Running head: PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

Project-Based Learning:
A Training Module for Educators at
The New High School Project at Chartwell
Cord I. Bynum
California State University Monterey Bay

IST 522 Instructional Design

Dr. Rosalie Strong
December 16, 2014

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................

Page
4

ANALYSIS ...........................................................................................................................

Needs Analysis ..............................................................................................................

Learner Analysis............................................................................................................

10

Workplace/Environmental/Setting Analysis .................................................................

11

Literature Review/Environmental Scan ........................................................................

12

Task/Work Analysis ......................................................................................................

14

Content and Procedures ................................................................................................

14

Goals and Instructional Objectives ...............................................................................

19

DESIGN ................................................................................................................................

21

Test Instruments ............................................................................................................

21

Organizational, Delivery, and Management Strategies .................................................

23

Instruction ......................................................................................................................

24

DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................................

26

Tools and Materials .......................................................................................................

26

Time...............................................................................................................................

27

Cost ................................................................................................................................

28

Process ...........................................................................................................................

29

Instructional Strategies and Materials ...........................................................................

30

IMPLEMENTATION ...........................................................................................................

32

Delivery .........................................................................................................................

32

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

EVALUATION.....................................................................................................................

34

Formative Evaluation ....................................................................................................

34

Summative Evaluation ..................................................................................................

37

REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................

38

APPENDICES ......................................................................................................................

40

SME Interview Questions .............................................................................................

40

Post-Training Questionnaire..........................................................................................

41

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this Instructional Design Document (IDD) is to plan a professional
development program for teachers at The New High School Project (TNHSP) at Chartwell
School in Seaside, California. TNHSP employs project-based learning (PBL) as a central
instructional model for its college-preparatory program, which serves students in grades 9-12
who have language-based learning differences, including dyslexia. The backgrounds and
experience levels of TNHSP faculty can vary widely, and TNHSP currently lacks a formal
training program for new or current faculty members regarding the schools application of PBL
instructional strategies. Members of the schools senior leadership team, including Strategic
Management Consultant John Reid and TNHSP Head of School Alyse LeValley, have expressed
the need to provide formal training in PBL, as well as other areas, to meet institutional goals
regarding professional development and address a perceived performance gap.
The purpose of instruction will be to provide new and current educators at TNHSP with
an overview of PBL objectives, practices, and strategies in the context of the school, its mission,
and target population. The goal will be to provide faculty with a baseline level of knowledge in
PBL as well as an opportunity to develop and apply PBL project-period planning skills in a
context that allows them to employ and build upon their existing skills and knowledge. In terms
of major objectives, faculty will be expected to demonstrate a firm conceptual understanding of
best practices in PBL and will be expected to articulate such in the context of the schools
mission and program activities. Learners will also be expected to successfully apply PBL
project-period planning strategies in a collaborative setting and in respect to case studies and
other content provided via the training.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

In terms of ethical considerations, it should be noted, for the purposes of full disclosure,
that the TNHSP Head of School Alyse LeValley is the designers spouse and will serve as a
primary subject matter expert for the project. The designer is also an employee of Chartwell
School and will thus have, to some degree, enhanced knowledge and access in regard to client
personnel, needs, and workplace conditions. In any case, the project will be conducted in a
transparent and ethical manner that acknowledges the designers ties to Chartwell School and its
key stakeholders while meeting professional and academic standards.
Among the potential challenges for the project is the possibility that TNHSP faculty may
face time constraints for completing the training and participating in any formative or summative
evaluations due to their already heavy time commitments to the school. Another possible
challenge concerns faculty attitudes toward the training, as some faculty members may not
perceive the need for such given their experience. Chartwell School is also entering the strategic
planning process and, thus, there is potential for programming, curricular, and/or personnel
changes during the development, implementation, and evaluation process for this training
program. Finally, the schools relatively small pool of faculty poses potential challenges for
usability testing, as such a small group may not allow for extensive testing in a manner that does
not negatively impact or lessen the need for the subsequent implementation of the training.
This training program will be developed over the course of the designers participation in
the Masters in Instructional Science and Technology (MIST) program at California State
University, Monterey Bay (CSUMB). The project will be created in stages throughout the MIST
program, with the initial IDD completed by December 2014; the interactive learning module
(ILM) prototype, including a media component, developed in Spring 2015; an assessment
component developed in Summer 2015; and the final project completed, following formative and

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

summative assessments, by December 2015. Costs are currently projected to be under $500.00,
as many production tools and resources have already been secured by the designer or will be
accessed at limited or no cost via CSUMB and the client organization. Potential cost increases
could stem from the provision of incentives to usability testing participants, if implemented.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

