MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412372693 · doi:10.5430/jct.v14n3p119

Inventive Problem-Solving Skills Effectiveness in RBT Project-Based Learning (PBL)

2025· article· en· W4412372693 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tee Tze Kiong, Noor Syuhaili Mohd. Rusly, Nurulwahida Azid, Charanjit Kaur Swaran Singh, Rahmat Azis Nabawi, Muhammad Aris Ichwanto, Andika Bagus Nur Rahma Putra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProblem-based learningProject-based learningComputer scienceMathematics educationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Examining how well a TRIZ-based Project-Based Learning (PBL) module fosters creative problem-solving abilities in secondary school students enrolled in Design and Technology (RBT) courses is the goal of this study. The combination of PBL with structured creative problem-solving techniques like TRIZ, particularly in the context of RBT topics, is still largely unexplored, even though PBL has been widely used in Malaysian education. In this quasi-experimental study, 118 Form 2 students were split into two groups: a control group (n = 58) that received traditional instruction and a treatment group (n = 60) that received the PBL intervention. The 12-week TRIZ methodology-based module was presented to the treatment group. The treatment group's mean scores increased by 34% (from 50.72% to 67.93%) compared to the control group's 16% improvement, according to pre- and post-test data. Significantly, the treatment group showed a stronger change in mastery levels and high order thinking abilities in every aspect of problem-solving. The results imply that the TRIZ-based PBL module fosters structured and innovative problem-solving skills more successfully than conventional methods. By giving a scalable methodology for developing 21st-century skills, the study offers new insights by presenting a verified pedagogical framework that incorporates TRIZ into project-based learning for secondary education.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicProblem and Project Based LearningFrench-language works237,207