Abstract
With the increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) across industries, there is a growing need to transform traditional teaching methods into more innovative, technology-driven, and practice-oriented approaches. Project-Based Learning (PBL) has emerged as an effective pedagogy that promotes active learning, connects theoretical concepts to real-world applications, and enhances critical thinking and problem-solving abilities. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a structured PBL framework implemented through the Technoscope program in an undergraduate engineering context using an integrated assessment approach. Data were collected from 58 to 60 students using a structured questionnaire based on a five-point Likert scale administered before and after the intervention. The instrument was validated using the Content Validity Index (CVI). In addition to student perceptions, project outcomes were assessed through rubric-based evaluation by domain experts to provide complementary performance insights. Descriptive and inferential analyses revealed a significant improvement in student outcomes, with mean scores increasing from 3.4 (SD = 0.7) under traditional teaching methods to 4.5 (SD = 0.4) following PBL implementation. Statistically significant gains were observed across key dimensions, including overall learning experience, conceptual understanding, creativity, and problem-solving skills (p < 0.001), with moderate to large effect sizes. A majority of students reported enhanced creativity (85.7%) and improved understanding of subject content (82.5%), while 60.3% expressed satisfaction with the overall learning experience. The overall mean score of 4.41 (SD = 0.86) indicates high engagement and positive learning experiences. Despite these findings, the results are primarily based on self-reported data and are limited by the absence of a control group and single-institution context. Future research should incorporate objective performance measures, longitudinal designs, and multi-institutional samples to strengthen the evidence base.
1 Introduction
Project-Based Learning (PBL) is a student-driven teaching approach that seeks to enhance the conventional education system by fostering creativity and problem-solving through hands-on projects that require in-depth understanding. This approach contrasts with traditional lecture-based teaching, in which students receive information (Rubino, 2024). PBL promotes active knowledge creation and the application of bookish knowledge to solve practical problems. PBL helps learners to gain in depth knowledge of the subject and perform practical learning rather than rote memorization. The education system is revolutionized by the arrival of new technologies such as artificial intelligence and the fancy metaverse. This digital revolution is resulting in significant challenges for talent development. Present requirement of education system is to inculcate higher order thinking skills among students that help learners to adapt to a dynamic society and cope up with real world complex problem (Khiati et al., 2025). Effectiveness of PBL is demonstrated in fast evolving engineering and technical education which requires students to comprehend complex theoretical concepts and apply them in practice. Apart from acquisition of basic technical skills in a particular domain, students also gain critical professional skills, such as teamwork, communication, critical thinking, and project management. This ensures that expectation of industry is fulfilled on day one of employment by making students work ready to address interdisciplinary problems and make a valuable contribution by aligning with broader educational reforms and industry needs (Hussin et al., 2025).
PBL is in sync with education policy frameworks such an Indias National Education Policy 2020 which focusses on overall development and experiential, skills-based learning. This policy highlighted the need to have pedagogies that supplement conventional textbook education with other essential skills like creativity, inquiry, and innovation- competencies that are highly required in the evolving technological world. Workshops and training teachers via activities will be fundamental in the successful implementation and integration of the PBL programme into the curriculum (Byrapuneni et al., 2025). In recent times, project-based learning has become an discussed topic in higher education. Numerous studies suggest that this approach improves student motivation, problem-solving, teamwork, and communication. Project-based learning and research methodological advancement are complex and diverse, making their effectiveness and affecting factors inconsistent. Meta-analyses of project-based learning examine its effects on academic achievement, cognitive ability, and emotional disposition.
