school-based curriculum action research series · complex relationship between input and output,...
TRANSCRIPT
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
SScchhooooll--bbaasseedd CCuurrrriiccuulluumm AAccttiioonn RReesseeaarrcchh SSeerriieess
The 21st century marks the development of an information or knowledge society
with fast-changing needs and environment. In order to prepare our younger
generation for their future needs, schools, through constant endeavours in search of
excellence, have to provide students with different learning opportunities and
experiences. In this respect, the school curriculum should best be aligned with the
social development as well as the students’ interest.
Since 1998, the School-based Curriculum Development (Primary) Section has
been collaborating with school teachers in curriculum development in various Key
Learning Areas. Building on the strengths and successful experiences accumulated
over the years, the Section has initiated action researches jointly with teachers, aiming
at empowering teachers to make informed decisions on curriculum research and
development.
WWhhyy DDoo WWee PPrroommoottee SScchhooooll--bbaasseedd CCuurrrriiccuulluumm AAccttiioonn RReesseeaarrcchh??
Collaborative school-based curriculum action research aims to :
ð enable teachers to enhance quality learning and teaching through knowledge
generated and constructed in the process of critical and systematic inquiry into
different learning and teaching issues;
ð develop teachers’ competence in curriculum development and research literacy
as well as their sense of curriculum ownership; and
ð develop schools into learning organizations through collaborative team work
within schools and professional sharing in school networks.
HHooww DDoo WWee CCoonndduucctt CCoollllaabboorraattiivvee SScchhooooll--bbaasseedd CCuurrrriiccuulluumm AAccttiioonn RReesseeaarrcchh??
In the course of school-based curriculum development, teachers’ critical reflections
will help them identify issues worth addressing in the form of an action research.
The following steps illustrate the basic cycle in action research :
1. Examine critically learning- or teaching-related issues worth researching into
2. Define the research focus and review literature for current theories and practice
3. Develop action plans or intervention strategies
4. Implement action plans in contexts
5. Collect evidence and reflect on effectiveness of actions
6. Draw conclusions and use feedback to improve learning and teaching
7. Start a new cycle if necessary
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
As teachers progress through this spiral cycle, they improve their teaching through
continual reflection and move closer to the solution of the identified problems.
Taking the role as facilitator, Curriculum Officers from the SBCD(P) Section work as
partners with teachers, rendering professional support throughout the research cycle,
assisting them in reflecting and conceptualizing tacit knowledge embedded in their
practice.
HHooww CCaann TThheessee RReeppoorrttss BBee UUsseedd??
This series of action research reports portrays the participating teachers’ educational
beliefs and philosophy, and the developmental pathway undertaken to improve the
school curriculum. The curriculum design, intervention strategies, action plans,
research tools and instruments, as well as the findings and recommendations may be
valuable references for teachers who intend to launch school-based curriculum
development and/or collaborative action research in their schools. We sincerely
hope that this series can serve as a platform to stimulate professional dialogue in
curriculum research and development, and to spark off a research culture in primary
schools in Hong Kong.
For comments and inquiries on the series, please contact
Mr. WUN Chi-wa
Senior Curriculum Development Officer
School-based Curriculum Development (Primary) Section
Phone : 2762 0174
Email : [email protected]
http://cd.ed.gov.hk/sbp
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
The Road to Creative Work
Enhancing Students’ Development in
Language, Ideas, Skills and Attitude
through Project Learning
Research Team: School-based Curriculum Development (Primary) Section
Curriculum Development Institute
Education Department PLK Leung Chow Shun Kam Primary School (PM) Ms Lee Hang Ling Ms So Wing Yee Ms Yuen Yuk Chun Ms Cheng King Yee
Curriculum Development Institute,
Education Department
Copyright 2002, Education Department, HKSAR
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
Contents
Page Abstract I. Background 1 A. The Situation B. The Problem C. Purpose of the Study II. The Research Process 4 A. Methodology B. Schedule C. Literature Review on Project Learning
(from July – Sept 2000)
D. The Development Process III. Findings 15 A. Impact on Learning IV. Insights and New Understandings 33 A. Importance of Giving Students Appropriate Input B. Importance of Knowledge and Experience in
Project Work
V. Conclusion 42 References 43
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
THE ROAD TO CREATIVE WORK ENHANCING STUDENTS’ DEVELOPMENT IN LANGUAGE, IDEAS, SKILLS AND ATTITUDE
THROUGH PROJECT LEARNING
ABSTRACT
This is a collaborative action research conducted by four Primary One
English teachers and a Curriculum Development Officer in the academic
year 2000-2001. The objectives were to find out:
• how students could be better prepared and equipped with the essential
language, ideas, skills and attitude for project work;
• what specific assessment criteria could be developed for project work
and how they could be applied to provide useful feedback to students for
improvement.
The focus of this research was on exploring students’ learning process. To
collect data on students’ learning in project work and the ir development of
language, ideas, skills and attitude, classroom observations and teachers’
journals were used. In phase 1, a pre-test and a post-test on students’
performance in knowledge and reading skills were conducted and data were
compared to see if there was any significant difference after the explicit
teaching of knowledge and reading skills. In phase 2, students did two
projects and their work was marked according to the assessment criteria
which placed emphasis on ideas, language skill and attitude. All students’
work was evaluated to examine students’ learning and achievement in
project work. Students’ self-evaluation was also used to collect students’
own feedback and responses towards project work.
During the research process, teachers were impressed by the students’
progress and their projects. Project work has provided a very good chance
for students to learn and develop. While realizing that students’ potentials
cannot be underestimated, teachers have learnt the importance of the
development process from reading to writing and how to prepare students
with various inputs in order to help them achieve the learning targets. The
research also sheds light on various issues including the importance of
having clear purposes of project learning, teachers’ role, parents’ role, the
complex relationship between input and output, the application of
assessment criteria and problems related to assessment.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
1
I. BACKGROUND
A. The Situation
We are teaching in a school in Tuen Mun with students largely from the
neighborhood with little family and language support. The school started
school-based curriculum development with the School-based Curriculum
Development (Primary) Section in P1 English Language last year and has made
a lot of changes in the curriculum. There were attempts in restructuring the
modules, enriching the textbook materials with big books, readers, phonics
worksheets and adopting an integrated approach in language teaching.
Teaching- learning-assessment focuses were made clearer. In the second term,
the Pl students were asked to do 3 projects based on the modules and language
they learnt from the textbooks and other resources. We were all pleased to see
how students learnt and applied what they had learnt in the final products.