ANALYSIS
Needs Analysis
This project will meet an expressed need for teacher training in project-based learning for
educators at The New High School Project (TNHSP) at Chartwell School. This need has been
voiced by John Reid, the Strategic Management Consultant at Chartwell, and Alyse LeValley,
the Head of School at TNHSP. Founded in 2009, TNHSP is a fairly young program that uses
project-based learning (PBL) as an organizing principle and fundamental feature of its
curriculum. The programs schedule is divided into four project periods. Each period has its
own theme, as defined by a driving question, which students explore in relation to their core
and elective coursework. Currently, TNHSP faculty receive a short PowerPoint presentation
(approximately 45 minutes) about PBL during the one week of teacher in-service that is held
immediately prior to the beginning of the school year.
This presentation currently serves as the primary informational or training session for
new and existing faculty members in PBL. The 2014-2015 school year is the first year that the
program has incorporated this specific PBL component into its teacher in-service week.
Previously, faculty informally learned about aspects of PBL through the collaborative projectplanning activities that are led by the Head of School and involve the entire TNHSP faculty as
part of the annual curriculum design process. However, faculty received no formal overview or
introduction into PBL or specific training in its implementation.
As the new Head of School at TNHSP for 2014-2015, Alyse LeValley designed and
implemented the new PowerPoint component this year. However, she would like to have a more
formal and elaborate training module to provide to faculty as part of the annual teacher in-service
week. Moreover, Mr. Reid is interested in developing training materials for faculty that could be

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

more readily deployed beyond the single week of face-to-face meetings that traditionally
comprises the schools in-service and professional development programs each summer.
The need for training in PBL is based on a perceived performance gap, as Ms. LeValley
feels that the collaborative project-period planning process could be improved if the team had
enhanced knowledge of PBL, including an overview of best practices and specific strategies for
designing project periods. This gap, it is reported, can be expressed in misperceptions, among
some faculty, about the appropriate application of PBL for the student population at TNHSP, all
of whom have a diagnosed learning disability (LD), such as dyslexia. Ms. LeValley sees this as
an important performance area to address in order to establish a baseline competency among
faculty and ensure effective and efficient planning and implementation in line with best practices
in PBL.
A training module in this area, developed through the MIST program, would provide a
low-cost solution that could be reasonably implemented as part of the programs existing oneweek period of teacher in-service and training. A computer-based training module,
approximately 50-60 minutes in length, would provide learners with a short overview of PBL
and introduce them to best practices in project-period design, as well as resources for further
study and use in the classroom. This asynchronous computer-based component would be
followed by a 60-minute face-to-face workshop component in which participants discuss and
apply project-period design strategies in relation to case studies and approaches presented in the
computer-based module. Together, such a blended program would prepare faculty for effective
project-period planning and help inform their day-to-day practice in the classroom. Instruction
would be particularly helpful for teachers who are new to the program and do not have

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

experience in PBL. As noted, it would also serve to fill an existing performance gap among
current faculty by ensuring a base level of knowledge about PBL objectives and practices.
Potential unintended consequences could include faculty apprehension about undergoing
a training module after having already participated in the project-period planning process at
TNHSP in past years. However, Ms. LeValley reports that faculty appreciated the PowerPoint
introduction this year and would likely be open to more training in this area.
This needs analysis was developed from interviews with Ms. LeValley and Mr. Reid. A
formal needs analysis, to be conducted via faculty surveys, would provide more information in
this area and also help focus the programs learning objectives.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

10

Learner Analysis
The target audience for this training module consists of current and future faculty at The
New High School Project (TNHSP) at Chartwell. In general, these are English-speaking adults
within a possible age range of 22-65. This group can be ethnically and socioeconomically
diverse. The learners within this group are all educated and have varied training and/or
experience as teachers and/or tutors. Education levels within this group can range from
bachelors degrees and teaching credentials to doctorates in education. Career levels within this
group can range from entry-level to experienced. While most learners in this group have
experience working with LD students, some may not; some may have formal training in general
education but not special education. All learners are expected to be college-level readers with
experience with basic technology, including computers and Internet. The typical learner within
this group will be motivated to learn and will be applying knowledge gained in a collaborative
setting with faculty and students in the classroom. This learner assessment is based on firsthand
knowledge of current and past faculty (as well as assumptions about future faculty) from the
designers experience in working at Chartwell for more than two years.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

