schools brand new to PBL to find

another CAPS school willing to be partners and mentors while new teachers gain self-assurance in

the project-based learning teaching methodology.

Limitations

Limitations to this study included participant population size, time, and autonomy of

each CAPS program. Also, the authenticity of participants’ perceptions of and reflections on open-

ended questions from the survey and interviews, due to varying interpretations of questioning,

could result in inaccurate and unreliable data. Findings from the study represented a snapshot of

CAPS instructors who have participated in the past eight years. Data were collected over a period of

one month, limiting the access to participants and time to organize focus group discussions.

Additionally, the pool of participants was quite small, as the CAPS program is in a limited amount

of school districts.

The scope of this study was limited to CAPS programs in three Midwest school districts.

Each CAPS program is autonomous; therefore, the findings may not apply to all CAPS districts.

Additionally, limitations may include bias from CAPS instructors or researcher bias. As a CAPS

instructor in one of the CAPS programs in the study, the researcher had a personal interest in the

findings of the study.

Recommendations for Future Research

The current study focused on effective project-based learning teacher training to support

CAPS instructors and student achievement. Additionally, perceptions of CAPS instructors were
 110

gathered to gain an understanding of barriers to PBL professional development. Through the

research and investigation process, ideas presented for further study included the following:

• A multi-district CAPS collaboration professional development consortium

• A multi-district CAPS Online collaboration for CAPS discussions.

The following sections present a discussion of these ideas.

Multi-district CAPS Collaboration Professional Development Consortium

Currently, collaboration between school districts is minimal. CAPS instructors can attend

Summer Huddle through the CAPS Network, paid for by school districts. This three-day conference

features empowered national speakers, solution-finding, break-out groups, and inspirational

messages to facilitate profession-based learning. However, even with this powerful meeting, CAPS

instructors return to their school districts, and many find themselves alone in their classrooms,

struggling to make sense of a new instructional method. In this study, CAPS instructors expressed a

desire to have a mentor in their district, as well as have time to meet with other CAPS program

instructors. These periodic collaboration days with other districts would be a time for sharing id eas,

discussing projects, describing how to find and vet business partners, and discussing critical

thinking vignettes. These opportunities could provide CAPS instructors with many contacts for

business partners and additional mentors. These collaborations would allow teachers new to CAPS

the opportunity to learn from seasoned veteran PBL teachers. Below is a list of questions that could

lead to more investigation about this topic:

• Which school districts would be a part of the consortium?

• What presentation topics would be most beneficial?

• How many times during the school year should the consortium meet?
 111

• Should businesses be invited?

• Should instructional coaches attend to understand PBL?

• Are break-out groups an integral part of the professional development consortium?

Multi-district CAPS Online Collaboration for CAPS Discussions

Currently, a CAPS discussion board exists on the CAPS Network website. However, this

platform has few users. In this study, one participant stated that she tried using the CAPS discussion

board, but did not find anything useful, leading to the question should school districts that are part

of the CAPS professional development consortium establish their own online collaboration for

CAPS discussions. Below is a list of questions that could lead to more investigation about this

topic:

• Should an online collaboration discussion platform be a topic of discussion for the CAPS
professional development consortium?

• Should CAPS instructors from the consortium be surveyed to see if there is a need for an
online collaboration platform?

• Should instructors be placed in discussion groups based on CAPS strands, or should

instructors be able to join any discussions?

• Who should monitor and own the discussion boards?

• What online discussion platform would be best for CAPS instructors?

Summary

School districts are looking for ways to align curriculum to include both content knowledge

and 21st century competencies to meet the demands of employers. Project-based learning is a
 112

specific instructional strategy designed to strengthen skills in critical thinking, collaboration,

communication, and creativity and is growing in popularity.

The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of CAPS instructors and create a

starting point of deductive research by examining the impact project-based learning has on teacher

instruction and student achievement for ongoing support for PBL implementation and 21 st century

competencies.

Research questions explored perceptions of CAPS instructors to uncover themes related to

supporting and implementing project-based learning, the impact of PBL professional development

on student achievement, and barriers to effective PBL teacher training. Qualitative data was

collected through surveys and focus-group interviews. Results were then analyzed for

interpretation.

