The application of project-based learning in graduate courses: a case study in China

With the rapid expansion of graduate enrollment in China, curriculum teaching reform has become crucial for enhancing the quality of innovative talent cultivation. This study investigates the effectiveness of Project-Based Learning (PBL) in graduate education reform and identifies key implementation challenges. An experimental study was conducted in the “Rural Social Survey and Research Methods” course at Hunan University of Technology, involving 60 master’s students specializing in rural development. Participants were randomly assigned to either a control group or an experimental group, with both groups taught by the same instructor. After the course concludes, a Likert scale is used to evaluate students’ recognition of the course. Additionally, 50 full-time teachers from Hunan University of Technology were randomly surveyed regarding their views on PBL. The results demonstrate that compared to traditional methods, the application of PBL significantly improved students’ self-directed learning abilities and research competencies. The primary determinants influencing teachers’ adoption of PBL were identified as: habitual pedagogical dependencies, insufficient instructional resources, and lack of project implementation experience. 76.19, 76.19, and 71.43% of the surveyed teachers believed that habitual pedagogical dependencies, insufficient instructional resources, and lack of project experience, respectively, led to their reluctance to adopt project-based teaching methods. 42.86% of the surveyed teachers indicated that excessively large class sizes also contributed to their reluctance to adopt project-based teaching methods.

1 Introduction

Higher education serves as a strategic nexus integrating education, science and technology, and talent development—functioning as a crucial hub for the convergence of scientific research and education, as well as industry-academia collaboration. It bears an irreplaceable mission in China’s socioeconomic development. However, influenced by the historical legacy of the Soviet Union’s educational system and ideology, China’s higher education remains predominantly focused on knowledge dissemination, with traditional closed-book examinations persisting as the primary assessment method (Wan, 2006; McDougall, 2020). Under this pedagogical paradigm, students predominantly engage in rote memorization of key concepts to pass the summative final exams that determine their grades. Consequently, this instructional approach yields graduates demonstrating deficiencies in both theoretical understanding and, more significantly, applied professional competencies. In this context, China’s President has repeatedly emphasized: “Our need for higher education is more urgent than ever before, and our pursuit of scientific knowledge and outstanding talent is more intense than at any time in history.” Nevertheless, only a handful of Chinese universities have begun adopting innovative pedagogical approaches, while the majority continue to rely on traditional teaching methods. This has resulted in a significant gap between the comprehensive competencies of current graduate students and the evolving demands of societal development.

PBL is designed to cultivate students’ problem-solving and critical thinking abilities (McWilliam and Dawson, 2008; Chu et al., 2017; Duchovicova et al., 2018; Greenier, 2020). Characterized by project-driven tasks, team collaboration, and practice-oriented evaluation, PBL facilitates the organic integration of theoretical knowledge and practical skills (Ayas and Zeniuk, 2001; Lam et al., 2010; Kubiatko and Vaculová, 2011; Hartikainen et al., 2019). Compared with traditional Chinese teaching methods, PBL achieves three fundamental paradigm shifts. First, it transitions from teacher-centered instruction to student-centered learning. Second, it shifts from textbook-based knowledge transmission to project-task-oriented content delivery. Third, it moves from classroom lectures toward practical exploration. Consequently, PBL is widely recognized as an effective pedagogical approach and has been extensively adopted in many Western universities. Maros et al. (2023) observed that project-based pedagogy enhanced instructional efficiency and strengthened students’ self-directed learning capacities. Concurrently, Zen et al. (2022) documented its efficacy in cultivating dynamic learning environments, which elevated academic performance and nurtured leadership competencies.

Since China’s education department began training on “PBL” in 1998, many higher education teachers have conducted a series of explorations and practices on how to effectively implement PBL. Yang (2024) discussed the application of project-based teaching methods in computer course reform from the perspectives of teaching methods, content, and organization. Mei et al. (2020) aligning with the standards of Chinese engineering education professional certification, restructured the teaching content through projects in the “Paper Packaging Structure Design” course, achieving an organic integration of knowledge objectives, ability objectives, and quality objectives. Hu (2021) explored the applicability of project-based teaching methods and proposed that it is a primary approach for cultivating applied talents. Regrettably, although project-based teaching methods align with the student autonomy and competence development-oriented guidelines advocated by China’s higher education reform, qualitative research on their effectiveness in fostering innovative and creative capabilities among graduate students remains notably scarce (Xu and Liu, 2010; Fan, 2018; Han et al., 2024). Concurrently, research examining the adoption barriers and dissemination dynamics of project-based pedagogy from faculty perspectives remains scarce. These knowledge gaps constrain the advancement of higher education in China.