11

Workplace/Environmental/Setting Analysis
The setting of this training will be the learners workplace at the TNHSP campus in
Seaside, California. The primary setting will be teacher in-service meetings, which are held in
the TNHSP classroom. The computer-based component of the module could also be deployed
for faculty use throughout the school year, as needed. In-service meetings are generally
collaborative and interactive, allowing for open discussion. TNHSP culture is professional and
informed by the collaborative, project-based, student-centered nature of the program. Training
and professional development is valued by administration, particularly under the guidance of
Strategic Management Consultant John Reid, whose expertise includes faculty growth and
development.
The TNHSP classrooms are sustainable modular units that are equipped with smart
boards, projectors, and other instructional tools. They have ample natural lighting and easy
access to amenities. The campus itself is LEED Platinum certified and designed to enhance
student outcomes through natural lighting, open ventilation, and other elements of integrated
design. All teachers are supplied with an individual MacBook laptop with on-site access to
Internet Wi-Fi and IT support via the Chartwell IT coordinator. Internet speed can have slow
upload times but has been recently reconfigured and is reliable. One possible constraint will be
time, as teachers have only one week of in-service to conduct initial training and planning for the
school year, with short additional in-service meetings scheduled on a monthly basis throughout
the rest of the year. This workplace analysis was developed from the designers firsthand
knowledge from working on this campus for more than two years, as noted above.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

12

Literature Review/Environmental Scan

Cercone (2008) provides a useful summary of adult learner characteristics, adult learning
theories, and specific instructional design strategies in regard to this audience. In terms of design
elements, Cercone recommends providing practice with feedback; using graphic organizers and
flowcharts; and chunking information into sections of 5-9 bits. Cercone also recommends using
multisensory methods to appeal to diverse learning styles, as well as strategies such as think
sheets and reflection logs. Appendices also provide a host of additional suggested instructional
strategies to correspond with varied principles of adult learning theory. Importantly, Cercone
also addresses some criticisms and perceived weaknesses of adult learning theory and,
specifically, andragogy, including the argument that it is not so much an actual theory that
explains the process of learning but is perhaps better seen as a set of principles for good
practice in teaching adult learners (p. 146). In any case, this is a useful reference for
instructional design strategies catering to adult learners.
Donnelly (2006) outlines a precedent for incorporating PBL into a blended learning
environment for educators receiving professional development. This study suggests the viability
of a blended training program incorporating asynchronous computer-based modules with
collaborative, face-to-face activities in the classroom. The training in this study was
significantly longer (approximately 10 weeks) than the planned module that is the subject of this
IDD. Nonetheless, the article describes some design strategies that follow a constructivist
approach, including reflection activities, adaptive activities (including those asking learners to
evaluate and contribute to the course itself), and interactive activities (e.g., a debate and role
playing exercises). The article also describes how such a design approach can foster outcomes
particularly relevant to the objectives of the training module outlined in this IDD: conversation

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

13

and issue-based discussion, both of which are essential to the process of designing curricula as a
group. The author cites Laurillards Conversational Model as a basis for the programs design,
providing a point of further research in regard to this approach.
In their research study, endaa and Odabab (2009) investigated how the online
problem based learning (PBL) approach employed in an online learning environment influenced
undergraduate students critical thinking skills (CTS) and content knowledge acquisition (p.
132). The study found that in post-tests learners in the online PBL group significantly
outperformed those in a control group in terms of critical thinking skills but that the PBL
instruction had no significant effect on content knowledge acquisition skills (p. 132). This
study suggests that an online PBL model could be effective for instilling learners with higherorder thinking skills (such as those that would be appropriate for the target audience of this IDD)
but would perhaps not result in higher content knowledge acquisition. This article is also useful
for providing a literature review in regard to the use of PBL in online learning environments,
including for professional development activities.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

14

Task/Work Analysis
Content and Procedures
I.

Project-based learning (PBL) at The New High School Project (TNHSP)

a. Define PBL
b. Articulate why TNHSP employs PBL
i. Define organizational mission
1. To diagnostically educate students with specific learning variations
in a way that provides them with the academic skills, confidence,
creativity, and perseverance necessary to meet the challenges of
mainstream education and lifelong learning
ii. Define organizational methodology
1. Skills-based instruction
a. Fosters skills and knowledge development for lifelong
learning
2. Multisensory instruction
a. Appeals to varied LD learning styles through active, handson projects in authentic learning environments
b. Re-engages students who have struggled in and/or
developed negative associations with school via their
experience in mainstream education
c. Articulate why PBL is beneficial for TNHSP students
i. Describe theoretical background
1. Define constructivism

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

15

ii. Describe research on PBL

1. Cite studies (Jonassen, etc.)
iii. Describe research on PBL and students who learn differently
1. Cite studies, if available
II.