The data revealed multiple themes regarding best practice and barriers in project-based

learning professional development to best support instructors and students. Data and the discussion

of findings would benefit other CAPS school districts nationwide looking for ways to provide PBL

teacher training. Districts should consider providing ongoing PBL teacher training, PBL modeling

for new instructors, and a CAPS mentorship program to better serve all instructors.
 113

REFERENCES

Alesandrini, K., & Larson, L. (2002). Teachers bridge to constructivism. The Clearing House: A

Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 75(3), 118–121. https://doi.org/DOI:

10.1080/000 98650209599249

Almulla, M. A. (2020). The effectiveness of the project-based learning (PBL) approach as a way to

engage students in learning. SAGE Open, 10(3), 215824402093870.

https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020938702

Bambrick-Santoyo, P. (2007, December 1). Data in the Driver's Seat. Educational Leadership,

65(4), 43-46.

Bambrick-Santoyo, P. (Director). (2019, September 5). R10 2019 Fall Leadership

Symposium-Getting Better Faster [Video file].

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTNdcWG8X1A

Barber, M. and Mourshed, M. (2007). How the world’s best-performing schools come out on

top. London, Barber and Mourshed & Company.

http://mckindeyonsociety.com/downloads/reports/Education/Worlds_School_Systems_Final

.pdf

Barron, B., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Teaching for meaningful learning; A review of

research on inquiry-based and cooperative learning. Book Excerpt. Distributed by ERIC

Clearinghouse.

Bell, Stephanie (2010.) Project-Based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future, The

Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83:2, 39-43,DOI:

10.1080/00098650903505415

Bellanca, J., & Brandt, R. (2010). 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn.
 114

Solution Tree Press.

Bengtsson, M. (2016). How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis.

NursingPlus Open, 2, 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.npls.2016.01.001

Blinder, A. S. (2008). Education for the third industrial revolution. CEPS Working Paper No. 163

Princeton: Center for Economic Policy Studies, Princeton University.

Boss, S. (2011, September 20). Project-based learning: A short history. Edutopia.

https://www.edutopia.org/project-based-learning-history

Boss, S. (2019, January 22). It's 2019. So why do 21st century skills still matter? EdSurge.

Retrieved January 9, 2022, from

https://www.edsurge.com/news/2019-01-22-its-2019-so-why-do-21st-century-skills-still-

matter.

Brende, B. (2019. April, 15). We need a reskilling revolution, here’s how to make it happen.

World Economic Forum.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/04/skills-jobs-investing-in-people-inclusive-growth/

Bringing 21st century skill development to the forefront of K-12 education. (2014, September

24). Hanover Research.

https://www.hanoverresearch.com/insights-blog/bringing-21st-century-skill-development-

to-the-forefront-of-k-12-education/.

Buck Institute for Education (2017). What is PBL? http://www.bie.org/about/what_pbl

CAPS Network (2021). The CAPS playbook modules.

https://yourcapsnetwork.org/the-caps-playbook-modules/

Buckner, B. (2019, November 1). Best practices in professional development [web log].

https://www.txstate-epdc.net/
 115

Buly, M., Coskie, T., Robinson, L., & Egawa, K. (2006). Literacy coaching: Coming out of the

corner. Voices from the Middle, 1(4), 24-28.

How it works: Personalized learning. CAPS Network. (2022, April 15). Retrieved September 10,

2022, from https://yourcapsnetwork.org/how-it-works/

Care, E., Kim, H., & Anderson, K. (2018). Education system

alignment for 21st century skills: Focus on assessment. Brookings.

Casner-Lotto, J., & Barrington, L. (2006). Are they really ready to work? Employers’

perspectives on the basic knowledge and applied skills of new entrants to the 21st

century U.S. workforce. Partnership for 21st Century Skills.

Charner, I., & Medrich, E. (2017). Educator-Centered instructional coaching: What the research

says. FHI 360.

Cohen, D.K. and Hill, H. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The

mathematics reform in California. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the

American Educational Research Association

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative

and qualitative research. Pearson.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods

approaches (4th ed.). Sage.

Creswell, J.W. [University of Michigan Family Medicine]. (2022, January 20). Sampling and

integration [Video]. YouTube.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZDTQVOI9ZI&t=11s

Croft, A., Coggshall, J., Dolan, M., & Powers, E. (with Killion, J.). (2010). Job-embedded

professional development: What it is, who is responsible, and how to get it done well

(IssueBrief). Washington, DC: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.