2 Literature review
Lee et al. (Lee and Lee, 2025) focusses PBL's ability to assist learners in solving real-world, multidisciplinary problems that require integrating knowledge across integrated Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines. The paper is concluded with identification of future research directions to improve assessment practises, long-term impacts, and teacher training in the implementation of integrated STEM PBL. Zhang et al. (Zhang and Ma, 2023) investigated influence of several parameters of PBL, including geographic region, subject area, course style, group size, class size, and implementation duration on PBL results. PBL produces stronger resignificant sults in the Asian context, particularly in engineering and technology courses for small-group learning. The results demonstrate the efficacy of PBL in enhancing student learning and 21st-century competencies across diverse educational institutions. Pai et al. (Srinivasa Pai et al., 2018) highlighted the requirement of incorporating PBL into current curricula to support industry revolution and the transition to Outcome-Based Education (OBE) system. The paper presented the issues faced by faculty members and provided guidelines for the effective implementation of PBL.
Gupta et al. (Gupta and Gupta, 2021) examined the application of PBL as an essential approach to outcome-based education for building 21st-century skills among students at technical institutions. This method applies a SNAP study involving 617 faculty members at Indian technical institutes. It highlights that PBL, when systematically applied at varied institutions, can provide significant benefits for programme outcomes and student competencies. The research summarizes how PBL benefits by reducing the gap between theoretical and practical knowledge, enabling students to address real-life problems. Almulla et al. (Almulla, 2020) examined the impact of the PBL methodology on student engagement by investigating its effects on collaborative, disciplinary, iterative, and authentic learning. Research results indicated that the PBL model promotes engagement of students in the learning process hence, it is highly recommended for deployment in institutions of higher learning, such as universities. Ashwini et al. (Ashwini, 2024) presented a study in engineering classes, emphasizing on the issues experienced by students and faculty while implementing PBL. The paper addresses problems related to frequent tracking of project development, insufficient institutional resources, and faculty acceptance of PBL. The Milan et al. (Maros et al., 2023) conducted an experiment which showed that students taught using conventional method scored significantly less in tests than those taught using PBL method. PBL students displayed increased engagement, ability to work together and solve problems. De la Torre-Neches et al. (de la Torre-Neches et al., 2020) discusses PBL and emphasises cooperation and evaluation as the main advantages. It emphasises the importance of student research for enhancing communication, responsibility, and collective problem-solving. Viswambaran et al. (Viswambaran and Shafeek ) examined the importance of the PBL approach in enhancing student involvement in vocational education.
Recent studies highlight the growing significance of Project-Based Learning (PBL) as a revolutionary pedagogical strategy in engineering education. PBL promotes the growth of professional skills, interdisciplinary learning, and real-world competencies, according to a systematic review by Lavado-Anguera et al. (2024) (Lavado-Anguera et al., 2024). Additionally, it has been demonstrated that incorporating active learning methodologies into PBL greatly improves academic achievement, problem-solving skills, and student engagement (Nagamalla et al., 2025). To enhance learning experiences and instructional design, contemporary PBL frameworks are increasingly using digital tools and artificial intelligence as educational technologies advance (Sánchez-Redroban and Romero-Duran, 2025).
Additionally, learning analytics has become a potent method for evaluating student performance and engagement in PBL settings. More data-driven educational decisions are possible thanks to recent studies showing that behavioural and interaction data can accurately model learning processes and forecast project outcomes (Xu et al., 2025). The current study attempts to address the requirement for validated tools that capture both perceived and performance-based outcomes in PBL settings (Viswambaran and Shafeek, 2019).
In summary, this research concludes that using Project Based Learning significantly improves the motivation level of students, since they can see how their learning relates to real world situations and how it will help them solve problems. This method helps students take an active role in their education through participation, collaboration, and accountability. Research shows that PBL has been shown to be a successful way to improve interaction between coworkers and skill development at work. The research will assess the impact of PBL on student learning, and will be using an example from one of the Engineering College PBL implementations for project-based curriculum development.
This research includes the following two questions:
Does project-based learning significantly improve students’ teamwork, communication skills, time management, creativity, and critical thinking compared to traditional teaching methods?
How do teachers implement project-based learning in their classrooms?
Recent research on project-based learning emphasizes the importance of combining perception-based metrics with learning analytics and objective performance indicators to support empirical claims. However, there are gaps in studies focused on the specific implementation of project-based learning within institutions. These studies should examine the practicality of PBL, the perspectives of participants, and the contextual constraints involved, despite the growing evidence of its effectiveness.