PBL Objectives and Practices

a. Define the eight essential components of PBL (according to the Buck Institute for
Education (BIE), the current best practices model for TNHSP) (Buck Institute for
Education, 2014)
i. Focus on significant content
1. Foster the development of fundamental, standards-based content
knowledge
ii. Develop 21st century competencies
1. Foster the development of increasingly essential skills such as the
4Cs: critical thinking, collaboration, communication, and creativity
iii. Engage students in in-depth inquiry
1. Provide a rigorous extended learning opportunity for students to
deeply engage in the material via research, inquiry, and problemsolving
iv. Organize tasks around a driving question
1. Design an engaging driving question to provide an open-ended
framework for student exploration
v. Establish a need to know

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

16

1. Employ an engaging entry event to activate student interest,

motivation, and enthusiasm for learning
vi. Encourage voice and choice
1. Involve students as active agents in the learning and design
process, giving them voice and choice in taking responsibility
for their educations
vii. Incorporate critique and revision
1. Provide students with ample constructive feedback and
opportunities for revision and improvement
viii. Include a public audience
1. Include opportunities for students to publicly present their work
and receive recognition by others
b. Define authentic learning
c. Show examples of PBL project periods and/or activities
i. Example 1 (TBD)
ii. Example 2 (TBD)
iii. Example 3 (TBD)
III.

Designing a PBL project period at TNHSP

a. Identify learning objectives
i. Identify content knowledge to be learned
1. Consult annual course schedule
ii. Identify skills to be learned
1. Recall TNHSP power skills objectives

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

17

a. Organization
b. Reading comprehension
c. Note taking
d. Test taking
e. Research
f. Writing
g. Mathematics
h. Decoding/fluency/spelling
i. Technology
j. Self-knowledge/advocacy/responsibility
k.

Presentation

b. Define driving question

i. Define types of driving questions (T-STEM Project-Based Learning: Craft
a Driving Question, 2012)
1. Abstract
2. Concrete
3. Problem-solving
4. Design challenge
ii. Define elements of a driving question (according to BIE rubric) (Buck
Institute for Education, 2011)
1. Framing words
a. The interrogative word of the question
b. Examples: what, how, could, should, why, etc.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

18

2. Person or entity
a. The actor, agent, or subject of the question
b. Examples: I, we, we as [a group according to role or
position], our town, city, state, nation, organization,
community
3. Action or challenge
a. The action (verb) of the question
b. Examples: Build, create, solve, write, decide, etc.
4. Audience or purpose
a. The target or object of the sentence
b. Examples: School, community, problem, etc.
iii. Model driving questions
1. Examples
a. Example 1
b. Example 2
c. Example 3
iv. Create driving question
IV.

Resources
a. Buck Institute for Education
i. Links
b. Project for 21st Century Skills
i. Links
c. Other (TBD)

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

19

Goals and Instructional Objectives

The goal of instruction is to provide new and current educators at TNHSP with an
overview of PBL objectives, practices, and strategies in the context of the school, its mission,
and target population (LD students). Instruction will provide the learner with a base level of
formal knowledge in PBL objectives and practices, including case studies of PBL projects from
other schools or organizations to spur analysis and reflection. Instruction will also provide the
opportunity to work collaboratively on a driving-question and project-period design exercise
during which faculty can share and apply their new and existing knowledge.
Objective 1 (Cognitive: Comprehension)
Upon completion of the unit, the learner will accurately describe project-based learning
(PBL).
Objective 2 (Cognitive: Knowledge, Comprehension)
In consideration of the schools mission and methodology, the learner will accurately
articulate why TNHSP employs PBL.
a) Defines the schools mission (Cognitive: Knowledge)
b) Explains the schools methodology (Cognitive: Comprehension)
Objective 3 (Cognitive: Knowledge, Comprehension, Synthesis)
The learner will articulate why PBL is beneficial for TNHSP students.
a) Identifies constructivism as the theoretical background for PBL (Cognitive:
Knowledge)
b) Summarizes general research findings on the efficacy of PBL (Cognitive:
Synthesis)

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

20

c) Describes research on PBL and students who learn differently (Cognitive:

Comprehension)
Objective 4 (Cognitive: Comprehension)
The learner will describe the eight essential components of PBL, as posited by the Buck
Institute for Education.
Objective 5 (Cognitive: Comprehension)
The learner will accurately describe the concept of authentic learning.
a) Illustrates an example of authentic learning (Cognitive: Comprehension)
Objective 6 (Cognitive: Knowledge)
The learner will recall the process for developing learning objectives.
a) Recalls course schedule (Cognitive: Knowledge)
b) Recalls TNHSP power skills (Cognitive: Knowledge)
Objective 7 (Cognitive: Knowledge, Comprehension)
The learner will accurately define the concept of a driving question.
a) Identifies the four general types of driving questions (Cognitive: Knowledge)
b) Identifies the four typical elements of a driving question (Cognitive:
Knowledge)
Objective 8 (Cognitive: Synthesis)
Given a rubric, the learner will create a driving question that follows the guidelines of the
provided rubric and posits a hypothetical project-period theme.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