 116

Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional

development. Learning Policy Institute.

Dalrymple, K. R., Wuenschell, C., & Shuler, C. F. (2006). Development and Implementation of

the comprehensive faculty development program in PBL core skills. Journal of Dental

Education, 70(9), 948-955.

David, J.L. (2008). What research says about ... / project-based learning. Educational Leadership,

65(5), 80-82.

Denton CA, & Hasbrouck J. (2009). A description of instructional coaching and its relationship

to consultation. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation 19, 50–175. doi:

10.1080/10474410802463296.

Devine, M., Houssemand, C., & Meyers, R. (2013). Instructional coaching for teachers: A

strategy to implement new practices in the classrooms [Abstract]. Procedia - Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1126-1130. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.001

Dewey, J. (1998). Experience and education (60th ed.).

Kappa Delta Pi, International Honor Society in Education.

DeWitt, Peter. (August 26, 2018). Has instructional coaching become a dumping ground?

Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/

Domina, T., Lewis, R., Agarwal, P., & Hanselman, P. (2015). Professional sense-makers.

Educational Researcher, 44(6), 359-364. doi:10.3102/0013189x15601644

Effective coaching: Improving teacher practice and outcomes for all learners. (2018). National

Center for Systematic Improvement. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED591448.pdf

Elliot, N. (2014, December 18). Top ten developments in qualitative evaluation over the last

decade [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ld-tI6gUGNs

 117

Ericksen, Kristina. (2020, February 5). The 21 st century skills today’s graduates need to succeed.

[Industry Insights]. Collegis Education. https://collegiseducation.com/news/higher-ed-

trends/21st-century-skills/

Galbo, C. (1998). Helping adults learn. Thrust for Educational Leadership, 27(7), 13-15, 35-37.

Galey, S. (2016). The evolving role of instructional coaches in U.S. policy Contexts. The

William and Mary Educational Review, 4(2), 54-71.

Gallagher, S.A. (1997). Problem-based learning: Where did it come from, what does it do, and

where is it going? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20 (4), 332-362.

Gavillet, R. (2018). Experiential learning and its impact on college students. Texas Education

Review, 7(1), 140-149. http://dx.doi.org/10.26153/tsw/21

Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., Soloway, E., & Clay-Chambers, J. (2008).

Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based curricula in the context

of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching vol. 45 (8), 922-939.

Glazewski, K., & Ertmer, P.A., (2010). Fostering socioscientific reasoning in problem-based

learning: Examining teacher practice. International Journal of Learning, 16 (12),

269-282.

GCN Staff. 25 years: A technology timeline. GCN. (December 6,

2007). https://gcn.com/articles/2007/12/06/25-years--a-technology-timeline.aspx

Green, J., & Thorogood, N. (2004). Qualitative methods for health research. Sage

Publications.

Grossman, P., Dean, C. G., Kavanagh, S. S., & Herrmann, Z. (2019). Preparing teachers for

project-based teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 100(7), 43–48.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721719841338
 118

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Corwin Press.

Hanover Research (2014). Why college and career readiness is an integral component of k-12

education. Retrieved from http://www.hanoverresearch.com/2014/09/24/ why-college-and-

career-readiness-is-an- integral-component-of-k-12-education/

Harris, M. J. (2015). The challenges of implementing project-based learning in middle schools

[Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

Harwell, S. H. (2003). Teacher Professional Development: It’s not an event: It’s a process

http://www.cordonline.net/ncpn-old/downloads/HarwellPaper.pdf

Hattie, J.A. (2003, October). Teachers make a difference: What is the research evidence?

[Conference Presentation]. ACER Research Conference, Melbourne, Australia.

http://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference_2003/4/

Hmelo-Silver, C.E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn?

Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266.

Holm, M. (2011). Project-based instruction: A review of the literature on effectiveness in

prekindergarten through 12th grade classrooms. Rivier Academic Journal, 7(2), 1-13.

Huebner, L.-A., & Zacher, H. (2021). Following up on employee surveys: A conceptual framework

and systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 12.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.801073

Huitt, W., & Hummel, J. (2003). Piaget's theory of cognitive development. Educational

Psychology Interactive. Valdosta State University.

Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. (2015). Likert scale: Explored and explained. British

Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 7(4), 396–403.

https://doi.org/10.9734/bjast/2015/14975
 119

Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development.

Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.

Jumaat, N. F., Tasir, Z., Halim, N. D., & Ashari, Z. M. (2017). Project-based learning from

constructivism point of view. Advanced Science Letters, 23(8), 7904-7906.

doi:10.1166/asl.2017.9605

Kaechele, M. (2018, October 8). 7 reasons why project-based learning is not a fad. Retrieved

March 18, 2019, from

https://schoolleadersnow.weareteachers.com/project-based-learning-fad/

Kagan, S. (2004, Spring). From lessons to structures- a paradigm shift for 21st century

Education. https://www.kaganonline.com/free_articles/dr_spencer_kagan/267/From-Lesso

ns-to-Structures-A-Paradigm-Shift-for-21st-Century-Education

Kane, B. D., & Rosenquist, B. (2018). Making the most of instructional coaches. Phi Delta

Kappan, 99(7), 21-25. doi:10.1177/0031721718767855

Kelly, M., & Knight, J. (2019, December 5). Seven Success Factors for Great Instructional

Coaching. Instructional Coaching Group.

https://www.instructionalcoaching.com/seven-success-factors-for-great-instructional-

coaching/

Kemp, S. (2011). Constructivism and problem-based learning. Learning Academy, 45-51.

Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How Does Professional Development Improve Teaching? Review of

Educational Research, 86, 945-980https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800Kincheloe, J. L., &

Horn, R. A. (2007). The Praeger Handbook of Education and psychology. Praeger.

Kingston, S. (2018). Project-based learning & student achievement: What does the research

tell us? PBL Evidence Matters. 1(1), 1-11. http://bie,org/x9JN

 120

Knight, J. (2011). What good coaches do. Educational Leadership, 69(2), 18-22.Knight, J.

(Director). (2017, July 20). Jim Knight's the impact cycle trailer [Video file]. From

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xX0OB7VBdGs

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). Experiential learning theory: A dynamic, holistic approach to

management learning, education and development. The SAGE handbook of management

learning, education and development, 7, 42.

Kolb, D. A. (1983). Experiential Learning; Experience as the Source of Learning and

Development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.

Kramer, K. M. (2014). Can professional development increase successful project-based learning

implementation? [Scholarly project].

https://ace.nd.edu/files/resources/actionresearch/Melody%20Fellows/2014/Kramer_AR%20

Project_Formatted.pdf

Kraft, M.A., Blazar, D., Hogan, D. (2017). The effect of teaching coaching on instruction and

achievement: A meta-analysis of the causal evidence. Brown University Working Paper.

Larmer, J., Mergendoller, J., & Boss, S. (2015). Setting the standard for project based learning:

a proven approach to rigorous classroom instruction. ASCD.

Learning environments: A 21st century skills implementation guide. (2009).

https://skupnost.sio.si/pluginfile.php/464207/mod_resource/content/0/Gradivo/21st_ce

ntury_learning_environments.pdf

Learning for the 21st century: A report and MILE guide for 21st century skills.

(2002).https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED480035.pdf

Lunde, J. P., & Wilhite, M. S. (1996). Innovative teaching and teaching improvement. To

Improve the Academy, 15(1), 155-167. doi:10.1002/j.2334-4822.1996.tb00307.x

 121

Lynch, M. (2022a, July 14). The significance of effective teacher training. The

Edvocate.https://www.theedadvocate.org/the-significance-of-effective-teacher-training/

Mangin, M. M., & Dunsmore, K. (2014). How the framing of instructional coaching as a lever

for systemic or individual reform influences the enactment of coaching.

Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(2), 179-213. doi:10.1177/0013161x14522814

Markham, T., Larmer, J., & Ravitz, J. (2003). Project based learning handbook: A guide to

standards-focused project based learning for middle and high school teachers

(2nd ed.).Buck Institute for Education.

Marzano, R. J., & Heflebower, T. (2012). Teaching and assessing 21st century skills.

Marzano Research Laboratory.