Building on the implementation of PBL in “Rural Social Survey and Research Methods”-a core graduate course for the Rural Development program at Hunan University of Technology, this study addresses two critical research questions. Firstly, does PBL demonstrate significantly greater effectiveness than traditional teaching methods in enhancing Chinese graduate students’ classroom participation and multidimensional competencies? Secondly, what factors explain Chinese teachers’ reluctance to adopt PBL approaches?

2 Method

2.1 Course selection

China is both a major agricultural country and a populous nation. A significant portion of its graduate students come from rural areas or grew up in rural regions. They serve not only as witnesses to China’s rural development, but more significantly as active participants and implementers of the nation’s two cornerstone rural strategies: the “Targeted Poverty Alleviation and Eradication” initiative and the “Rural Revitalization” campaign. Therefore, this study focuses on the compulsory course “Rural Social Survey and Research Methods” for Master’s students in Rural Development across multiple Chinese universities. This course is a compulsory course for first-semester Master’s students in Rural Development. It carries 2 credits and consists of 32 contact hours, delivered in 8 weeks with 4 h of instruction per week. This course aims to cultivate the core competencies of professional master’s students in three dimensions: at the cognitive level, they should develop a theoretical perspective and problem awareness as a professional researcher; at the methodological level, they should master standardized research tools and technical routes for investigation; at the practical level, they should possess comprehensive capabilities for independently conducting rural social research.

An in-depth study conducted on September 1, 2024, regarding former students and instructors of this course revealed that there were primarily two issues with the teaching model used in the past. Firstly, the classroom dynamic exhibited pronounced one-way knowledge transmission characteristics, predominantly relying on teacher-centered lectures. Secondly, the assessment adopted an “end-of-term written test (accounting for 70%) + regular attendance (accounting for 30%)” evaluation model, where the content of the written test overly focused on the mechanical memorization of textbook theoretical knowledge. This traditional teaching mode led to significant limitations in three aspects. Firstly, students demonstrated reactive learning behaviors with significantly diminished classroom participation and interaction; secondly, the knowledge acquisition remained at the theoretical level, with weak practical transformation ability; thirdly, the cultivation of innovative thinking and problem-solving ability was insufficient, making it difficult to meet the demand for compound talents in rural revitalization practices.

2.2 Implementation of PBL

In the PBL implementation of this course, instructors primarily proposed overarching research themes, while graduate students autonomously determined the project title, clarified the project tasks, formulated the project plan, implemented the work plan, and conducted strict project evaluation. In contrast, the traditional teaching method mainly involves teachers lecturing knowledge based on textbooks. This project is implemented as a new initiative aimed at cultivating students’ ability to systematically identify practical issues in rural development, scientifically design research plans, conduct standardized investigations, and produce research reports and papers of practical value. This will lay a solid professional foundation for their future careers in agricultural and rural management.

2.2.1 Project topic selection

The selection of an appropriate research topic is a critical step in rural social investigation and research, as it directly influences the project’s effectiveness, methodological approach, and scope of inquiry. Through discussions with students, it became evident that there is strong interest in China’s “Targeted Poverty Alleviation and Eradication” and “Rural Revitalization” policies. Students aim to understand the effectiveness and existing problems in China’s rural social development during the period of effectively consolidating and expanding the achievements in poverty alleviation and integrating them with rural revitalization. After evaluating research value, feasibility, and alignment with course objectives, we determined that “A Study on the Effectiveness of Consolidating and Expanding Poverty Alleviation Achievements in Synergy with Rural Revitalization” would serve as the most suitable research topic for PBL.

2.2.2 Project design

The class was divided into six project teams, each consisting of five students. Based on the overall requirements and main measures of poverty alleviation and rural revitalization, the project tasks are decomposed, the core goals of the projects are clarified, and the project tasks are effectively connected with theoretical knowledge and practical skills. Under faculty guidance, students systematically studied China and Hunan provincial policy documents on poverty alleviation and rural revitalization to identify key initiatives and evaluation metrics. Based on this policy analysis, the research objective was established as evaluating the effectiveness and challenges of rural revitalization efforts, with the project subsequently divided into eight thematic components: (1) industrial development; (2) relocation programs; (3) ecological compensation; (4) compulsory education; (5) social security; (6) cultural revitalization; (7) organizational development; and (8) talent cultivation. This comprehensive framework enabled systematic assessment across all critical dimensions of rural revitalization.