Project learning was proved to be an enjoyable experience for both teachers and
students.
Asking students to do projects is particularly important in our school since
it provides free room and success experience to students, including the deprived
ones with little support, and let them know what they can do when they develop
their own potentials. It is a very important means to motivate our students.
B. The Problem
Despite the enjoyment and enthusiasm demonstrated by some students, the
large majority still had a lot of difficulties in expressing themselves and
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
2
producing good projects. Besides, we did not have enough time to work on the
process and prepare students well for project work. We were not satisfied with
just a few successful and impressive products. We wanted to go deeper into the
process and help all students develop in not only in language, but also ideas,
skills and attitude.
Besides making English learning enjoyable and meaningful, we hoped that
students could have all-round development through project work. Unlike other
assignments, four criteria were used for project assessment last year: language,
ideas, skills and attitude and students were expected to show improvement in
all these four areas, though they were not of equal importance and could vary
from one project to the other. This had an important washback effect on
teaching and learning and both teachers and students became more aware of the
meaning of learning the language. We also began to appreciate the different
potentials and value all- round deve lopment of students. But we still lacked
experience and more specific scoring rubrics to make assessment effective.
Assessment of projects remained a very difficult task for us.
So, with the valuable experience and many questions cropping up in last
year’s attempt, we started off this action research to address the above issues. It
was hoped that more effective ways of preparing students for project work and
helping them to achieve all- round development could be worked out. More
refined scoring rubrics for assessment of projects were also needed and
experience in applying them was essential. We also wanted to explore our own
process of growth and go more deeply into the teaching- learning-assessment
process.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
3
C. Purpose of the Study
This was a collaborative action research aiming to explore how we could
help students do projects and achieve all- round development. We are teachers
teaching P.1 English and three of us have been working on curriculum
adaptation with SBCD(P) for one year. Based on the experience we have
gained and support we have developed for each other, we wanted to further
explore how we could empower ourselves in new attempts. We therefore
embarked on this action research on project learning, which was a real
challenge for all the teachers involved. After some preliminary study of the
needs of both students and teachers, the objectives of the research were to find
out:
• how students could be better prepared and equipped with the essential
language, ideas, skills and attitude for project work;
• what specific assessment criteria could be developed for project work and
how they could be applied to provide useful feedback to students for
improvement.
We expected the following outcomes from the research:
• Students demonstrated improvement in their projects and showed evidence
of development in language, ideas, skills and attitude based on the input and
support given in the process.
• We teachers increased our experience and competence in preparing students
for project work, developing specific assessment criteria and applying them
effectively.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
4
II. The Research Process
A. Methodology
Since this was a collaborative action research, the reflective part from both
teachers and CDO was very important. During the whole process, we had
discussions and sharing from time to time. Important findings and development
were noted down for analysis. All of us kept journals and reflected on the
teaching process. Our meetings were crucial occasions for reflection and
evaluation. Reflection or evaluation forms were one of the methods for
collecting data on our process of growth and change in action. Sharing related
to the teaching process and our struggle were also recorded as far as possible.
This was basically a qualitative research since we tried to explore and
interpret the learning process in the real context of classroom and school. Data
on students’ learning in project work and their development in language, ideas,
skills and attitude were mainly collected through classroom observations and
teachers’ journals.
In phase 1, a pre-test and post-test on students’ performance in knowledge and
reading skills were conducted and data were compared to see if there was
any significant difference after the explicit teaching of knowledge and
reading skills related to project learning and to examine whether the input
was effective.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
5
In phase 2, students did two projects and their work was marked according to
the assessment criteria. Students’ work was evaluated to examine students’
learning and achievement in project work. Continuous feedback was given
to students and we evaluated and adjusted input or support students needed
for improvement. The two projects were compared in areas including
language, ideas, skills and attitude to see if students had any improvement
and explore further into their needs. Students’ self-evaluation was also
used to collect students’ own feedback and responses towards project work.
In this research, all five Primary One classes were included. Each class
consisted of around forty students and they were of mixed ability.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
6
B. Schedule
Time
Phase 1
July 2000
August 2000
September 2000
October 2000
October – December 2000
January 2001
February 2001 – March 2001
Phase 2
March 2001
April 2001
May 2001
Action
Ø do literature review, explore materials and discuss
focuses;
Ø set learning targets and focuses of teaching, decide on
the aims of research;
Ø plan teaching schedule;
Ø decide on the research methodology and target group,
design the research instruments;
Ø conduct pre-test on target group;
Ø discuss and try out teaching in preparation for project
work;
Ø teachers conduct observations during the course of
teaching;
Ø teachers reflect through the journals and share from
time to time;
Ø first phase evaluation & plan for phase 2
Ø conduct post-test on target group;
Ø first stage analysis;
Ø discuss and try out teaching on project work;
Ø students do the first project;
Ø teachers conduct observations during the course of
teaching;
Ø teachers reflect through the journals and share from
time to time;
Ø teachers evaluate students’ first projects;
Ø teachers plan for the second project;
Ø students do the second project;
Ø teachers evaluate students’ projects and collect
students’ self-evaluation forms ;
Ø data analysis & report writing
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
7
C. Literature Review on Project Learning (from July – September
2000)
We started by reading up materials on project learning in English Language
teaching from July 2000. Based on the knowledge from the literature review,
we had lengthy discussions on the objectives of having projects in our
curriculum, things we wanted to find out from this research and how to go
about it.
Project is defined in many different ways, reflecting its richness and the
many possibilities that it can offer. In our context, project work means ‘a
large task composed of smaller steps’ (Ribe & Vidal, 1993) and so the
process of project work is of paramount importance.
The integrated approach is developed from Katz’s (1994) idea that project
work should be treated as integral to all other work included in the
curriculum. There are many researches on how the use of project work can
support teaching and learning in English Language. The most basic
function suggested is it helps students reinforce the learning and practice of
language patterns and vocabulary and ‘enables students to recyc le known
language in a relatively natural context’ (Lee, Li & Lee,1999). Students can
also develop essential learning skills e.g. language skills, information skills,
inquiry skills, problem-solving, organization & presentation skills and they
can apply integrated skills. So, through project work, students can be helped
to reinforce and apply the knowledge and skills they have learnt and use
them for meaningful and real purposes in an enjoyable manner. All learning
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
8
is coherent and connected.