21

DESIGN
Test Instruments
The selection of testing instruments for this module poses a potential challenge given the
audience of adult professionals of varied backgrounds and experience levels who may respond
negatively to a type of formal assessment as part of their in-service training. A pre-test could be
useful as both an engaging entry event and form of assessment, to be followed by instruction that
includes interactive exercises that require a level of completion but are not part of a summative,
stand-alone assessment at the end of the module.
Reflection logs could serve as the most viable form of assessment to allow each learner to
focus on areas that are relevant and helpful for them while providing them the opportunity to
analyze and integrate the material into their existing frameworks of knowledge. Specifically, the
reflection logs would be led by prompts that provoke the application, analysis, and/or integration
of content across the module. For example, a question for reflection could be: How did the
project shown in example X capture the eight essential elements of an effective PBL exercise?
Or: Consider ways that you could reconfigure the project shown in example X according to
your subject specialty (or specialties) and the population of learners at TNHSP. Or: How does
the project shown in example X compare and contrast with projects you may have been involved
in at TNHSP? And, as a final example: "Considering the driving question shown in example X,
posit an authentic learning experience for this project in regard to your subject area and describe
how it meets the definition of authentic learning."
In the face-to-face workshop component, the Head of School will informally assess
learners via their participation and engagement. A post-training questionnaire will also be used to

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

22

provide learners with a final opportunity to further reflect on the material as well as evaluate the
course for effectiveness, relevance, and areas of improvement.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

23

Organizational, Delivery, and Management Strategies

The training will be delivered in a blended format incorporating an asynchronous
computer-based module followed by a synchronous face-to-face group session led by the Head
of School. The asynchronous component will allow learners to complete the foundational
training individually, and according to their own schedules, in preparation for the face-to-face
meeting to be held during the teacher in-service week. For new faculty who join the staff at
other times of the year, the asynchronous component could be delivered individually, as
necessary, as a baseline introduction to the use of PBL at TNHSP. This format is viable due to
the schools provision of the necessary technology (a personal laptop with wireless access) and
the format of the teacher in-service week, which provides structured time and facilities for faceto-face faculty meetings. The Head of School will assign the asynchronous training and manage
the face-to-face meeting, with the instructional designer providing support, as necessary,
throughout the process.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

24

Instruction
Instruction will be delivered following Gagns Nine Events of Instruction, as well as
elements of Marzanos Nine Instructional Strategies for Effective Teaching and Learning, among
other pragmatic approaches, as necessary. These are widely used, research-based instructional
strategies that align with best practices for educating adult learners and will suit the format and
content of the training.
The primary instructional strategies will include: gaining attention (e.g., via a pre-test);
setting objectives (to articulate how and why the material is applicable and beneficial to the
learner); activating prior knowledge; presenting stimulus (i.e., presenting content in coherent,
manageable chunks); providing learner guidance (primarily via examples/case studies, as well as
cues, questions, and organizers); eliciting performance (in the form of a cooperative learning
exercise in the synchronous component); providing feedback (via peer-to-peer feedback in the
cooperative learning exercise, as well as the Head of Schools informal assessment of the group
activity); and assessment (in the form of reflection logs, self-assessments, and/or a post-training
questionnaire). As the training will be delivered during the teacher in-service week, the structure
of in-service should allow for the immediate application of knowledge and skills in the projectperiod planning process that occurs during that week, thereby enhancing retention and transfer.
In terms of media, instruction will incorporate graphic organizers detailing instructional
content and photos of TNHSP student activities as illustration. The module may also incorporate
one or more videos describing the development and implementation of a PBL project at another
school or organization, as well as, potentially, a video of TNHSP student activities and/or
reflections on what they appreciate and find effective in regard to PBL. Notably, instruction may
also include an interactive driving question rubric that learners would be able to use to explore

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

25

the different question elements and develop new questions in regard to instructional directives.
As is currently planned, this component will effectively digitize and animate the paper rubric (or
Tubric 2.0) that BIE provides as a PBL planning tool.
The major deliverables will include a computer-based module, with graphics and media,
to be created, it is planned, using Adobe Captivate and delivered online via a yet-to-be
determined host. The synchronous component will be a written workshop curriculum put into
practice by the Head of School in a collaborative setting with faculty.
The project will be created in stages over the course of the MIST program, with the initial
IDD completed by December 2014; a media component (driving question generator and/or
video) developed in Spring 2015; an assessment component developed in Summer 2015; and the
final project completed, following formative and summative assessments, in Fall 2015.
Possible challenges include the potentially shifting needs of Chartwell School, which is
currently entering the strategic planning process, including a curriculum review. The outcomes
of this ongoing process could shape the final product, and could potentially limit or even expand
the need for this training. (It is possible that the Chartwell middle school could begin to
implement more fully developed PBL curricula as well and therefore be inclined to implement
training in this area.) Additional challenges include shaping the instruction and assessment
components to appeal to, and be effective for, the diverse TNHSP faculty of adult learners.
These potential challenges will be addressed and resolved via ongoing communication and needs
analysis with Chartwell and TNHSP executive administration and faculty.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