2.2.3 Project execution

The implementation of the project was carefully designed to align with the core curriculum content, enabling graduate students to enhance their theoretical understanding and practical application skills through hands-on project execution, thereby achieving optimal integration of theory and practice. The project implementation process consisted of four key steps. First, based on the selected research topic and assigned tasks, graduate students conducted comprehensive literature reviews through platforms including Web of Science, CNKI, and Chinese government websites to gather relevant materials and data, while examining existing research findings in the field to obtain reference research ideas and methodologies. Second, faculty members explained the critical components, key points, and precautions of research design and questionnaire development, after which students designed research protocols and questionnaires according to their project requirements, incorporating pilot surveys to identify and rectify potential errors or design flaws. Third, a combined approach of “self-directed learning with faculty support” was adopted, where students independently studied sampling theories and conducted sampling and field surveys, while instructors provided guidance to address technical questions encountered during implementation. Finally, following a “faculty-guided, student-led” approach, instructors demonstrated qualitative data organization, statistical software installation, data entry, and analysis techniques, after which students independently completed data processing and analysis before collaboratively composing a research report based on a faculty-provided framework.

2.2.4 Project evaluation

Project evaluation constitutes an essential component of PBL, serving as a scientifically rigorous method to assess graduate students’ mastery of theoretical knowledge and practical skills. The evaluation system employed a weighted scoring approach combining team peer assessment (40%), faculty evaluation (30%), and expert review (30%) to grade each team’s research report and presentation. Key evaluation criteria included: (1) clarity, specificity, and feasibility of project objectives and content; (2) appropriateness and rigor of research methodologies and analytical approaches; (3) compliance with academic writing standards and research ethics in report preparation; and (4) clarity and conciseness of presentation materials, along with delivery quality, logical coherence, and ability to address questions during defense sessions. Following the evaluation, faculty provided targeted feedback to each team regarding project implementation challenges, offering concrete improvement suggestions to optimize the pedagogical effectiveness of PBL in the curriculum.

2.3 Experimental design

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Hunan University of Technology (protocol code ZK2025–004). Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

This study focuses on two classes (n = 30 per class) from the Rural Development program at Hunan University of Technology. Students are assigned to classes through a randomized process conducted by the school, which is unrelated to their personal information such as admission scores, gender. The control group was taught using traditional teaching methods, while the experimental group employed project-based learning (PBL). Both classes were instructed by the same teacher. To evaluate whether PBL enhances graduate students’ classroom engagement and comprehensive competencies, we administered a standardized questionnaire survey incorporating validated measurement scales.

As shown in Table 1, this survey includes 11 items. For each item, students are required to give a response of “strongly agree,” “agree,” “neutral,” “disagree,” or “strongly disagree,” which used the Likert scale on December 31, 2024. Students’ responses are translated into countable scores on a scale ranging from 1 to 5. In particular, the item of “strongly agree” corresponds with value of 5; the item of “agree” corresponds with value of 4; the item of “neutral” corresponds with value of 3; the item of “disagree” corresponds with value of 2; and the item of “strongly disagree” corresponds with value of 1. The first and second questions are designed to assess the impact of PBL on students’ learning initiative, while the fourth to seventh questions are intended to evaluate its effect on students’ comprehensive competencies. When the experimental group scores higher on questions 1 and 2 compared to the control group, it indicates that PBL has enhanced students’ learning initiative. When the experimental group scores higher on questions 4 to 7 compared to the control group, it demonstrates that PBL has improved students’ comprehensive competencies. All the survey responses are anonymous.

Table 1

Table 1. The student feedback form.

Student grades consist of a final score and a regular performance score, weighted at 70 and 30%, respectively. The final score is determined through evaluations of each team’s (The experimental group worked in teams, while the control group worked individually) submitted project research report and PowerPoint presentation, incorporating peer evaluations among teams, teacher evaluations, and expert evaluations, weighted at 40, 30, and 30%, respectively. The comprehensive assessment score serves as the final score for all members of the team. The regular performance score is based on individual attendance, class participation (e.g., frequency of raising hands to answer questions), and attentiveness (e.g., “head-up rate,” reflecting how often students avoid using phones and focus on lectures), weighted at 30, 30, and 40%, respectively. The grading criteria were informed to all students during the initial session of the course. The students’ grades are classified into five levels, namely Excellent, Good, Average, Pass, and Fail, corresponding to the numerical scores of A, B, C, D, and E, respectively. Moreover, students’ final grade of this course is taken as an important indicator of students’ learn as well. When the experimental group’s final scores are significantly higher than those of the control group, it shows that PBL has promoted the improvement of academic performance.