Meeder, H., & Pawlowski, B. (2019). Preparing Our Students for the Real World: The Education

Shift Our Children and Future Demand. National Center for Colleges & Career

Transitions. https://www.nc3t.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Preparing-Our-Students-

for-the-Real-World-021720.pdf

Mixed Methods Workshop (2022, January 20). Sampling and Integration John W. Creswell Mixed

Methods [Video}. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZDTQVOI9ZI

Mpho, O.-M. (2018). Teacher centered dominated approaches: Their implications for today's

inclusive classrooms. International Journal of Psychology and Counseling, 10 (2),

11–21. https://doi.org/10.5897/IJPC2016.0393

Mooney-Frank, J.A. (2000). William Heard Kilpatrick: progressive educator, curriculum

innovator, and social philosopher: the impact of his project method on today’s innovations

[Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut]. Proquest Dissertations Publishing.

Moust, J. H., J., Van Berkel, H.J., & Schmidt, H.G. (2005). Signs of erosion: Reflections on
 122

three decades of problem-based learning at Maastricht University. Higher Education 50,

665–683.

Murray, I. & Savin-Baden, M. (2000). Staff development in problem-based learning, Teaching in

Higher Education. 5(1), 107-126.

Nariman, N., & Chrispeels, J. (2015). PBL in the era of reform standards: Challenges and

benefits perceived by teachers in one elementary school. Interdisciplinary

Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 10(1). doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1521

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2021). National teacher and principal survey.

National An Educator’s Guide to the “Four Cs.”

Newcomer, Kathryn E., Hatry, H., & Wholley, J. Handbook of practical program evaluation, John

Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central.

Norris, N. (1997). Error, bias and validity in qualitative research. Educational Action Research,

5(1), 172–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650799700200020

Özel, S. (2013). W3 of project-based learning. STEM Project-Based Learning, 41-49.

doi:10.1007/978-94-6209-143-6_5

Parker, F., Novak, J., & Bartell, J. (2017). To engage students, give them meaningful choices in

the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 99 (2), 37-41.

Patton, M. (2014) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 4th Edition, Sage, Thousand

Oaks.

P21 Framework Definitions FIN. (2009). Retrieved March 21, 2021, from

http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/P21_Framework_Definitions.pdf

Payne, A., Storbacka, K., Frow, P., & Knox, S. (2009). Co-creating brands: Diagnosing and

designing the relationship experience. Journal of Business Research, 62(3), 379–389.

 123

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.05.013

Pearlman, B. (2006). 21st century learning in schools: A case study of New Technology High

School. New Directions for Youth Development, 110. Retrieved January 3, 2009, from

www.bobpearlman.org/Articles/21stCenturyLearning.htm on January 3, 2009.

Pierce, J. D. (2014). Effective coaching: Improving teacher practice and outcomes for all

learners. National Center for Systemic Improvement WestEd.

Poglinco, S. M., & Bach, A. J. (2004). The heart of the matter: Coaching as a vehicle for

professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(5), 398-400.

Polly, D., Mraz, M., & Algozzine, R. (2013). Implications for developing and researching

elementary school mathematics coaches. School Science and Mathematics, 113(6),

297-307. doi:10.1111/ssm.12029

Quintero, D. (2019, January 25). Instructional coaching holds promise as a method to improve

teachers’ impact. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-

chalkboard/2019/01/25/instructional-coaching-holds-promise-as-a-method-to-improve-

teachers-impact/

Rader, K. L. (n.d.). Instructional coaching: Developing efficacy for Project-Based Learning

(dissertation).

Ravitz, J. (2010). Beyond changing culture in small high schools: Reform models and changing

instruction with project-based learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 85 (3), 290-313.

doi:10.1080/0161956X.2010.491432.

Reddy, L. A., Dudek, C. M., & Lekwa, A. (2016). Classroom strategies coaching model:

Integration of formative assessment and instructional coaching. Theory Into Practice,

56(1), 46–55.
 124

Reese, W.J. (2013). In search of American progressives and teachers. History of Education:

Journal of History of Education Society, 42(3), 320-334.

Ribeiro, J. (2020). The Illiterate of the 21st Century: Are you prepared for the future, or will you

lose your job? A discuss about IA, Automation, and Education. Journal of

Telecommunications Systems and Management.

https://doi.org/https://www.hilarispublisher.com/abstract/the-illiterate-of-the-21st-century

-are-you-prepared-for-the-future-or-will-you-lose-your-job-a-discuss-about-ia-automati-4

9337.html

Richardson, V. (1997). Constructivist teacher education: building new understandings. Falmer

Press.