Project work in the English subject provides students opportunities for
meaningful and integrated use of language. But teachers must have clear goals
and steps. To make project learning successful, the input teachers can provide
in the process to help students understand what they should aim at in their
output is very important. Also, teachers should choose topics and activities that
are of genuine interest to both the teacher and the students, provide a natural
context for learning, allow some flexibility and encourage a high degree of
self-direction in terms of which tasks are taken on by students and how they are
approached (Fowkes, 1995).
So, whether students can benefit from project work depends largely on how
teachers make it. Teachers’ role is very important. To help students benefit
from project work, teachers have to use different strategies and some
features characterizing the teachers’ role are as follows:
Teacher should
• guide the children’s work;
• build on children’s proficiencies or on what the children already know;
• provide activity at independent level;
• let children choose from alternatives;
(http://www.project-approach.com/foundation/formats.htm)
• involve students in planning and execution of projects through a series of
tasks; (Lee, Li & Lee,1999)
• encourage children to take risks; (Errors should be regarded as a natural
part of the development)
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
9
• ensure children’s feelings of success ---- make them regard themselves as
capable of exploring and enjoying the use of language;
• provide many opportunities for children to read and write independently
The list of how teachers can provide support to students can be endless and
teachers need to develop competence and experience in making project
learning a fruitful process for all students. This action research arises from
such understanding and we all want to explore the above possibilities. We
therefore engage ourselves in this continual process of rethinking the
meaning and teaching of project work in language teaching.
D. The Development Process
A. 1. Planning-Acting-Reflecting Cycle (Phase 1)
With an attempt to consolidate and build on our experience in teaching
projects last year, we looked into the problems students had faced and thought
about the essential knowledge, skills and attitude students would need in order
to do projects. The following conclusion was made: an integrated approach of
project learning would be used. First, project work was made an integral part of
the curriculum, well integrated with the textbooks and all other related
materials and was a natural outcome demonstrating what students had learnt
from all resources. Second, process and product were equally important and
students had to be provided with adequate input and support before they were
to apply what they had learnt and produced the output. To help students achieve
the expected outcomes, we had to share our understanding and learning in the
process of working out more specific expected outcomes from project work for
better assessment; and explore effective ways of preparing students and helping
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
10
them achieve these outcomes.
Based on last year’s experience, students could start working on projects
in the second term. In the first term, we focused on preparing students for
project work later. From October 2000 to January 2001 during the preparation
and input stage, our major tasks were to help students develop the basic
language, ideas, skills and attitude needed for project work and they included:
• providing students with reading input in context and reinforce students’
language learning in patterns and vocabulary;
• helping students build up the concept of what a project can be like and what
are required;
• giving students free room for expression, encourage active use of language,
development of ideas, skills and positive attitude towards project work.
In the first term, we focused on conducting reading activities with students.
Besides shared reading, we designed two project books altogether: one on `My
book about school things’ (Appendix I) and the other on `Animals’ (Appendix
II). The teaching of reading skills was integrated with the textbooks and
resources being used. The focus of each mini-task was clear and related to the
skills students needed, e.g. understand and respond to short written instructions,
understand and use patterns, locate specific information and follow instructions.
Basic skills of recognizing sight vocabulary and word building were also
included. The format of the activities in the book was also designed to help
students develop the concept of project and there was room for appreciation
and free expression. In some parts, students were asked to gather information
like pictures and present their work in their own way. It was hoped that such
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
11
ways of teaching could help students build up basic reading skills and develop
the ability of applying what they had learnt in project work. This was also the
beginning of the learning process of project work.
For the second project book on animals, we had thought of an interesting
storyline of treasure hunt: `Animals can help?’ The book was about a journey
in a zoo with different animals describing themselves. The narrator had to seek
help from different animals in order to get to the destination and find the
treasure. The treasure could be an animal or a monster and students could
design it in their own way towards the end of the project book. Such design was
to make the task more challenging and allow students free room for expression.
With the use of these project books, students could acquire the essential
basic reading skills. They also had opportunities to express themselves and try
different ways of presentation. Students’ response towards the project books
was good on the whole. They were learning to read instructions and their
mastery of language was reinforced. Individual students demonstrated good
effort in collecting pictures and building up vocabulary (Appendix IIIa). As for
the second project book, one student demonstrated his creativity in writing
(Appendix IIIb). However, most students still followed the models from the
textbook closely. The post-test result reflected that students in general had
improvement in their reading and writing. After the first term, we felt that
students could move onto the second stage with more skills and confidence.
B. 2. Planning-Acting-Reflecting Cycle (Phase 2)
In the second term from February 2001 to June 2001, the application and
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
12
output stage, our major tasks were to let students apply what they had learnt in
phase 1 in actual project work and they included:
• helping students apply what they have learnt in phase 1 and develop writing
skills based on models;
• using ways to check students’ progress and provide feedback while
applying assessment criteria;
• helping students make improvement through different projects.
The first project was developed from the first module of the second term.
Students were asked to do their first project after the teaching of the module
`Me and my friend’. All teaching materials including readers and big books
were related to the same theme. The content, language and whether the books
could appeal to the students and elicit their personal response were considered
when we selected the books. Besides the readers, a variety of input was
provided to help students apply them in their work. Students were expected to
demonstrate their development in four areas: ideas, language, skills and attitude.
We did not provide any paper or framework for the students. Students were to
do the project during the Easter Holiday and they could use whatever they
could get hold of. There were some basic requirements concerning the content
and the minimum number of pages. We also expected students to use the
language they had learnt. Other than that, students were free to write about
anything they found relevant and present them in their own way.
In the first project, students in general could use the language to express
ideas. Many students had good ideas and attitude towards project work. Their
performance was better than those of the last year in terms of language and
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
13
ideas. Last year, students demonstrated more effort in design but wrote very
little. This year, students tended to write more and focus more on expression.
They showed genuine interest in using language to express themselves. They
also had different ways of presentation and their creativity level was higher. A
few of them even tried to organize their work with a content page added.
However, we felt that students still had much room to develop their own ideas
and creativity.