A randomized questionnaire survey was administered to 50 full-time faculty members at Hunan University of Technology to assess teaching practices on September 2, 2025. These 50 full-time teachers were randomly selected from across the entire university and are not limited to instructors of the “Rural Social Survey and Research Methods” course. All the survey responses are anonymous. Table 2 summarizes some statistical information of the questionnaire participants. Most of the participants had over 10 years of teaching experience, accounting for 70%. 80% of the teachers taught natural science courses, and 20% taught humanities science courses. Only 16% of the teachers adopted the PBL. Non-adopting teachers were surveyed using multiple-choice questions to investigate their reasons for not implementing PBL.

Table 2

Table 2. Demographic characteristics of the participating teachers.

2.4 Statistical analyses

An independent samples t-test was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 20 to compare the means of the control and experimental groups. If the prerequisites for using this test were not met, we would have to use a nonparametric alternative, the Mann–Whitney test.

3 Results

3.1 Students’ feedback

The average scores of each question of the survey are summarized in Figure 1. The experimental-group students demonstrated average scores exceeding 4 across all items from 1 to 11, which were significantly higher than those of the traditional teaching method, except for question 9. Notably, for Items 2–7 and 9–11, all experimental group respondents selected either ‘Agree’ or ‘Strongly Agree’ on the Likert scale. In contrast, the control group exhibited instances of ‘Strongly Disagree’ responses for Items 4–6, 8, and 11. It indicates that students have given a positive evaluation of the PBL.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Performance on questionnaire items 1–11. Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments at the p < 0.05 level.

3.2 Students’ scores

The results presented in Figure 2 demonstrate that the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group, with 90% of experimental students attaining A or B grades versus merely 56.67% in the control condition. No students in the experimental group received grade D, whereas four control group participants scored at this level. These findings demonstrate that PBL significantly enhances academic performance among students.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Students’ course grades.

3.3 Teacher’s feedback

Table 3 presents the key barriers to PBL implementation reported by non-adopting teachers. Habitual-based reliance and lack of instructional resources constitute the primary factors influencing teachers’ adoption of project-based learning. Particularly in humanities and social sciences, faculty lack essential resources such as field research sites and digital tools. Prior project experience significantly influences adoption decisions, as 71.43% of teachers reported either no or only one previous project engagement, resulting in insufficient management expertise and reluctance toward PBL implementation. Survey data revealed that exactly two-thirds (66.67%) of non-adopting teachers included the lack of performance-based incentives in their rationale for rejecting PBL. 66.67% of the teachers indicated that they were reluctant to adopt the PBL because it requires a significant amount of time and effort. 59.52% of the teachers pointed out that professional training on project-based teaching methods was also an important influencing factor. This is because those who have not received professional training in project design, process management, or multiple evaluation methods lack confidence in how to effectively implement the project-based teaching method. 50% of teachers expressed opposition to project-based learning, citing concerns over excessive student autonomy potentially leading to direction deviation, schedule delays, and elevated classroom management risks. 42.86% of teachers identified class size as an impediment to project-based learning implementation, citing difficulties in monitoring each group’s progress and providing individualized guidance due to excessive student numbers. These critical reflections underscore that successful PBL implementation requires coordinated efforts among teachers, administrators, and institutions, while acknowledging inherent methodological constraints - particularly its limited suitability for large-class settings.

Table 3

Table 3. Primary reasons for teachers’ non-adoption of PBL.