DEVELOPMENT
Tools and Materials
1. MacBook Pro laptop computer
2. Microsoft Office Suite for Mac
3. Adobe Creative Suite
4. Adobe Captivate (separate subscription from Creative Suite)
5. Headset with microphone
6. Media resources (images, videos, etc.)
7. SLR and HD video cameras (tentative)
8. Google Forms (for surveys)
9. Reference materials
10. Website host
11. Printer and paper supplies (for producing face-to-face meeting materials)
12. Incentives for trial participants (tentative)

26

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

27
Time

The development stage for this product will require an estimated minimum of 200 hours.
This stage will begin in January 2015 with the initial writing of instructional content and the
initial development of the framework for the computer-based training module, including a media
component. An assessment component will be developed in Summer 2015, when the prototype
for the module will be tested and necessary revisions will be identified. Development of the
remaining components will be concentrated in the months of September, October, and
November, allowing time for continued formative assessment and the completion of summative
assessment by December 2015.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

28
Cost

Many of the necessary tools and materials for this project have already been obtained and
thus will not entail costs particular to this project. The MacBook Pro, MS Office Suite for Mac,
and headset with microphone are property of the designer. Access to Adobe Creative Suite is
currently provided at no additional cost via CSUMB. Reference materials are accessible online
and/or through the CSUMB library. Additional software applications (e.g., Google Forms) are
also accessible at no cost. Access to SLR and HD video cameras is available at no cost via the
client organization, Chartwell School. For media resources, efforts will be made to utilize
Creative Commons or other free resources, but an allowance of $100.00 for purchasing royaltyfree media, as needed, will be provided in the budget. Adobe Captivate will require a $299.00
cost for the education edition, which is available to CSUMB students. Finally, printer and
supplies costs will be budgeted at $50.00. The total costs for this project are currently estimated
at $449.00. This total could increase if incentives (such as gift certificates) are used to secure
participants for usability testing.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

29

Process
1. Development of instructional content (ongoing throughout)
2. Collection/development of corresponding media resources (ongoing throughout)
3. Development of framework for the computer-based module component
4. Development of an assessment framework for the computer-based module component
5. Pilot test for the computer-based module prototype
6. Revision of computer-based module based on initial usability testing
7. Development of subsequent computer-based module components following revised
prototype
8. Development of face-to-face workshop component
9. Usability testing (e.g., small group trial for both asynchronous and synchronous
components)
10. Final revisions of modules based on usability testing

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

30

Instructional Strategies and Materials

The learning environment will reflect the modules blended format. The computer-based
component will be delivered online, asynchronously, prior to the face-to-face meeting. The
learning environment of the computer-based module will be interactive and multisensory to
appeal to and engage adult learners of diverse backgrounds. The learning environment for the
face-to-face component will be the TNHSP classroom, where teacher in-service and faculty
meetings are held. The classroom is equipped with tables, chairs, a projector, a smart board, and
other instructional tools and supplies. All faculty members have personal laptops to access
content individually, as needed. The environment will be casual and familiar to the learners and
the workshop will be hosted as a collaborative, exploratory learning exercise.
As noted above, the instructional strategies will be developed following Gagns Nine
Events of Instruction, as well as Marzanos Nine Instructional Strategies for Effective Teaching
and Learning, among other pragmatic approaches, as necessary. The primary strategy for the
computer-based component will be to present and assess course objectives via scenarios and case
studies. This process will involve the learner in activating existing knowledge as well as
integrating and applying new knowledge in reflective and constructive ways. Accordingly, the
development process will center on the presentation and/or creation of case studies of PBL
projects (and driving questions) that reflect best practices. Course material will require learners
to analyze, reflect on, and re-envision these projects to demonstrate their understanding of core
concepts and apply the skills and strategies outlined in the objectives.
Media components to be collected and/or developed include images, videos, audio files,
and interactive learning modules. Images will include photographs of students, faculty, and PBL
activities at TNHSP, which will be collected and utilized with student, parent, and organizational

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

31

permission via Chartwell School. The module will also incorporate photographs of PBL
activities from other schools and organizations to illustrate case studies. Generic images in the
form of photographs or illustrations will also be used, as needed, as instructional material or for
design purposes. The module will also, it is planned, incorporate videos of PBL projects and
activities from outside organizations; inclusion of such components will be contingent on
availability, relevance, and licensing. An original video documenting TNHSP student activities
and reflections may also be developed. Audio files to be developed will consist of narration and
any necessary accompanying sound effects or music. Finally, the product will also include an
interactive driving question generator as an additional media component.
The major deliverables will consist of the website (html files) and source files for the
computer-based instructional tutorial; the latter will include images, audio files, and original
video and media components (those which are not merely linked to via the module). Deliverables
will also include the written course material files for the face-to-face meeting, including a
prescriptive instructional document for the facilitator and any course materials/handouts to be
distributed to participants.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

