Impact of Project-Based Learning on Critical Thinking Skills and Language Skills in EFL Context：A Review of Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the domain of Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL), the cultivation of critical thinking skills (CTSs) and language skills (LSs) is imperative for the academic deveolpment of learners. Project-Based Learning (PBL), characterized by its integration of real-world challenges and emphasis on collaborative learning, demonstrates significant potential to positively influence the development of CTSs and LSs in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. This systematic review of literature meticulously evaluates the effects of PBL on fostering critical thinking skills CTSs and language skills LSs among EFL learners over recent decades. It assimilates insights from a range of empirical studies, elucidating how PBL activities enhance EFL learners’ critical thinking skills more effectively compared to conventional teaching methodologies. Additionally, this review underscores the beneficial impacts of PBL on language skills, encompassing vocabulary acquisition, speaking, writing, and reading comprehension, which are attributed to its focus on authentic tasks and practical real-world applications. The implementation of PBL is instrumental in promoting deeper engagement in learning within EFL classrooms. Moreover, the perceptions of PBL by EFL learners and teachers constitute a significant component of the findings. EFL learners typically demonstrate favorable attitudes towards PBL, while EFL teachers recognize its efficacy in nurturing critical thinking and creativity, acknowledging challenges in its practical execution and assessment design. Conclusively, the review pinpoints existing research gaps and delineates prospective research trajectories. There exists an exigent need for comprehensive exploration into the mechanisms by which PBL augments skill development, longitudinal investigations into its enduring impacts, and research across diverse educational settings. The incorporation of technology within PBL frameworks and the preparedness of teachers are identified as pivotal areas for further inquiry.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".