To provide students with another opportunity to develop their creativity,
we designed another project `Family Poem’. This second project intended to
provide students with more room for free expression. Its focus was not on
language but ideas. Input like poems and worksheets were used to help
students develop the ideas. Different ways of presentation were explored. This
project had tried to link up students’ knowledge of family members, animals
and adjectives. It provided a more authentic and natural context for students to
write about their own family. Students’ previous knowledge was used and
recycled and there was integration built into their learning. Students were then
able to apply what they had learnt in a more meaningful way. In the process,
we brainstormed with students on the various possibilities of describing their
family members. Students were encouraged to write more creatively in their
final products.
Despite our encouragement to students and our sharing in the
brainstorming sessions, most products were still quite similar, reflecting that
students still tended to follow the teachers’ examples. These examples were
intended to be stimulation and reference for students only. However, it seemed
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
14
that most students wanted to play safe and they preferred to write about things
they were most familiar with. Although we did not see much creativity in the
students’ projects as we expected, we were still satisfied with students’ work
since they demonstrated ability to use the language and apply it in a
meaningful context. We were surprised to see that the difficult language
pattern was not a problem to students as long as we made it meaningful to
them. They were able to understand and use difficult language with adequate
support.
In conclusion, students’ performance in the two projects `Me and my
friend’ and `Family Poem’ was very satisfactory and they demonstrated very
good effort in doing the projects.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
15
III. Findings
A. Impact on Learning
1. Phase 1
Students’ Learning as Reflected by the Tests and Students’ Work Learning
of the Basic Reading Skills in the Preparation Stage: Project Book
We generally felt that students showed very good response
towards shared reading and activities related to the project books. For
the reading skills, we felt that students performed best in reading
different text-types. However, owing to limited exposure and
vocabulary, students did not show much development in acquiring
word-building skills. As for recognizing basic sight vocabulary, it
largely depended on students’ previous knowledge.
The pre-test and post-test (Appendix IV) were conducted at the
beginning of the first and second term respectively. They were
intended to assess students’ learning in the first term, which
focused on reading skills and knowledge developed from the
reading activities and project books. Besides specific language
items, some general parts aiming at testing students’ skills and
understanding were added e.g. reading stories and instructions.
In the pre-test results, we found that students were particularly weak
in reading comprehension and writing. They were better in
vocabulary. This was expected as most P1 students did not have
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
16
training in comprehension and writing skills. Teaching in the
kindergarten focused mainly on vocabulary. Taking this into
consideration, we targeted our teaching more at reading and
writing skills. The project books were designed to equip students
with the essential skills and concept of project work.
The post-test was conducted after the first term. The two test results
were compared and it was found that in 3 classes, over 85% of the
students had made improvement and in the other two classes, the
percentage was around 70%. Some classes demonstrated better
performance on comprehension and writing. It reflected that
students did make some improvement after we had taught them
reading skills and writing through the project books.
Reflecting on the design and results of the tests, we realized that
there were some limitations with the tests, for instance, time lag
between the two tests, insufficient time for students to complete the
post-test and inadequate preparation. The validity of the test paper
was also a problem. Owing to the heavy workload and time constraint,
we only adapted the paper we had been using normally for
diagnosing P1 students. Although we had modified some parts, the
objectives and focuses of the test paper failed to serve our purposes in
assessing the students’ skills. For example, the spelling part was still
designed in a traditional manner focusing on students’ short-term
memory but not phonics or reading skills. The vocabulary items were
related to some specific contexts and they were not the ones students
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
17
always used. When the students took the post-test, they might have
forgotten the vocabulary as they learnt them some time ago.
We also identified some problem cases in which students
performed very differently in the two results, particularly those who
scored lower than 40 marks in the post-test. For instance, one student
was very dependent. Since we read the question paper to the students
in the pre-test only and so she had to handle the post-test on her own,
she was at a loss in the post-test and her result was disastrous.
So there were various reasons for the differences between
pre-test and post-test. We learnt that we had to be very clear about the
purposes of the tests. Existing papers were convenient to use but a lot
of modifications might need to be made before they could serve our
purposes. Our adaptations to the paper this time were not adequate
and so both the reliability and validity of the tests were a problem.
We might need to design a different paper if we focused on assessing
the students’ mastery of skills rather than memory. However, despite
these limitations and problems in the design and administration of the
tests, the high percentage of improvement was very encouraging and
this was still an indicator of the students’ progress.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
18
2. Phase 2
a. Development in Language, Ideas, Skills and Attitude as Reflected
from the Projects:
i. Project 1 - ‘Me and My Friend’
We were impressed by our students’ work as they demonstrated
very substantial learning. In the past, our P1 students did not have a
chance to have free writing and they were not expected to use
language other than those in the textbooks. However, examining our
students’ first project, we were amazed by the number of sentences
they had written. The students really showed interest to express
themselves. Although there were a few weak ones who only managed
to write 4-5 sentences, on average, students wrote more than 20
sentences and some wrote as many as 60 (Appendix Va). The
variation in terms of content, language, ideas and presentation among
students’ work was also very encouraging. Many students did not just
use the language they learnt from the textbook and the readers, but
also seek new words/patterns to talk about themselves or their
possessions, like `handsome’, `photos’, `picnic’, `macaroni’, `candy’,
`a pair of glasses’. One student used connectives `but’ and `too’
(Appendix Vb) to link up ideas. There were also complex patterns
like `I like dancing’, `We always play together’, `We are singing’,
`I’m playing puzzles with my friend’ in the students’ work. We saw
from all the illustrations and the flow of ideas that these students
understood these complex patterns and used them for meaningful
expression. We were happy to see that some of them had started to
find words, seek information and learn on their own. It was obvious
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
19
that brainstorming and sha ring in class had helped students to think
of more ideas, learn from each other and find new words to express
themselves. We also made use of the opportunities to provide
students with the necessary language for expression. From the
students’ self-reflection, we saw that parents’ support had been very
important. We had tried to provide our students with the free space
and encourage them to take risks as far as possible throughout the
whole process and the students were clearer of our expectations.
They were more willing to try and their parents could provide them
with the assistance needed.
Students wrote about different things. Besides talking about
themselves, some chose to write about their friends, some wrote
about their family members and the others wrote about their pets. A
few even wrote about what they did with their friends and took some
shots of their activities together. Quite a number of students used
different ways and formats to present their ideas (Appendix VI).
Other than just sentences, there were charts and mind maps
illustrating things of the same topic. These were examples
demonstrating students’ own creative ideas. A few students were
even able to express themselves in a very personal style, giving their
work a unique personal touch. We also appreciated a few students’
attempt and ability in providing a content page (Appendix VII).