Saavedra, A. R., & Opfer, V. D. (2012). Learning 21st-century skills requires 21st-century

teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 8-13. doi:10.1177/003172171209400203

Sandelowski, M. (1995). Sample size in qualitative research. Research in Nursing & Health,

18(2), 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.4770180211

Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: definitions and distinctions.

Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1, 9–20.

Savery, J., & Duffy, T. (1995). Problem-based learning. An instructional model and its

constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35 (5), 31-38.

Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. (1991). What work requires of schools.

A Scans report for America 2000. Washington D. C. Author.

Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. (2004). Scaffolding problem-based teaching in a traditional social

studies classroom. Theory & Research in Social Education, 32(3), 349-378.

doi:10.1080/00933104.2004.10473259
 125

Schroeder, C. M., Scott, T. P., Tolson, H., Huang, T.-Y., & Lee, Y.-H. (2007). A meta-analysis of

national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the

United States. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(10), 1436–1460.

https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20212

Servant-Miklos, V. F. (2019). Fifty years on: A retrospective on the world’s first

problem-based learning programme at McMaster University Medical School. Health

Professions Education, 5(1), 3-12. doi:10.1016/j.hpe.2018.04.002

Simons, K.D.. & Ertmer, P.A. (2006). Jumping the PBL implementation hurdle: Supporting the

efforts of K-12 teachers. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1),

40-45.

Spelman, M., Bell, D., Thomas, E., & Briody, J. (2015). The growth of instructional coaching

partner conversation in a prek-3rd grade teacher professional development. Journal of Adult

Education, 44(2), 1-6.

Swanson, B. (2014, January 3). Lessons from the AT&T break up, 30 years later. AEI.

https://www.aei.org/technology-and-innovation/lessons-att-break-30-years-later/

Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning.

Autodesk Foundation.

Thomas, S. (2018, August 6). Partnership Principle 1 Equality: The Struggle [web log].

Retrieved December 16, 2021, from

https://www.instructionalcoaching.com/partnership-principle-1-equality-the-struggle/. 21st

century skills, education and competitiveness: A resource and policy guide. (2008). ERIC.

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED519337.pdf

21st century skills education and competiveness: A resource and policy guide (2008). Retrieved
 126

September 9, 2022, from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED519337.pdf

Ultamr, E. (2012). An epistemological glance at the constructivist approach: constructivist

learning in Dewey, Piaget, and Montessori. International Journal of Instruction, 5(2),

195–212.

Ungaretti, T., Thompson, K.R., Miller, A., & Peterson, T.O. (2015). Problem-based learning:

Lessons from medical education and challenges for management education. The Academy

of Management Learning and Education, 14 (2), 173-186. Van Roekel, D. (2010, March 9).

National Education Association: Great Public Schools for Every Student. Retrieved 2021,

from chrome-

extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc

/van%20Roekel.pdf

Wagner, T. (2014). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don’t teach the new

survival skills our children need--and what we can do about it. New York: Basic Books.

Weinberger, D. (2007). Everything is miscellaneous: The power of the new digital disorder. Times

Books.

What Work Requires of Schools: A SCANS report for America 2000. (2000).

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED332054.pdf

Williams, M. K. (2017). John Dewey in the 21st century. Journal of Inquiry and Action in

Education, 9 (1). https://digitalcommons.buffalostate.edu/jiae/vol9/iss1/7

With PBL, Missouri went from follower to leader. (2018, June 06). MU School of Medicine

University of Missouri Health.

Wolpert-Gawron, H. (2016). How to be a change agent. International Online Journal of

Education Leadership, 73(June), 56–60.

 127

Wren, S., & Vallejo, D. (2009). Effective collaboration between instructional coaches and

principals. Retrieved July 30, 2020, from

https://silo.tips/download/effective-collaboration-between-instructional-coaches-and-prin

cipals-sebastian-w.

Zull, J.E. (2002) The Art of Changing the Brain: Enriching Teaching by Exploring the Biology of Learning .

Sterling, VA: Stylus.

 128

APPENDIX A

INVITATION LETTER

Dear CAPS Leadership Team,

My name is Sally Ricker. I am a doctoral candidate completing my final requirements for the EdD
in Educational Leadership at Evangel University. I am conducting a research study on the impact of
PBL teacher training on instructional practices and student achievement to support 21st century
skills.