32

IMPLEMENTATION
Delivery
The computer-based component will be delivered online, asynchronously. The training
will be assigned by the Head of School in coordination with the designer. Participants will
receive a link to log in to the web-based course using a user name and password. Learners will
likely receive a 1-2 week window prior to the face-to-face meeting to complete the computerbased training according to their respective schedules. They will have individual laptops to
access the course. These conditions should give the participants the necessary time and
resources to complete the computer-based component prior to the face-to-face meeting. The
deadline for completion of the computer-based component will be scheduled to give the Head of
School sufficient time to review the reflection logs of participants prior to the face-to-face
meeting.
The face-to-face component will consist of a 60-minute collaborative activity in which
participants discuss the computer-based component, including the scenarios presented, and
collaborate on a project-period design exercise. This component will be delivered by the Head of
School in coordination with the designer and will provide participants with the opportunity to
discuss, apply, and reinforce their knowledge gained from the training. This part of the course
will be delivered in the TNHSP classroom at the Chartwell campus, as noted above.
Ideally, the respective components of the module would be delivered over a two-week
span, with the workshop component held during the faculty in-service week prior to the start of
the school year. This proposed timing is ideal because, in such case, the training would
immediately precede the groups initial project-period planning activities as part of the in-service
week, allowing them to immediately apply any ideas or knowledge gained from the training.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

33

Alternatively, the initial implementation may occur during the school year, with the face-to-face
meeting being held during a scheduled monthly faculty meeting. Such faculty meetings are two
hours long and would provide sufficient time for the face-to-face activity.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

34

EVALUATION
Formative Evaluation
Formative evaluation will be conducted over multiple stages to assess and improve on the
effectiveness and general usability of the product. The first stage will consist of connoisseurbased formative evaluation in which SMEs will review the module for accuracy, relevance,
cohesion, usability, and other important factors. This process will involve the TNHSP Head of
School Alyse LeValley and possibly Chartwells Strategic Management Consultant John Reid or
other consultants. SME reviews will take place at multiple stages in the development process.
First, the SME(s) will review the planned instructional content, along with storyboards; second,
they will review the ILM prototype; and third, they will review the completed ILM along with
the materials for the face-to-face session. Data gathering techniques for SME reviews will
include observation, questionnaires, and/or interviews, to be combined with any written notes
provided by the SMEs or other consultants. Ideally, the designer will be on hand to observe and
collect feedback as the SMEs review the computer-based module components and the materials
for the face-to-face session. Feedback from this process will be used to revise the instructional
content and/or module accordingly, and could also provide points of further analysis to be
addressed through a subsequent decision-oriented study, if necessary and feasible.
SME evaluations will be followed by at least 1-2 one-to-one trials with TNHSP faculty
members to receive feedback via observation, a questionnaire, and interviews. Ideally, this
process will involve two faculty members with different education and experience levels in order
to assess the relevance and leveling of the content from different perspectives within the diverse
target audience. In line with the products internal assessments, this process may also involve an
objective-based study employing pre-tests and post-tests to measure the effectiveness of training.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

35

As is currently planned, one-to-one trials will be held following the completion of the ILM
prototype. If conditions allow, this stage of the testing will be conducted onsite, at Chartwell,
with the designer on hand to observe; however, testing subjects may also need to complete the
test at a different location and/or time according to their individual needs.
If time and other conditions allow, a third stage of formative evaluation will also be
conducted in the form of a small group trial. This type of testing poses challenges due to the
small pool of faculty at TNHSP. Faculty size typically ranges between 5-7 educators and would
thus not allow for both a separate group trial and actual implementation, as the former would
likely negatively affect the latter by causing redundancy and, perhaps, a lack of interest or value
in the second iteration. Thus, one alternative would be to stage a small group trial, consisting of a
minimum of 3-4 educators, with faculty from the K-8 program at Chartwell, where teachers are
familiar with the target audience and have some experience with project-based activities. In this
case, the target audience for the module would not be identical for the testing and
implementation stages but could nonetheless be beneficial in assessing the program. In any case,
a small group trial would be important for testing both the computer-based and face-to-face
components, as only the former would be assessed in the one-to-one formative evaluations. This
stage would be held following the completion of the ILM and the face-to-face module
components. If possible, this form of testing would follow the prescribed format of the module
itself, with the computer-based component completed individually and the face-to-face meeting
held onsite, at Chartwell, and led by the TNHSP Head of School. Feedback would, again, be
collected from this stage via observation (when possible), a questionnaire, and interviews with
subjects.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