Although they were not mature in making the content page very
sensible, they began to organize themselves even without the
teacher’s support. We learnt that the free space given in the project
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
20
work had encouraged students to transfer what they had learnt from
other subjects and express in their own way.
Students’ positive attitude towards project work was also
encouraging. Most students showed great interest and good effort in
completing their work. Even the weaker students who could not write
too much had tried to put strenuous effort in doing the project and
making it impressive (Appendix VIII).
ii. Project 2 – ‘Family Poem’
For the second project, students could use difficult patterns to
express ideas. They could use their previous knowledge and draw
linkage among the things they had learnt: vocabulary of family
members, animals and adjectives describing character / appearance.
They also developed concepts of different things like characteristics
of animals and their analogy with family members. So, they began to
use language at a higher level drawing upon more abstract concepts.
Although there was not much creativity in the students’ projects as
we expected, students had already demonstrated much learning in
their work (Appendix IX).
`We are really happy to see that our pupils can do project
work independently. Most of them are willing to do the
projects and they have great fun in the work. They feel
proud because they can create a book of their own. They
show some sense of achievement.’
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
21
--- from the teachers’ journals
b. Students’ Motivation / Learning Attitude as Reflected by Our
Observation and Students’ Self-Evaluation Form
We observed that students demonstrated very high motivation in
doing their projects and their attitude towards learning was also very
positive. When they had problems in their work, they were willing to ask
and seek solutions. They did not just depend on teachers and parents but
they tried their best to contribute to the projects. Their own effort was
impressive and they had begun to take responsibility for their own
learning.
Besides observation, all students were asked to complete a
self-evaluation form (Appendix X) on their projects towards the end of
the year. A lot of interesting points were elicited since there were
open-ended questions asking students to explain why. The students’
response was very positive and many of them shared their opinions and
feelings.
The majority of the students showed great interest in project work. Of
all the P1 students, 79.7% responded that they enjoyed doing the projects.
47.3% pointed out that they liked drawing most and 7.1% said that they
liked writing. The others were more on artwork like coloring. For very
young kids in P1, other than language, drawing appeared to be a very
important way for them to express themselves. However, it was quite
surprising to see such a high percentage for writing. Around six students
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
22
pointed out that project work was challenging and they could learn things
from it. When they were asked to state which project they liked more,
49.5% chose `Me and my friend’. Besides general reasons like they found
the project work interesting and great fun, students were able to give very
specific reasons. For the first project, some students explained that it was
because they loved their family/friend, they wanted to introduce their
family members/friend to others or they wanted to make more friends. It
showed that they had some intrinsic motivation to do the projects as they
had genuine desire to share with others and they wrote what they felt most
strongly about. The projects were meaningful to them as they were to use
language for authentic expression of feelings.
Most students (75.8%) thought that their projects were good. When
they were asked to choose which areas they thought they were good at,
most of them (68.1%) chose attitude, followed by ideas (47.3%) and skills
(39%). But only 37.9% thought that they were good at language. So, these
students showed very good confidence in their work and they appreciated
their own attitude most. Comparatively speaking, they had more worries in
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
Fig. 1. Q.7 Circle the one(s) you are good at:
數列1 68.10% 47.30% 39.00% 37.90%
Attitude Ideas Skills Language
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
23
language and they felt they were not so good at it (Fig. 1).
Finally, 80.2% of all the students rated themselves very highly, with
61.5% giving themselves 4 stars and 18.7% 3 stars. This was a very
promising start for the students (Fig. 2).
Besides, the majority (61.5%) said that the work was not difficult,
even though these were the first projects for them. There were many
reasons: the teachers had taught them how to do the projects, they saw the
teachers’ examples (“我看見老師做得很美麗我就感到很容易”) and
there was support from the family (“媽媽和爸爸和我一起做”、“有家人一
起做就很簡單”、“媽媽幫手真很有趣”). One even said that it was
because he enjoyed the independence he had in doing the projects (“我有
獨立的空間做報告”). However, 36.8% still felt that the work was
difficult because they did not know how to do it and they had problems
with English. A few stated that the problem was they needed to write a lot
and there were many things to do.
Fig. 2. Q.8 How many stars would you give toyourself?
Missing3.8%
*8.2% **
7.7%
***18.7%
****61.5%
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
24
So, over 70% of these students had great interest and confidence in
project work and correspondingly, 70.9% expressed that they wanted to do
more projects because it was great fun, they could learn more and they
could draw pictures. One specifically explained that he could make a book
and become a writer. For those who did not want to do more projects, the
main reason was they found it difficult. The majority of the students did
develop greater motivation and better ability in project work and their
confidence was impressive.
Although the students failed to say too much in their self-evaluation
exercise, some of them could point out clearly what they had learnt from
project work, for instance, `I know how to do it now (我現在明白怎樣做
了)’, `I can learn more words (可以學多點字)’, `I have to use my brain
(要用腦想)’, `I can know more friends (可以認識多些朋友)’. Besides,
they began to take responsibility for their own work and were proud of
themselves. They told the teachers: `I did it myself (我自己做)’, `I did my
work seriously (我做得好有心機)’, `I can make a book and be a writer
(可以做成一本書可以做作者)’, `The design is good (設計很好)’, `I am
very happy that I do it (很有趣和做了很快樂)’, `I have done very well. I
want to do it again. (我做得很好我想再做)’.
So, as reflected from the students’ own reflection, the whole process
had been very enjoyable and meaningful to them. The fun element in the
second project was particularly strong because of the design and the
artwork involved. Students really enjoyed the work very much. Since it
was a simple and easy project, students had a greater sense of achievement.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
25
One lesson had been spent on this project and we were able to provide
more guidance to students. Mistakes or problems identified could be
rectified as soon as possible, providing students a better chance to revise
and improve. So, most students could enjoy the fruitful experience and
gain a sense of satisfaction. This in turn motivated them further to learn.
`We enjoyed reading our students’ reflection. Their
responses helped us reflect more on our teaching and
their learning. We found that some responses were what
we had expected: they loved the coloring and drawing
part, they found the writing task difficult and parental
support was really essential for such young kids.
However, we were surprised to see that despite the hard
work involved, many of them did enjoy doing the project,
especially the writing part. We were really happy to see
that the great majority did the project with great effort
and good attitude. Many of our students expressed the
desire to do projects again, despite the heavy workload
and language problems they had encountered in the
process. The impact of project had been very positive.
