Pre-Service Teachers’ Experiences and Views on Project-Based Learning Processes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Project-based learning (PjBL) has been promoted as an effective and frequently used student-centered learning approach for various learning environments. To have various learning experiences with PjBL is an important requirement for pre-service teachers (PSTs). The purpose of the study was to investigate the experiences PSTs had with group work and collaboration, resources and research methods, the problems they faced, and the strategies they used to overcome these problems during the information and communications technology (ICT)-integrated PjBL process, as well as their thoughts concerning learning processes in PjBL. The participants in the study consisted of 413 PSTs in six different teaching programs who took the course Computer 2. Qualitative methods were used in this descriptive study. The results revealed that PSTs perceived the PjBL processes mostly positively and also that they thought the PjBL process contributed to their learning and helped them gain PjBL skills. PSTs formed groups based on their own preferences. PSTs perceived that the PjBL process based on group work that was implemented advanced their problem-solving and collaboration skills.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it