Education is in a period of transition and revolution. Many school districts are looking for ways to
train teachers and students in 21st century competencies, whereas the CAPS program has been
addressing these issues for the past ten years. PBL, or Pro-BL, the instructional method used in the
CAPS program and select schools around the country, is widely accepted as best practice in
teaching inquiry. However, there is little research on best practice for PBL professional
development. My research focuses on effective teacher training in PBL (best practice in acquiring
21st century skills) to impact student achievement and teacher instruction. I hope to conduct this
research on the Blue Valley and Monet campuses.
My research proposal is complete, and I have RRB approval from Evangel University to conduct
research. I hope to email PBL teachers from the above-mentioned campuses with an anonymous
survey and follow up with in-person interviews.

Do I have permission to make contact with your PBL teachers?

Thank you in advance,

Sally Ricker
Physics and Chemistry Instructor
Pittsburg High School
[email protected]
417-350-2067
 129

APPENDIX B

PBL Teacher Training Research Study Participant Recruitment Email Script

Dear Colleague:

My name is Sally Ricker, and I am a doctoral student at Evangel University pursuing an EdD in
Educational Leadership. I am working on my dissertation titled “Closing the global achievement
gap: effective project-based learning professional development strategies for increasing student
success in 21st century skills and building teacher capacity”. Because you are a part of the CAPS
program and familiar with PBL, I am inviting you to participate in this research study. My study
has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Evangel University and the CAPS
Network.

Pockets of school districts around the country have heard the call from industry leaders to prepare
our students for a dynamic global workforce. There is enormous pressure for educators to change
the way students learn and teachers teach to meet these demands. The innovative, student-centered
learning PBL method is a revolutionizing way to achieve competency in 21st century skills.
Through the use of constructive learning in PBL, both teacher and student learn to be sense-makers
of new knowledge by building on their past experiences.

I have chosen to complete my study within the CAPS Network because of the unique PBL
experience provided to your students. My interest in best practice for PBL is beneficial to the
administration and teachers in the CAPS program. I believe this information will also benefit other
administrators, teachers, and professional development staff searching for best practice to support
21st century skills.

The data collected for this study will be done through an online survey and through in-person, semi-
structured interviews with PBL teachers in the CAPS program.

I hope you will be willing to assist me in this research project. If you choose to participate, the
survey will be anonymous, and the interview will take approximately thirty minutes, scheduled at a
mutually convenient time. You will be asked to sign an informed consent form prior to the
interview, giving permission to use the information you provide in the data analysis. Additional
information will be provided regarding one-on-one interviews following the survey.

Thank you in advance for choosing to be a part of this research project. Your responses to this
survey can help develop best practice in PBL teacher training methods. Your participation in the
survey is completely voluntary and will remain confidential. If you have any questions regarding
this research project, please contact me or my research advisor. I can be reached at 417-350-2067 or
at [email protected]. My advisor, Dr. Matt Stringer, can be reached 417-865-2815 ext. 8563 or
at [email protected].
 130

APPENDIX C

PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online Survey

Thank you for your participation in this survey. Your responses will be anonymous.

1. Have you received PBL teacher training in the past year?

● Yes
● No [Skip to 3]

2. Approximately how much PBL professional development have you received in

the past year?
● Less than a week
● 1-4 weeks
● 5-10 weeks
● More than 10 weeks

3. Would you like to spend more time exploring the following components of
PBL?

● Collecting and analyzing PBL data from my classroom

● Modeling PBL lessons in my classroom
● Observations and feedback of my PBL instructional methods
● Additional resources for use in my classroom
● Interviews and feedback with my PBL students
● Co-teaching with another PBL teacher or trainer
● Visiting other PBL classrooms or campuses
● 21st century competencies
● Identifying, learning, and improving methodology teaching practice.
● Other, be specific

On a scale of 1-5, with 1 being least important, to 5 being most important, how do you rate the
following factors in PBL professional development?

4. The PBL professional development staff clearly 12345

defines the PBL process.