We guessed our students had learnt and internalized the
things we taught them in the preparation stage. So, when
they were given a chance to apply them in an interesting
way, they found it exciting, challenging and great fun.’
--- from the teachers’
journals
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
26
3. Development and Application of Assessment Criteria for Project Work
a. Setting the Assessment Criteria and Scoring Rubrics
We gave students grades for their projects in the past and realized that
they did not inform students clearly of their strengths and weaknesses. We
teachers were not clear about our expectations either. So, using simple
grades or scores failed to reflect students’ true performance and could not
give students the necessary feedback for learning. Since we hoped to make
use of the process of project learning to enhance our students’
development in language, ideas, skills and attitude, we decided to do away
with grades but design a set of criteria consisting of these four aspects
(Appendix XI).
This set of criteria was used starting from last year. However, we had
difficulties in applying them and different teachers might have different
understanding. So, based on the experience and sample work we collected
last year, we developed more detailed scoring rubrics (Appendix XII) for
the criteria. It was felt that more specific items for the four criteria would
be useful to help us make judgment and compare the work of students. We
also knew more clearly what we expected from students and had more
consensus. The criteria set helped to give a fairer picture of students’
performance and did not penalize the ones who were poor in language.
b. Washback Effects of the Scoring Rubrics
We took some time to sort out the details for the scoring rubrics. We
expected our students to perform better in language (since language used
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
27
was not very complicated and all had been taught already) and so no
mistakes were allowed for the highest level (4). We were aware that if we
stressed language accuracy too much, students’ expression of ideas might
be inhibited for they might not want to make any mistakes. There would
be negative washback effects on students’ learning and they would not
want to take risks. However, we thought that the other three criteria should
be able to give a good balance and students would be accredited anyway
for their expression of ideas and attitude. In order to encourage students to
express more ideas, we finally put ideas in the first column to highlight its
significance. We conveyed this message to the students clearly in the
process.
c. Flexibility in Applying the Scoring Rubrics
During the process of assessing two projects, we realized that the
focuses for different projects could be different and the criteria should be
used flexibly. For instance, the first project could reflect students’ learning
in different aspects, particularly the use of language and ideas. Skills like
presentation and organization could be examined as well for students had
free room for expression and there were many things to write about.
Students had to put everything together into a book in the end. However,
for the second project, skills might not be so obvious and language was
not a big problem. It was more important that students expressed their
ideas creatively and demonstrated good attitude in their work. So, we
focused more on ideas and attitude for the second project. We learnt that
the criteria should be used wisely in different contexts for different
projects.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
28
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
29
The four criteria were not of equal priority. Their weighting also
varied from project to project. For instance, we felt that for the first project,
we would focus more on ideas, followed by language and other items.
However, ideas and attitude were more important for the second project.
For both projects, it was more important to encourage students to think of
their own ideas and be creative. Although we still helped students to
identify their grammatical mistakes and correct them themselves or
marked out the mistakes in the final product, we did not emphasize the
importance of language so much as a result.
However, in practice, we still had difficulty in applying the criteria.
Consistency of applying them was a problem and subjectivity might be
involved. Experience in using the criteria was very important. Trial
marking together and discussion on using criteria on actual work were
needed. But we believed that our marking should improve with more
experience.
`Marking has been a very difficult but challenging task.
Although we share the same criteria and scoring rubrics
and we have some common understanding already, we
still do not always agree on a particular piece of work
as far as assessment is concerned. Impression marking
plays an important role here, which sometimes affects
our objective application of the criteria. Although we
always remind ourselves of the standards that we have
set for different levels, it is very difficult to keep
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
30
ourselves consistent and we have difficulty in making
decisions. Our students’ projects vary greatly in their
ideas, language and presentations and such variation is
a great challenge to our assessment. Their work is
always a surprise to us and we keep asking ourselves:
what are we expecting from our students and how should
we give credits to them? There are also other variables
affecting our judgment. For instance, we have some
basic understanding of our students’ ability and this
affects what we expect them to be able to do in the end
(e.g. We may be more demanding on the more able
students). Besides, the whole marking process is very
time-consuming and we need to struggle to find time for
it. Despite all these limitations, we feel that this way of
assessment is more meaningful, to teachers, students and
even parents. The whole process has given us a valuable
chance to reflect on learning and teaching, and we do
grow profoundly as reflective teachers.’
--- from the teachers’ journals
d. Stressing Criterion-Referencing rather than Norm-Referencing
Assessment
Instead of using the criteria to compare our students, we thought that
assessment should reflect more on what each child had achieved and how
he/she had progressed. In such cases, emphasis might be different for each
child e.g. if a child had very good ideas, he/she would get `4’ and teachers
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
31
might be more demanding on his/her language part, expecting him/her to
make improvement in this area later. For another child who was very poor
in language but demonstrated very strenuous effort in his/her work with a
lot of drawings, we could be more generous in assessing his/her attitude so
as to encourage him/her. We also tried to compare his/her two projects to
see if he/she had made any improvement in language and would be more
ready to give him/her higher rating if there was any.
For each child, we felt that it was important to find at least one good
point, one thing that we could appreciate so that the child knew where
his/her achievement was. We learnt from all the projects that each work
was unique and every project did have at least one strong point with it
which deserved our recognition. We learnt to be more generous in praising
our students and appreciating their performance. We also needed to tell the
kids explicitly about their strengths and weaknesses in our comments so
that they knew how good they were and how to improve further. For
instance, for student E in Appendix VI, we could tell her that she was very
good in presenting herself and she had her own style. But she could try to
organize her ideas better and give a better ending. As for student K in
Appendix VIII, he was really good at drawing and he demonstrated very
good effort in his work, but he should try to write more and think of more
ideas.
`We learn that conducting project work in school is not as
simple as we think. We have to be clear about the
purposes and find different ways to help our students.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
32
Assessment is also a very difficult part. Although we have
the criteria and scoring rubrics, how to apply them and
make them useful for learning is a big task. All in all,
there are both pains and gains in the whole process. We
really did not have enough time and resources to prepare
everything well. Things are far from perfect. However, it
is a valuable learning experience for all of us involved.