36

Throughout the formative evaluation process, observational feedback will be collected by

the designer and, in the case of the small group trial, the Head of School as well. Questionnaires
will be developed using Google Forms and will be distributed and collected electronically.
Interviews will be conducted on-site or via e-mail, as needed. (For sample SME interview
questions, please see Appendix A.) Data will be analyzed in respect to each individuals learning
profile and will receive additional review by the project SME(s). Feedback determined to be
valid, useful, and feasible will be implemented following each respective stage of evaluation,
with any data gathered via a small-group trial serving as the final feedback for making revisions
prior to full implementation and summative evaluation.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

37

Summative Evaluation
Summative evaluation will take the form of a post-training questionnaire in which faculty
provide feedback on the programs perceived effectiveness, relevance, usability, suggestions for
improvement, and other factors. (For a sample post-training questionnaire for participants, please
see Appendix B.) Again, in line with the products internal assessments, this process may also
involve an objective-based study employing pre-tests and post-tests to measure the effectiveness
of training. Additional summative feedback will also be gathered following the first projectperiod planning session to occur after implementation. In this case, another questionnaire will be
provided to faculty to assess their perceptions for the usefulness of the training and any
perceived performance outcomes in the actual project-period planning process. Additional
feedback will be collected from the Head of School, who will similarly assess any perceived
performance outcomes in the project-period planning process following the training. Together,
these data will be used to assess the effectiveness of the module and plan any further revisions, if
feasible.

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

38

REFERENCES
Buck Institute for Education. (2011). Driving question tubric 2.0. Retrieved from
http://bie.org/object/document/driving_question_tubric
Buck Institute for Education. (2014). PBL essential elements checklist. Retrieved
from http://bie.org/object/document/pbl_essential_elements_checklist#
Cercone, K. (2008). Characteristics of adult learners with implications for online
learning design. AACE Journal, 16(2), 137-159. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Donnelly, R. (2006). Blended problem-based learning for teacher education: Lessons
learnt. Journal of Learning, Media and Technology, 31(2), 93-116.
Savery, J.R. & Duffy, T.M. (1996). Problem based learning: An instructional model and
its constructivist framework. In B.G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning
environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 135-148). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Educational Technology.
Savery, J.R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Denitions and distinctions.
Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1(1).
http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1002
endaa, S. & Odabab, H. F. (2009). Effects of an online problem based learning
course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Computers &
Education, 53(1), 132-141. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008
Strobel, J. & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis
of meta-analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary
Journal of Problem-based Learning, 3(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1046

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

T-STEM project-based learning: Craft a driving question. (2012). In-Sight: A
Newsletter for Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment, 4. Retrieved from
http://www5.esc13.net/thescoop/insight/2012/02/stem/

39

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

40

APPENDIX A
SME Interview Questions
1. What is your general impression of the instructional module?
2. Did you find the content to be accurate?
3. Did you find the content to be relevant to the purpose of the training and the day-to-day
work of faculty? If not, which areas can be modified or removed?
4. Do you think the content is appropriately leveled for TNSHP faculty?
5. What did you think of the example(s) of PBL projects from other schools/organizations?
Are they appropriate models for instruction at TNHSP?
6. What did you think of the assessment activities, e.g. the reflection logs? How do you
think faculty would receive them?
7. Did you find the organization of the material to be logical and effective?
8. Did you find the module to be user-friendly in terms of navigation and readability?
9. Is the length of the module appropriate in relation to faculty schedules and the structure
of teacher in-service?
10. Does the module accurately represent the instructional model and philosophies of The
New High School Project at Chartwell?
11. What recommendations would you make to improve the module?

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AT TNHSP

41

APPENDIX B
Post-Training Questionnaire
1. What did you think of the computer-based module?
2. What did you think of the face-to-face session?
3. Did you find the instruction engaging? Please explain.
4. Did you have any issues using the computer-based module? Please explain.
5. How did you feel about the assessment activities?
6. Do you plan to use any of the provided strategies or resources in your work at TNHSP? If
so, please specify.
7. What is your general impression of the training as a whole?
8. What recommendations would you make to improve the module?
9. On a scale of 1 (not relevant) to 5 (highly relevant), please rate the relevance of the
training to your work at TNHSP.
10. On a scale of 1 (not useful) to 5 (very useful), please rate the usefulness of the
training to your work at TNHSP.
11. How much new, useful knowledge did you gain from the training?
a. A lot
b. Some
c. Very little
d. None
12. Overall, on a scale of 1 (not valuable) to 5 (highly valuable), please rate the value of
this training for your professional development.
13. Would you like to participate in more training programs like this one?