3 Methodology
The Technoscope program aimed at planning and implementation of PBL to enable students to experience engineering concepts through practical projects. For this a pilot study was conducted for 60 students, and the orientation programme was conducted which aimed to raise awareness of the Project-based learning (PBL) programme amongst students. After the technoscope orientation program for first-year students, a Google Form was circulated for registration at the midpoint of the first semester. A total of 100 enrolments were received, of which 70 students were shortlisted based on their 12th and MHCET results. Students scoring 60% or higher were considered for the PBL-based activity, and mentors were assigned.
Further, after understanding students’ expectations, the project-based learning (PBL) framework (Bell, 2010) was created to provide a platform for students to think outside the box, be creative, solve real-life problems, and work as a team. Accordingly, expert talks and industrial visits were conducted to help students become more efficient at selecting a project title. Evaluation of the project title was conducted in the presence of expert judges, who provided suggestions and guidance on any improvements and the scope of the topic, within the PBL scope. Students also submitted the project synopsis report under the guidance of the Mentors. They worked deliberately on the project implementation for 3 months. After the project's completion, students appeared for the final evaluation using rubrics in front of an expert panel and submitted the Final Project report as shown in Figure 1. The program helped students correlate the theoretical concepts they learned in the classroom with the actual challenges in communities and industries. Thus, the program successfully identifies and implements projects aligned with technological and societal needs.
Figure 1
3.1 Program design and pedagogical framework
The Technoscope program depends on three pillars: expert lectures, industry connections, and continuous mentorship. The faculties played a pivotal role by assisting students with their projects, motivating them, addressing their queries and technical issues, and providing guidance on distributing responsibilities and working as a team. The students on industry visits had the chance to closely examine the implementation of technologies in the real world and the limitations professionals actually face. In addition, the expert talks from pioneers in different fields provided exposure to the latest technologies and actual case studies, which helped students correlate their conceptual and practical understanding of the subject. This knowledge helped the students select project themes that address community problems and learn how to work in small groups. The topics on which the students created projects and prototypes are:
Cyber-attacks decoded: Trends, Tactics and Countermeasure
Recycling PET into 3D printer filament
Using Arduino to design an automated irrigation system to promote resource-efficient farming.
Creating an AI-based smart helmet with built-in air purification to improve industrial workers’ health and safety.
Developing digital healthcare and telemedicine solutions, like “MediSync” and “Get Doctors at Your Fingertips,” to increase access to healthcare.
Developing a passenger counting system for public transportation to help with planning, crowd control, and service optimization.
Evaluating water quality to ensure clean water and improve public health.
Thus,
Figures 2a,b. Demonstrate the working models of projects titled “An Automated Irrigation System using Arduino” and “Recycling PET into 3D printer filament.”
Figure 2crepresents the evaluation of the projects, and
Figure 2ddepicts the project display by the student group. While completing their project work throughout their academic program, students focussed on applying the principles of engineering design, developing new technical skills from a range of courses, and developing a balance between usability, chance, and societal outcomes throughout the project. The new emphasis on authentic assignments has provided students with the opportunity to experience the uncertainty and open-endedness of real-world engineering problems instead of the very limiting and narrowly defined textbook problem assignments.
Figure 2
3.2 Learning support, reflection and rubrics
The project-based learning (PBL) pedagogical approach was structured around a formalised learning process and various types of support/assessment approaches. Students’ teams were able to validate their development and improve their professional presence when giving project presentations at key points in the project lifecycle, including Problem Definition/Conceptualisation, Design, Development/Implementation, and Testing (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). The students created the following types of deliverables throughout the course of their project: Technical reports, formal presentations, working on conceptual prototypes, etc., all of which were utilised to determine the students’ overall grade. Each of these deliverables was evaluated by three different domain experts, all with different technical backgrounds (for the purposes of having an unbiased assessment and bringing together a multilateral assessment). Student performance was rated using multiple methods based on established, objective evaluation criteria; five marks for each criterion (for a total score of 30) as seen in Table 1.