4 Discussion

This study demonstrates that PBL represents a highly effective pedagogical approach that enjoys strong student endorsement, which is consistent with the previous research results (Song, 2018; Chen and Yang, 2019; Lavonen et al., 2022; Maros et al., 2023). First, PBL substantially enhances students’ learning initiative and classroom engagement. Notably, all participants in the experimental group expressed agreement or strong agreement that PBL facilitated their research work (100%) and boosted their research interest (100%). These results stand in stark contrast to outcomes from the traditional teaching group, where only 13.33 and 33.33% of students reported comparable levels of agreement for these respective aspects. Instructional supervision data revealed that PBL classrooms demonstrated higher metrics than traditional lectures in: attendance rates, front-row seating occupancy, and classroom engagement levels. This observed superiority of PBL may stem from its fundamental emphasis on learner autonomy. Unlike traditional didactic approaches, PBL grants students substantial independence in determining project team composition, research topics, and methodological frameworks. Such autonomy likely enhances intrinsic motivation and personal investment in learning outcomes. Secondly, PBL demonstrates significant effectiveness in developing students’ multidimensional competencies. All experimental group participants (100%) agreed or strongly agreed that PBL improved their learning capacity, practical skills, collaborative abilities, and research capabilities. This might be because throughout the entire project process, students need to independently acquire a lot of knowledge related to the project topic, form a team, and complete all the tasks together in a team format, including project research and project report writing (Helle et al., 2006; Turek, 2008; Larmer and Mergendoller, 2010; Chmelárová and Pasiar, 2017). Additionally, PBL fosters significant improvement in faculty-student relationships through three transformative mechanisms: transparent assessment criteria, differentiated mentoring approaches, and collaborative project retrospectives. The teacher-student relationship has evolved from a traditional “authority-compliance” model to a contemporary “co-creation partnership” paradigm. Finally, the PBL improved the academic performance. This may result from enhanced engagement and motivational drivers, including intrinsic motivation derived from authentic challenges and tangible project outcomes that boost self-efficacy.

The findings of this study indicate that abundant project experience, training opportunities, and teaching resources positively influence the implementation of PBL. These findings are consistent with the results of previous studies (Zin et al., 2017; Sukacke et al., 2022; Cai et al., 2023; Sánchez-García and Reyes-de-Cózar, 2025). Teachers with substantial project experience demonstrate enhanced capacity for designing authentic tasks that effectively balance challenge levels with students’ competencies. They exhibit particular proficiency in providing timely scaffolding and establishing more appropriate formative assessment criteria. Notably, the positive classroom feedback from students further reinforces these teachers’ willingness to adopt project-based learning approaches, creating a virtuous cycle of pedagogical improvement. However, the funding rate of China’s National Natural Science Foundation (NSFC) has remained below 20% for years, leaving many university faculty members without experience in leading research projects. This lack of project management expertise may hinder the widespread adoption of PBL in the Chinese educational context. In addition, professional training has been shown to significantly improve teachers’ instructional capabilities. As Cai et al. (2023) found, educators who participated in PBL training programs demonstrated a stronger inclination to adopt PBL methodologies in their teaching practices. Availability of teaching resources serves as another critical factor influencing teachers’ methodological choices. When adequately supported with sufficient resources, educators demonstrate greater enthusiasm for incorporating PBL into their instructional practices (Lam et al., 2010). The lack of PBL resources negatively affected the implementation of PBL (Lantada and De Maria, 2019).

Time cost and benefits are the key influencing factors in the implementation of project-based teaching method. On the one hand, implementing PBL requires more time and effort in both preparation and classroom instruction compared to traditional teaching methods. However, current full-time teachers are not only responsible for teaching tasks but also undertake non-teaching duties such as serving as homeroom teachers and psychological counselors, which significantly reduces the time they can devote to teaching. As demonstrated by Appleton and Kindt (1999), insufficient time allocation directly impacts teachers’ confidence levels, making them less likely to adopt innovative pedagogical approaches like PBL. On the other hand, the quality of teaching outcomes is not directly related to salary levels. The size of the class also influences the choice of teaching methods by teachers, as larger classes impose greater demands on instructors’ comprehensive teaching competencies (Zhou and Sun, 2011). Research indicates that effective implementation of PBL requires optimal class sizes, with empirical evidence suggesting a recommended maximum of 30 students per class. Teacher age is also a factor that affects the implementation of PBL. The older the teachers are, the less willing they are to adopt project-based teaching method. Our survey data shows that teachers under the age of 40 had the highest adoption rate of PBL, while none of the teachers over the age of 50 utilized this approach. This phenomenon may be attributed to the trajectory of teachers’ self-efficacy, which typically follows an inverted U-shaped curve throughout their professional careers (Klassen and Chiu, 2010). As suggested by Bandura’s (1997) social cognitive theory, educators’ self-belief in their instructional capabilities tends to increase during early and mid-career stages, peaking at intermediate experience levels, but subsequently declines during later career phases. Moreover, teachers approaching the end of their careers have typically experienced multiple waves of educational reforms, which may contribute to their reluctance to adopt new pedagogical approaches such as PBL. This phenomenon can be understood through the lens of “reform fatigue” - a well-documented psychological state wherein educators, after undergoing numerous curricular and instructional changes, develop skepticism towards new initiatives (Hargreaves and Quarterly, 2006).