5. The PBL professional development staff are experts

in their field. 12345
 131

6. The PBL development staff focuses on relationship building. 12345

7. The PBL professional development staff is interested

in listening to you as they provide instruction. 12345

8. In your PBL professional development, you have a

choice and a voice in what you learn and how you learn it. 12345

9. You feel your relationship with your PBL professional

development is a partnership and not evaluative. 12345

10. You feel you can trust your PBL professional

development team. 12345

11. The PBL development team has a deep understanding of the

instructional practices that they share with you. 12345

12. The teaching practices that the PBL professional

development team shares effectively address your
needs and the needs of your students. 12345

13. Adequate time is given for you and the professional

development staff to meet and discuss lessons
and student work. 12345

14. You and the PBL professional development staff

discuss goals through identifying, learning, and
improving the instructional methods. 12345

15. Your teaching practices have improved as a result of 12345

PBL professional development.

16. PBL teacher training focuses on and models the 4 Cs to

support 21st century skills: critical thinking, collaboration,
communication, and creativity. 12345

17. Modeling PBL instruction is a part of my teacher training. 12345

18. Student achievement is improving as a result of PBL

professional development. 12345
 132

19. I see an increase in standardized test scores and an increase 12345

in retention of information from my students as a result of
PBL teacher training.

Please answer the following questions.

20. What factors contributed to successful PBL teacher training?

21. If changes were made to your PBL professional development, what suggestions would you
make?

22. What elements of the PBL teaching training had the greatest impact on your teaching
practice?

23. What type of evidence, if any, have you seen in the classroom that PBL professional
development is increasing student achievement?

24. What factors were barriers to successful PBL teacher training?

 133

APPENDIX D

Email to set up interviews

Dear _______________,

My a name is Sally Ricker, and I am a doctoral student at Evangel University in Springfield,

Missouri. I am currently working on my dissertation entitled “Effective Project-Based
Learning Professional Development Strategies for Increasing Student Success and Building
Teacher Capacity in 21st Century Skills.” My advisor for this project is Dr. Matt Stringer and
my study has been approved by the Research Review Board of Evangel University and
___________ School District.

I appreciate your willingness to complete the PBL Teacher Training Research Study Online
Survey and based upon your responses, I would like your permission to interview you in a
focus group. All information associated with this study will remain confidential and password
protected in a locked file, accessible only to the researcher. Interview transcripts will be kept
for five years, in accordance with Evangel University’s program guidelines. Participants’
comments will be anonymous and unidentifiable by name in any publications.

I will conduct the interviews and focus on gathering perceptions on instruction for supporting
and implementing project-based learning, student achievement linked to PBL teacher
training, and barriers to successful PBL professional development. Interviews will be
conducted during the month of February and will last approximately 40 minutes. Do you have
a specific date that works best for you?

I look forward to hearing from you and scheduling at time for this interview. I greatly
appreciate your time and willingness to assist me in this research study. Please feel free to call
or email to schedule a time, or if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Sally Ricker
(417)350-2067
[email protected]
 134

APPENDIX E

Interview Protocol: Interview questions for teachers

Interviewer: Sally Ricker

Date:

Time:

Location:

Focus group interviewees:

Interview Questions

1. How do we better prepare new teachers to instruct CAPS who have never taught using PBL

methodology?

2. How can facilitators be best supported in PBL?

3. What is the answer for districts who do not provide professional development for PBL?

4. Professional Development Team, lead instructor, instructional coach… who should lead PBL

teacher training?

5. Is it possible, in your viewpoint, to tie standardized test scores and CAPS to evaluate student

achievement?

6. How do you evaluate student success and student achievement in CAPS?

7. How can CAPS PBL training best prepare teachers to instruct and teach students to use 21st

century skills(Communication, collaboration, creativity, and critical thinking)?

8. How does flexibility play a role in your instruction as a CAPS facilitator?

 135

9. Identifying/learning/improving instruction was the area of improvement most needed by CAPS

participants in the survey results. How do you feel you could be best supported as an instructor in

these areas of concern?

 ProQuest Number: 30819537

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality and completeness of this reproduction is dependent on the quality
and completeness of the copy made available to ProQuest.

Distributed by ProQuest LLC ( 2024 ).

Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author unless otherwise noted.

This work may be used in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons license
or other rights statement, as indicated in the copyright statement or in the metadata
associated with this work. Unless otherwise specified in the copyright statement
or the metadata, all rights are reserved by the copyright holder.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17,

United States Code and other applicable copyright laws.

Microform Edition where available © ProQuest LLC. No reproduction or digitization

of the Microform Edition is authorized without permission of ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346 USA