Table 1
| Criteria | Description | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| Title of project | Clarity, relevance, and alignment with problem statement | 5M |
| Relevance of project | Practical significance and real-world applicability | 5M |
| Communication skills | Clarity, confidence, and effectiveness of presentation | 5M |
| Technical knowledge | Depth of understanding and application of concepts | 5M |
| Teamwork | Collaboration, coordination, and role distribution | 5M. |
| Question and Answer | Ability to respond accurately and critically | 5M |
| Total | 30M |
Project evaluation rubric.
Bold values indicate the final rubric score, representing the overall evaluation based on all listed assessment criteria.
The use of a multi-dimensional rubric ensured a comprehensive and standardized assessment of both technical and soft skills, aligning with outcome-based education principles.
3.3 Survey instrument and data analysis
In terms of gathering data from participants about their perceptions of traditional vs. project-based learning approaches, an analysis of feedback collected before and after the implementation of a project-based learning pedagogy demonstrated that participant's perceptions increased significantly from a mean score of 3.4 (SD = 0.7) for traditional pedagogy to a mean score of 4.5 (SD = 0.4) for project-based learning. Graphic representation of the shift in participant's understanding, creativity, and consistency pre and post project-based learning compared can be found in Figure 3.
Figure 3
In determining the effectiveness of the Technoscope PBL Program, feedback forms were administered as part of an evaluation at the conclusion of the program (Kokotsaki et al., 2016). The evaluation encompassed data from 58 completed feedback forms for analysis, with responses from all 60 participating students. A tested Likert scale was used to measure this evaluation on a five-point scale ranging from 1, “Strongly Disagree,” to 5, “Strongly Agree.”
3.4 Instrument validation and reliability
3.4.1 Content validity
An establishment of the survey instrument was built on an extensive review of appropriate literature and validated instruments for each research construct. Each item was modified appropriately to accommodate the contextual framework of the study. The categories of engineering educational experience the items attempt to capture include technical competency, problem-solving ability, teamwork and collaboration, communication skills, and learning outcomes. Each item will be rated based on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The draft survey instrument was evaluated for content validity by a panel of three subject matter experts with engineering experience. Based on their suggestions, a few minor changes were made to enhance conceptual alignment and phrasing accuracy.
After that, a pilot study was conducted with 20 individual's representatives of the intended audience. The pilot participants’ input was used to increase overall clarity and clarify any unclear language. The final survey was conducted online using Google Forms. To reduce missing data and ensure complete answers, every question was set as required.
High content validity of the instrument was indicated by the scale-level CVI (S-CVI) being above 0.80 and the item-level CVI (I-CVI) values for all items exceeding the suggested threshold of 0.78 as shown in Table 2.
Table 2
| Item | Construct | I-CVI |
|---|---|---|
| Q1 | Technical Competency | 0.83 |
| Q2 | Technical Competency | 0.83 |
| Q3 | Technical Competency | 1.00 |
| Q4 | Technical Competency | 0.83 |
| Q5 | Teamwork & Communication | 1.00 |
| Q6 | Teamwork & Collaboration | 0.83 |
| Q7 | Teamwork & Coordination | 0.83 |
| Q8 | Communication Skills | 1.00 |
| Q9 | Problem Identification | 0.83 |
| Q10 | Decision Making | 1.00 |
| Q11 | Creativity | 0.83 |
| Q12 | Learning Outcomes | 1.00 |
| Q13 | Reflective Learning | 0.83 |
| Q14 | Holistic Skill Development | 1.00 |
Content validity Index (CVI) for questionnaire items.
3.4.2 Construct validity
By matching questionnaire items to theoretically supported constructs in engineering education and PBL frameworks, construct validity was ensured. The following domains comprised the conceptual structure of the instrument:
Technical Proficiency (Q1–Q4)
Cooperation and Teamwork (Q5–Q7, Q14)
The ability to communicate (Q8)
Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving (Q9–Q11, Q13)
Learning Objectives (Q12)
As a result, PBL places a high priority on fostering creativity, which is where the curriculum excels. As seen in
Figure 4, 78% of participants approved of the program's continuation, rating it 4/5 and 5/5, demonstrating its effectiveness.