Project work helps us see the immense potentials in our
students… ’
--- from the teachers’ journals
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
33
IV. Insights and New Understandings
A. Importance of Giving Students Appropriate Input
1. From Reading to Writing
Our P1 students did not have any experience in project work and we
believed that it was important to equip them with basic reading skills first
before they were asked to start writing on their own. So, instead of asking
students to do projects in the first term, we started with project book and
shared reading activities. It was difficult for students to write without any input
and reading should come before writing. Besides the textbook, more
interesting and stimulating materials including big books and small readers
which could appeal to students’ feelings and arouse their interest to write and
express were really important and this was our consideration when choosing
the reading materials. We also encouraged our students to refer to whatever
they had read in the process when they were doing their project. For instance,
when explaining the guidelines (Appendix XIVa) to the students, we reminded
students of the small reader `He and I’, the worksheets `My Book’ and the big
books like `I am special’. We demonstrated to the students how they could use
the language and ideas from these materials. All these serve as reference and
stimulation for students when they produced their own work.
2. Preparing Students with Various Inputs
During the second term, we started with the teaching of the first module
`Me and my friend’. Besides the textbook, various inputs including readers and
big books were used in class (Appendix XIIIa). For language input on the use
of third person singular and agreement, the worksheets `My father and I’
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
34
(Appendix XIIIb) were designed. As for the input for the project, there were
`My book’ (Appendix XIIIc) with worksheets on various things related to
myself; a teacher’s own project designed last year (Appendix XIIId) and past
students’ work for exposure and demonstration. Some guidelines (Appendix
XIVa) informing students more clearly about the requirements and things to be
noted were explained to students. The criteria were clearly spelt out in the
guidelines. Students were told what they were expected to learn and produce in
the process. They were encouraged to learn how to learn and sort out `what’,
`how’, `who’ and `when’ while reading the guidelines. The guidelines were to
help students know how to deal with their project work.
For the second module on `My family and me’, students were asked to
write lines or a poem about their family. Supplementary notes on using
pronouns to describe family members were provided as input. A worksheet for
the brainstorming session was designed to help students master the language
and share ideas. Input on more family names, animal names and adjectives
describing personality was given to students as support. We teachers had also
worked out some actual examples for students as more concrete illustration
(Appendix XIVb, c& d).
So, the inputs included grammar worksheets, guidelines, worksheets in
context and teachers’ examples as well as students’ projects as illustration.
Besides these materials, we provided a lot of input during the lessons with all
the brainstorming, sharing and monitoring activities. Instead of a one-off
marking exercise, we also conducted sharing in class, gave students feedback in
the process and asked students to revise their drafts for improvement when we
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
35
felt that they could do better. We believed that it was most important for
students to have the chance to improve their drafts and learn from each other.
3. Relationship between Input and Output
Input for project work was crucial. We believed that all such inputs did
have great impact on the students’ learning. Students did draw language and
ideas from the various materials provided. Guidelines for students were also
important. Since we spent quite some time explaining the guidelines and
requirements of the project work, our students really had better understanding
of what they were supposed to do and their work demonstrated better
performance in different areas as well.
However, it was more important to see how input should be used in order
to provide the necessary support but not to limit students’ creativity. There
were some differences between the two projects. For the first project, there was
input but there were no simple models for students to follow. The input was in
the form of language support and examples for stimulation mainly. The
guidelines clearly spelt out what were expected and students were encouraged
to develop freely on their own. For the second project, considering that it was a
more demanding task since the language was more complicated, we had
provided very complete input by giving two full models to students. It turned
out that students followed the teachers’ model too closely in the second project
and their creativity was inhibited.
So, we learnt that we had to be careful in designing our input. We still
insisted that it was essential to give students the necessary language support so
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
36
that they could apply and use it for their project. Letting them know what was
expected with clear guidelines and some examples was also very important.
However, working out a full- fledged example for students might lead to some
undesirable effects. It really depended on how the teacher used the materials to
achieve the best-desired effects. The materials might be well designed with
good intentions, however, we needed to think more deeply about the actual
learning and teaching process. For the second project, we might tend to be
more teacher-led in the brainstorming sessions. So, there was not enough space
for students to develop further based on the model and shifting the focus from
the teacher’s idea to their own. How to stimulate students with some concrete
examples, how to use the materials flexibly and help students to expand rather
than limit them was what we had to explore further.
Input could be in different forms provided at different stages of project
learning. For instance, besides the inputs mentioned before, sharing throughout
the process was very important. We held the first sharing after students had
handed in their first drafts of the first project. Students were encouraged to
make improvement on their own project if they wanted to after the sharing, as
they had learnt from the other classmates. Although not all students made the
second attempt, this at least provided a good chance for those who wanted to
improve. We found that the more motivated ones did try to improve their work.
Some were attracted by the special bonus we awarded to all who had made a
second attempt. However, these students were the minority. Most students did
not try to make improvement and we did not have time to do the follow-up. We
felt that it was a pity that we failed to seize the chance to make this happen. We
also did not have time to explore into the facilitating factors as well as
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
37
limitations for students to make a second attempt. Sharing after project work
was held as well to confirm students’ achievement, help students see more
possibilities and learn from each other. So, we learnt that inputs at different
stages had to be designed to achieve different aims. However, how to make full
use of these opportunities and help students improve was still a big challenge
for us.
B. Importance of Knowledge and Experience in Project Work
Reflecting on our experience, we have really learnt a lot and our
experience has helped us to improve greatly in teaching and preparing students
for project work. We realize that we have to develop professional knowledge in
project work, including understanding of its theory and how to put it into
practice. These are what we want to share for they are what teachers need to
know in order to make project learning effective:
1. Purposes of Project Learning
We should be clear about the purposes of doing project work. For instance,
project work is very different from guided writing. The expectations are totally
different as guided writing provides no free room for expression of ideas and
even language is very much controlled. The beauty of project work is the room
for creativity and encouragement for self-expression. While guided writing
focuses on language accuracy, project work provides an opportunity for
students to internalize their learning and apply language in a meaningful
context and it is more skills-based. So, guided writing can be used as a kind of
support for project work. If project work is made similar to guided writing
where students have no free room to make their own choice, there is not much
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
38
point in asking students to decorate their `standard answers’ with drawings and
call it a project. We should realize that the most important part of project work
in English is that students can enjoy using language to express meaning and
feelings. The whole thing should be student-directed in essence; students can
have the space to make choices, on language, content, length and presentation
of their work. So, the process is as important as the product.
Besides, each project should have its specific purposes. For instance, for the
first project, our concern is more on attitude and language, considering that
it is the students’ first attempts. However, in the second project, the
language demand is not so great and we hope to see more creativity on the
students’ part. So, ideas are emphasized more. So, the purposes for each
project may be different and it depends on the teacher’s professional
judgment as well as students’ readiness.
