School-based Curriculum Action Research Series · complex relationship between input and output, the application of ... how students learnt and applied what they had learnt in the

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


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


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


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


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.


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


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.


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.


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.


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.


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


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


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)


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


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 Ànimals’ (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


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: Ànimals 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


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


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


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.


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


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


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.


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’,

à pair of glasses’. One student used connectives `but’ and `too’

(Appendix Vb) to link up ideas. There were also complex patterns

like Ì like dancing’, `We always play together’, `We are singing’,

Ì’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


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


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.’


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


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


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%


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, Ì know how to do it now (我現在明白怎樣做

了)’, Ì can learn more words (可以學多點字)’, Ì have to use my brain

(要用腦想)’, Ì 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: Ì did it myself (我自己做)’, Ì did my

work seriously (我做得好有心機)’, Ì 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)’, Ì am

very happy that I do it (很有趣和做了很快樂)’, Ì 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.


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


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


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.


28


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


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.’


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


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.


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… ’



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 Ì 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’


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


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


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


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


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


39

project work, we think it is important not to sacrifice free expression for

accuracy.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


Gordon G. et al. (2000). “Notes from a Brainstorming Session of Teachers

Beginning Project Work”. Initial Materials.


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.


Helm, J. H. et al. (2000). “Documenting Projects”. Initial Material.,


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


“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

Documents

School-based Curriculum Action Research Series · complex relationship between input and output, the application of ... how students learnt and applied what they had learnt in the