Figure 4
Mean and standard deviation statistics were used to summarize each parameter. The findings provided a clear overview of central tendencies in students’ perceptions and variability throughout the program. It also perceived positive trend in both conceptual knowledge and higher-order skills, such as creativity and problem-solving as depicted in Figure 5. Along with attributes such as teamwork, communication skills, time management, critical thinking, research analysis and experimental learning (Baser et al., 2017) as depicted in Figure 6.
Figure 5
Figure 6
Many students’ feedback indicated that the program helped them transition from passive information consumption to active participation in designing and implementing solutions. As shown in Figure 7A 85.7% student's feedback represented that the PBL program helped them to increase their creativity and ability of solving problems, Figure 7B 82.5% students responded that the PBL program had increased their efficiency in understanding the topic effectively and Figure 7C 60.3% of students responded that they were satisfied with the overall learning experience in the Technoscope program.
Figure 7
4 Results
4.1 Evaluation of project performance
A quantitative assessment of the project outcomes was conducted, using a structured rubric and three domain experts. The mean results for the various evaluation criteria appear in Table 3.
Table 3
| Criteria | Mean score (out of 5) | Standard deviation |
|---|---|---|
| Title of project | 4.12 | 0.68 |
| Relevance of project | 4.35 | 0.59 |
| Communication skills | 4.08 | 0.72 |
| Technical knowledge | 4.22 | 0.64 |
| Teamwork | 4.40 | 0.55 |
| Question and Answer | 4.05 | 0.70 |
Mean scores of project evaluation rubric.
The data show that all students performed consistently well across all evaluation criteria; in particular, the highest average score (M) was for teamwork (4.40), followed closely by project relevance (4.35). The PBL method fosters teamwork and helping students develop engineering solutions that are relevant to society by encouraging collaboration between students working on their projects and the members of the project team.
4.2 Student self-reported outcomes
The results show a significant positive impact of the PBL framework. The average score across the entire learning experience was 4.41 (SD = 0.86), indicating high student satisfaction. Enhanced topic understanding resulted in a mean score of 4.81 (SD = 0.44), indicating consistent conceptual clarity among participants. Creative and problem-solving skills had a mean score of 4.55 (SD = 0.94), indicating significant improvement in higher-order skills. Support for program continuation received an extremely high mean score of 4.97 (SD = 0.18). A bar graph showing the mean scores for overall experience, subject understanding, creativity, and program continuation as depicted in Figure 8. Standard deviation of student responses for evaluated parameters as shown in Figure 9.
Figure 8
Figure 9
The study of feedback data revealed consistently high mean scores across all examined aspects. Subject knowledge had one of the highest mean values, indicating that students found PBL extremely helpful in developing conceptual clarity. Correspondingly, the mean scores for the overall learning experience and the characteristics of creative and problem-solving abilities were high, indicating greater engagement, motivation, and knowledge application. The program's endurance parameter also scored high, suggesting that students strongly support the continued implementation of the PBL framework.
4.3 Statistical analysis
The statistical significance of the observed variations in student replies was investigated using inferential analysis in addition to descriptive statistics. The observed trends were further supported by the use of appropriate tests (paired t-test/Wilcoxon test) based on the data distribution.
Inferential statistical analysis was carried out to investigate the effects of the PBL intervention. For normally distributed variables, paired t-tests were used; and for non-normally distributed variables, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was utilized (as shown in Table 4). All of the measured areas of improvement (technical competency, teamwork, problem solving, communication skills, and learning outcomes) demonstrated statistically significant results, with p-values less than 0.001. Teamwork demonstrated the most significant improvement (Mean Difference=1.05) while technical competency and learning outcomes were the next two most improved areas of measurement. Cohen's d effect size analysis showed moderate to large effects for all of the measured areas of improvement (d = 0.70–0.88), therefore supporting the hypothesis that the observed improvements were both statistically and practically significant (as shown in Table 5).