Unlike previous studies that solely focused on the implementers or beneficiaries of curriculum reform, this research systematically connects teachers and students. By combining quantitative and qualitative analysis, it evaluates the positive role of PBL in promoting student learning and analyzes the main factors influencing teachers’ adoption of this approach, providing new insights for the reform of graduate curricula in China. However, as this study was based on a short-term trial of a single course, and the student sample was relatively homogeneous (all participants were master’s students majoring in rural development at Hunan University of Technology), whether the findings can be generalized to a wider range of Chinese universities still requires further investigation.

5 Conclusion

This study demonstrates that PBL significantly enhances students’ learning initiative, academic performance, and comprehensive competencies. Student feedback on PBL was markedly more positive compared to traditional teaching methods. It is worth noting that whether teachers adopt the project-based teaching method depends on multiple factors. For instance, whether there are corresponding teaching resources, whether they have rich experience in conducting research projects, the degree of reliance on traditional teaching methods, and a reasonable performance system. Therefore, to implement the project-based teaching method in China’s higher education system, it requires the joint efforts of teachers, educational administrators, and universities.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

The studies involving humans were approved by Research Integrity and Ethics Management Committee of Hunan University of Technology. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author contributions

FH: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – review & editing. JX: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Visualization, Writing – original draft. YP: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft. CY: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This study was funded by the Science and Technology Program of the Tibet Autonomous Region (XZ202501ZY0086) and the Scientific Research Project of the Department of Education of Hunan Province (25C0359).

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.

References

Appleton, K., and Kindt, I. (1999). Why teach primary science? Influences on beginning teachers’ practices. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 21, 155–168.

Google Scholar

Ayas, K., and Zeniuk, N. (2001). Project-based learning: building communities of reflective practitioners. Manag. Learn. 32, 61–76.

Google Scholar

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman.

Google Scholar

Cai, Z. L., Zhu, J. X., Yu, Y., and Tian, S. Q. (2023). Elementary school teachers' attitudes towards project-based learning in China. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 10. doi: 10.1057/s41599-023-02206-8

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chen, C. H., and Yang, Y. C. (2019). Revisiting the effects of project-based learning on students' academic achievement: a meta-analysis investigating moderators. Educ. Res. Rev. 26, 71–81.

Google Scholar

Chmelárová, Z., and Pasiar, L. 2017 Teacher’s overview on project teaching in economic subjects. Reviewed Papers of the, 2nd International Scientific Conference – Schola nova, quo vadis? Berková, Pasiar; Extrasystem, Praha, Czech Republic

Google Scholar

Chu, S. K. W., Reynolds, R. B., Tavares, N. J., Notari, M., and Lee, C. W. Y. (2017). 21st Century Skills Development through Inquiry-based Learning. Berlin: Springer.

Google Scholar

Duchovicova, J., Sabo, A., Petrova, G., and Hosova, D. (2018). Stimulation of creativity as a prerequisite of permanent sustainability form personality development of gifted learners. J. Interdisc. Res. 8, 54–60.

Google Scholar

Fan, X. Y. (2018). Research on Oral English flipped classroom project-based teaching model based on cooperative learning in China. Educ. Sci. Theory Pract. 18, 1988–1998.

Google Scholar

Greenier, V. T. (2020). The 10Cs of project-based learning TESOL curriculum. Innov. Lang. Learn. Teach. 14, 27–36.

Google Scholar

Han, C. Y., Liang, Y. L., Tan, H. Y., and Ren, A. Q. (2024). Exploratory application of project-based learning in the "food packaging science" course. Pack. Eng. 45, 83–86.

Google Scholar

Hargreaves,, and Quarterly, A. J. E. A. (2006). Educational change over time? The sustainability and nonsustainability of three decades of secondary school change and continuity. Educ. Adm. Q. 42, 313–324.