2. Accuracy versus Fluency
How to treat students’ grammatical mistakes is always a controversial
issue for English Language teachers. Our experience is students can perform
well in the pre-tasks and they show good accuracy. But when they write in
projects or have free expression, they tend to forget and make grammatical
mistakes. Whether we should focus on fluency or accuracy for project work is
an important issue to address. We feel that our students, even as young as P1
kids, are worried about making mistakes and this in turn inhibits their free
thinking and imagination. So, stressing accuracy too much and marking all
students’ mistakes in their projects would convey a message to the students that
we care more about accuracy. This would restrict students’ free expression. In
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
39
project work, we think it is important not to sacrifice free expression for
accuracy.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
40
3. Teachers’ Role
We teachers really play the role of facilitator more and there are many things
that we are not in control. For the very young learners, we really have to
provide a lot of input and guidance. However, it is important not to provide
too much and overdo things to the extent that we are limiting our students
instead of encouraging them and expanding their ideas. Besides, we need to
evaluate and assess students’ learning from time to time and make
adjustments whenever necessary. We first brief our students on the
expectations and requirements of the projects, stimulating them with
various inputs. Then we have a lot of brainstorming and sharing in the
process. We try to have interaction with the students whenever necessary,
giving them feedback and suggestions for improvement. Students are also
given chances to ask questions, to draft and revise their work. So, it is
basically an interactive process and we teachers are trying to facilitate our
students in the whole process. However, there are lots of problems. As we
have mentioned before, some inputs like our examples might turn out to be
restrictions on students. In our brainstorming and sharing sessions, we gave
more examples but might fail to elicit students’ ideas as far as possible. So,
how we presented the examples and stimulated the students was very
important. Though we gave the students a chance to make a second attempt
and improve their work, we did not have enough time to probe into the
reasons why some of them tried while the majority did not. So, we failed to
seize the chance and help students improve. We need more space and
experience to evaluate our students’ needs at different stages and provide
them with the necessary support timely.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
41
4. Parents’ Role
Parents can never do the projects for the children and this is the very first rule
we have for our students. We state that very clearly in the guidelines. In the
past, we had quite a number of examples in which parents did too much for
their children and the projects were more the parents’ products. They
mostly aimed at perfection, beautiful design and high scores, but not
reflection of children’s own development in language, ideas, skills and
attitude. Both parents and children failed to see the essence and meaning of
project work. So, we emphasize to our students repeatedly that they must
demonstrate their own effort and learning in the projects.
On the other hand, we understand that very young students need their parents’
support in many ways. Parents can provide the resources the children
need, work with the children in designing or even artwork since they may
not be able to manage everything on their own. Parents can also encourage
the children and help them to put their ideas onto the paper. From the
students’ reflection, many of them pointed out the importance of their
parents’ support. One student said, T̀hings became easier when we did
things together (有家人一起做就很簡單)’. So, parents play the role of
resource person, co-worker and supporter. As reflected from our students’
work and reflection, parents’ support has a very positive impact on project
work. It is important to convey this message to the parents so that they
know the meaning of project work and can really support their children.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
42
V. Conclusion
We are really impressed by our students’ performance this year. We never
expect P1 students to be able to write freely on their own. And the fact that they
enjoy writing and using language to express themselves is very encouraging.
Project work has provided a very good chance for students to learn and develop.
We understand through this research that all this cannot happen naturally. The
input and the planning we have been making all the time are the crucial factors
leading to the students’ achievement. We have made mistakes here and there,
like overdoing the examples for students to the extent that they can copy. But
we do learn from such experiences. Our own set of assessment criteria also
helps us clarify our purposes and expectations. One thing is certain: we can
make things happen if we know clearly what we expect from our students.
Students cannot benefit from project work if there are no clear learning targets
for them. Input and support have to be provided at different times in different
forms so that students have clear idea of what they are expected to do. Besides,
we should never underestimate our students. Given adequate and appropriate
support, given the free room and choice, students can really perform very well
and there are so many surprises. Project work, when designed well, can provide
very good chances for students to learn how to learn and demonstrate their
different potentials.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
43
REFERENCES
Chard, S. C. (1998). The Project Approach.U.S.A.: Scholastic Inc.
Crawford, J. (ed.) (1997). Achieving Excellence: Units of Work for Levels P-8.
Victoria: Education Shop.
Curriculum Resources Section, Hong Kong Education Department (2001). Zhuanti
Yanxi.. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government Printer.
Fowkes, L. (1995). Teaching through projects. U.S.A.: Addison-Wesley Publishing
Co.
Lee, M. M. T., Li B. K. W. & Lee, I. K. B. (1999). Project Work: Practical
Guidelines. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Luongo-Orlando, K. (2001). A Project Approach to Language Learning. U.S.:
Pembroke Publishers Limited.
Phillips, D., Burwood, S. & Dunford, H. (1999). Projects With Young Learners.
Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
Ribe, R. & Vidal, N. (1993). Project Work: Step by Step. Oxford: Heinemann
International.
School-based Curriculum Action Research Series
44
Websites Borgia, E. (2000). “Frequently Asked Questions about Project Work”. Initial
Materials.
http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/books/projappl/initial.html
Chard, S. C. (2000). “The Project Approach in Action”. Initial Materials.
http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/books/projappl/initial.html
Gordon G. et al. (2000). “Notes from a Brainstorming Session of Teachers
Beginning Project Work”. Initial Materials.
http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/books/projappl/initial.html
Helm, J. H. (ed.) (1998). “The Project Approach Catalog 2”.
http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs//books/projcat2.html
Helm, J. H. (2000). “Incorporating the Project Approach into a Traditional
Curriculum”. Initial Materials.
http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/books/projappl/initial.html
Helm, J. H. et al. (2000). “Documenting Projects”. Initial Material.,
http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/books/projappl/initial.html
Katz, L. G. (1994). “The Project Approach”. Eric Digest. April 1994,
http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/digests/1994/lk-pro94.html
Katz, L. G. (2000). “Foreword: The Importance of Projects”. Initial Materials
http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/books/projappl/initial.html
“Project Approach Publications”
http://www.project-approach.com/resources/biblio.htm
http://www.poetryzone.ndirect.co.uk/teacher.htm
http://www.project-approach.com/default.htm