Table 4
| Variable | Pre-mean | Post-mean | Mean difference | Test used | t/Z value | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technical competency | 3.21 | 4.18 | 0.97 | Paired t-test | 6.45 | <0.001 |
| Teamwork skills | 3.35 | 4.40 | 1.05 | Paired t-test | 7.12 | <0.001 |
| Problem-solving skills | 3.28 | 4.22 | 0.94 | Paired t-test | 6.01 | <0.001 |
| Communication skills | 3.30 | 4.08 | 0.78 | Wilcoxon Test | −5.32 | <0.001 |
| Learning outcomes | 3.25 | 4.15 | 0.90 | Paired t-test | 6.28 | <0.001 |
Inferential analysis of Pre–post PBL outcomes.
Table 5
| Variable | Effect Size (d) | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Technical competency | 0.82 | Large |
| Teamwork skills | 0.88 | Large |
| Problem-solving skills | 0.79 | Moderate–Large |
| Communication skills | 0.70 | Moderate |
| Learning outcomes | 0.81 | Large |
Effect size (Cohen's d).
4.4 Analysis of variance (ANOVA)
For each skill:
H0 (Null Hypothesis): There is no significant difference between pre-PBL and post-PBL scores.
H1 (Alternative Hypothesis): There is a significant difference between pre-PBL and post-PBL scores.
In order to study the differences between the skills acquired pre and post PBL, a One-way ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) was performed. The level of statistical significance was set at
p≤ 0.001 (as shown in
Table 6).
Table 6
| Skill | F | p | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Teamwork | 135.2 | <0.001 | Significant |
| Communication | 147.6 | <0.001 | Significant |
| Time management | 145.4 | <0.001 | Significant |
| Creativity | 122.8 | <0.001 | Significant |
| Critical thinking | 135.3 | <0.001 | Significant |
| Technical skills | 90.7 | <0.001 | Significant |
One-way ANOVA (analysis of variance).
The p-values were all less than 0.001 across the assessed skill areas, including teamwork, communication, time management, creativity, critical thinking, and technical skills. This indicates that for all skills, the null hypothesis (H0), which claimed there was no significant change between pre-PBL and post-PBL scores, is rejected. Consequently, the alternative hypothesis (H1) is approved. This demonstrates how the PBL framework greatly enhanced students’ abilities. These results demonstrate that the PBL intervention significantly improves several student learning outcomes.
4.5 Comparative and deviation analysis
Comparative study of traditional teaching method and PBL approach shows a significant increase in the understanding of the concepts represented by the reduced deviation in the PBL teaching technique. The increase in feedback clearly shows an advantage of project-based learning over conventional teaching method fostering active and skill-based learning. Individual learning styles and variable levels of prior introduction to project-based assignments may explain the slightly larger variance in creative and problem-solving skills reported. Overall, the deviation analysis verifies the PBL approach's reliability and efficacy.
5 Discussion and limitations
While the findings demonstrate positive results from the PBL strategy, they must be interpreted with certain limitations taken into consideration. The fact that all of the data and assessments were conducted through the Technoscope program, which is a structured mentorship and evaluation program, means that the results cannot necessarily be generalized to other types of educational contexts. Also, while student perceptions regarding learning may suggest benefits to the program, the use of self-reported data can lead to response bias. To some extent, having independent evaluations of performance by at least three different judges provided an acceptable amount of objectivity; however, more objective measures would improve validity. The use of a single item to measure communication skills and learning outcomes, among other related constructs, is likely to understate the complexity of these measures than if multiple items were used. In addition, given that the lack of a control group makes it impossible to link demonstrated improvements directly to the PBL intervention, it is also more difficult to link the positive improvements exhibited primarily by higher motivation students to the PBL intervention, as these students, by sheer merit of their motivation, will likely demonstrate positive improvements regardless of the intervention. Recruitment of participants based upon their performance level and interest level likely creates a degree of selection bias. Furthermore, having performed this study at one institution, with a very small number of participants, reduces the degree of generalizability. Therefore, rather than being definitive proof of efficacy, the results should be seen as a sign of favourable student perspectives and reported improvements. The present study does not explicitly report measures of variability, uncertainty, or confidence intervals, which may limit the depth of statistical interpretation. Future research may incorporate these measures to provide a more comprehensive and robust analysis of PBL outcomes. Additionally, to enhance the robustness and generalizability of the findings, future studies may consider extending the assessment instrument, adopting comparative research designs, and implementing the framework across multiple institutions.