Google Scholar

Hartikainen, S., Rintala, H., Pylväs, L., and Nokelainen, P. (2019). The concept of active learning and the measurement of learning outcomes: a review of research in engineering higher education. Educ. Sci. 9:276. doi: 10.3390/EDUCSCI9040276

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Helle, L., Tynjälä, P., and Olkinuora, E. (2006). Project-based learning in post-secondary education -: theory, practice and rubber sling shots. High. Educ. 51, 287–314.

Google Scholar

Hu, J. F. (2021). Practical difficulties and logical path of applied talents cultivation——also on the applicability of project teaching method. China's Vocat. Tech. Educ. 26, 24–29.

Google Scholar

Klassen, R. M., and Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers' self-efficacy and job satisfaction: teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. J. Educ. Psychol. 102, 741–756.

Google Scholar

Kubiatko, M., and Vaculová, I. (2011). Project-based learning: characteristic and the experiences with application in the science subjects. Energy Educ. Sci. Technol. Soc. Educ. Stud. 3, 65–74.

Google Scholar

Lam, S. F., Cheng, R. W. Y., and Choy, H. C. (2010). School support and teacher motivation to implement project-based learning. Learn. Instr. 20, 487–497.

Google Scholar

Lantada, A. D., and De Maria, C. (2019). Towards open-source and collaborative project-based learning in engineering education: situation, resources and challenges. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 35, 1279–1289.

Google Scholar

Larmer, J., and Mergendoller, J. R. (2010). 7 essentials for project-based learning. Educ. Leadership 68, 34–37.

Google Scholar

Lavonen, L., Loukomies, A., Vartiainen, J., and Palojoki, P. (2022). Supporting pupils' scientific and engineering practices in everyday life contexts at the primary school level during a project-based learning unit in Finland. Education 50:17. doi: 10.1080/03004279.2021.1921823

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Maros, M., Korenkova, M., Fila, M., Levicky, M., and Schoberova, M. (2023). Project-based learning and its effectiveness: evidence from Slovakia. Interact. Learn. Environ. 31, 4147–4155.

Google Scholar

McDougall, J. I. (2020). Whither the global in Chinese higher education? The production of space in China's "new era" universities. China Q. 244, 1013–1030.

Google Scholar

McWilliam, E., and Dawson, S. (2008). Teaching for creativity: towards sustainable and replicable pedagogical practice. High. Educ. 56, 633–643.

Google Scholar

Mei, L. Y., Chen, J., and Shao, Y. P. (2020). Construction and practice of a blended learning model for the "paper packaging structure design" course based on project-based learning. Pack. Eng. 41, 47–51.

Google Scholar

Sánchez-García, R., and Reyes-de-Cózar, S. (2025). Enhancing project-based learning: a framework for optimizing structural design and implementation-a systematic review with a sustainable focus. Sustainability 17. doi: 10.3390/su17114978

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Song, Y. J. (2018). Improving primary students' collaborative problem solving competency in project-based science learning with productive failure instructional design in a seamless learning environment. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 66, 979–1008.

Google Scholar

Sukacke, V., Guerra, A., Ellinger, D., Carlos, V., Petroniene, S., Gaiziuniene, L., et al. (2022). Towards active evidence-based learning in engineering education: a systematic literature review of PBL, PjBL, and CBL. Sustainability 14:13955. doi: 10.3390/su142113955

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Turek, I. (2008). Didaktika. Bratislava: Iura Edition.

Google Scholar

Wan, Y. M. (2006). Expansion of Chinese higher education since 1998: its causes and outcomes. Asia Pac. Educ. Rev. 7, 19–31.

Google Scholar

Xu, Y. Y., and Liu, W. Q. (2010). A project-based learning approach: a case study in China. Asia Pac. Educ. Rev. 11:363-370.

Google Scholar

Yang, Z. (2024). Research on computer teaching reform oriented at project-based teaching method. Mech. Des. 41, 158–162.

Google Scholar

Zen, Z., Reflianto,, Syamsuar,, and Ariani, F. (2022). Academic achievement: the effect of project-based online learning method and student engagement. Heliyon 8:e11509. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11509

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Zhou, P. D., and Sun, Q. (2011). The practice and exploration of project-based teaching method in the course "rural social survey methods". China Educ. Teach. Forum 35, 157–159.

Google Scholar

Zin, W., Williams, A., and Sher, W. (2017). Introducing PBL in engineering education: challenges lecturers and students confront. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 33, 974–983.

Google Scholar