6 Contribution
Using an integration of both validated measures that assess perceptions and an expert evaluation of student outcomes using rubrics and measuring agreement between evaluators (or inter-rater reliability), this study develops a new combined framework for evaluating PBL (Project-Based Learning) outcomes in engineering education.
7 Conclusion
The effectiveness of Project-Based Learning (PBL) under the Technoscope framework was evaluated using validated questionnaires, rubric evaluations, and inferential analysis of statistical data. Significant improvements in technical competencies, teamwork, problem-solving, communication skills, and learning outcomes were observed. The instrument utilized to measure improvement was highly reliable and valid according to CVI, and Inferential analysis (i.e., paired t-test/ANOVA) indicated statistically significant differences (p < 0.001) with moderate to large effect sizes. Rubric evaluation and inter-rater agreement provided an objective basis for the findings. However, the findings should be examined with awareness of limitations, such as reliance upon self-reported data, lack of a control group, and single institution context. Overall, this study presents a comprehensive evaluation framework that includes both perceptional and performance-based measures. Future investigations would benefit from utilizing a multi-institutional sample as well as objective metrics and more advanced methods of analysis.
Statements
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Ethics statement
Written informed consent was obtained from the individual(s) for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article.
Author contributions
VP: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. GD: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft. MB: Formal analysis, Supervision, Data curation, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was not received for this work and/or its publication.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge Anjuman-I-Islam Kalsekar Technical Campus, School of Engineering and Technology, Navi Mumbai, for successfully implementing the Technoscope program for First-Year Engineering students.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2026.1780665/full#supplementary-material
References
1
AlmullaM. A. (2020). The effectiveness of the project-based learning (PBL) approach as a way to engage students in learning. Sage. Open.10 (3), 2158244020938702. 10.1177/2158244020938702
2
AshwiniB. (2024). Issues and challenges of implementing project based learning in engineering courses: student and faculty perspective. J. Eng. Educ. Transform.37, 86–98. 10.16920/jeet/2024/v37i3/24006
3
BaserD.OzdenM. Y.KaraarslanH. (2017). Collaborative project-based learning: an integrative science and technological education project. Res. Sci. Technol. Educ.35 (2), 131–148. 10.1080/02635143.2016.1274723
4
BellS. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: skills for the future. Clear. House83 (2), 39–43. 10.1080/00098650903505415
5
BlumenfeldP. C.SolowayE.MarxR. W.KrajcikJ. S.GuzdialM.PalincsarA. (1991). Motivating project-based learning. Educ. Psychol.26 (3–4), 369–398. 10.1080/00461520.1991.9653139
6
ByrapuneniL. P.KumarP. V.GundalwarP. R. (2025). Innovative computer science curriculum design: integrating STEM and project-based learning in accordance with NEP 2020–a case study on web technologies. J. Eng. Educ. Transform.38, 356–367. 10.16920/jeet/2025/v38is2/25043
7
de la Torre-NechesB.Rubia-AviM.Aparicio-HerguedasJ. L.Rodríguez-MedinaJ. (2020). Project-based learning: an analysis of cooperation and evaluation as the axes of its dynamic. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun.7 (1), 1–7. 10.1057/s41599-020-00663-z
8
GuptaB. L.GuptaP. B. (2021). Project-based learning in technical institutions. J. Eng. Technol. Educ.15 (1), 1–8.
9
HussinM.UsmlediU.MasdiH.SimatupangW.FadhilahF.HendriyaniY. (2025). Project-based problem learning: improving problem-solving skills in higher education engineering students. RISE14 (1), 62–84. 10.17583/rise.15125
10
KhiatiM.JirariS.AissaS.ELomariO.OuboujemaaE.AliB.et al (2025). “Artificial intelligence and smart education as dual catalysts for reinventing global trade, entrepreneurial innovation, and intelligent customs logistics: a multi-layered modelling framework,” in 2025 International Conference on Circuit, Systems and Communication (ICCSC), (Fez: IEEE), 1–7.
11
KokotsakiD.MenziesV.WigginsA. (2016). Project-based learning: a review of the literature. Improv. Sch.19 (3), 267–277. 10.1177/1365480216659733
12
Lavado-AngueraS.Velasco-QuintanaP. J.Terrón-LópezM. J. (2024). Project-based learning (PBL) as an experiential pedagogical methodology in engineering education: a review of the literature. Educ. Sci.14 (6), 617. 10.3390/educsci14060617
13
LeeM. Y.LeeJ. S. (2025). Project-based learning as a catalyst for integrated STEM education. Educ. Sci.15 (7), 871. 10.3390/educsci15070871
14
MarosM.KorenkovaM.FilaM.LevickyM.SchoberovaM. (2023). Project-based learning and its effectiveness: evidence from Slovakia. Interact. Learn. Environ.31 (7), 4147–4155. 10.1080/10494820.2021.1954036
15
NagamallaL.ReaddyV.KumarS.KolaganiL.SuryadevaraG. (2025). Impact of active learning methods on project-based learning (PBL): enhancing student engagement and outcomes. J. Eng. Educ. Transform.38, 30–37. 10.16920/jeet/2025/v38is2/25005
16
RubinoS. (2024). Project-based Learning and its Impact on Student Engagement, Well-being, and Learning Outcomes: A Study of Teachers’ perspectives. Arkansas: Arkansas State University.
17
Sánchez-RedrobanJ. D.Romero-DuranM. V. (2025). A comprehensive framework for integrating modern educational technologies with problem-based learning in medical education. Discov. Educ.4, 583. 10.1007/s44217-025-00963-z
18
Srinivasa PaiP.ChiplunkarN. N.Shrinivasa RaoB. R. (2018). Project based learning (PBL): issues faced by faculty for its effective implementation. J. Eng. Educ. Transform.31, 9–16. 10.16920/jeet/2018/v31i3/120743
19
ViswambaranV. K.ShafeekS.“Project Based Learning (PBL) Approach for Improving the Student Engagement in Vocational Education: an investigation on students ‘learning experiences & achievements,” in 2019 Advances in Science and Engineering Technology International Conferences (ASET) (Dubai: IEEE), 1–8.
20
XuZ.ChoudhuryF. H.MaS.MurphreyT. P.DooleyK. E. (2025). Leveraging learning analytics to model student engagement in graduate statistics: a problem-based learning approach in agricultural education. Behav. Sci.15 (10), 1360. 10.3390/bs15101360
21
ZhangL.MaY. (2023). A study of the impact of project-based learning on student learning effects: a meta-analysis study. Front. Psychol.14, 1202728. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1202728
Summary
Keywords
active learning, educational innovation, engineering education, project-based learning (PBL), rubric-based assessment, student engagement
Citation
Pawar VS, Desai GT and Borotikar M (2026) Evaluating the impact of a project-based learning framework on overall skill development. Front. Educ. 11:1780665. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2026.1780665
Received
04 January 2026
Revised
20 March 2026
Accepted
30 March 2026
Published
01 May 2026
Volume
11 - 2026
Edited by
Aiedah Khalek, Monash University Malaysia, Malaysia
Reviewed by
Kuppan Chetty Ramanathan, SASTRA Deemed to be University, India
Hiba Alsmadi, Teesside University, United Kingdom
Updates
Copyright
© 2026 Pawar, Desai and Borotikar.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Varsha S. Pawar varsha.pawar@aiktc.ac.in
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.