Abstract
Research on the advantages and disadvantages of project-based learning (PBL) among gifted pupils studying physics is scarce. This mixed-methods study investigates engagement, experiences, and learning outcomes among gifted Finnish upper-secondary-level students learning physics through PBL. A six-lesson PBL module on basic Newtonian mechanics was designed and implemented for a group of gifted students ( N = 38), whereas a traditional teacher-driven approach was used among a control group ( N = 38) of gifted students. Data were collected by means of a questionnaire, interviews and a physics test. According to the results, PBL met the preconditions (challenge, skill, interest) for engaging the students in learning physics. It generated interest in learning among the vast majority, but not as many found it challenging. The findings also highlight the impact of autonomy when learning through PBL. No differences in overall learning outcomes were found between the groups.
Highlights
Background informationGeneral interest in learning physics was very high among the students, but the perceived easiness of the subject was polarized (Table 6)
The aim in this study is to investigate engagement, experiences, and learning outcomes among gifted students exposed to the project-based learning (PBL) approach in their physics learning
This study investigated engagement, experiences, and learning outcomes among gifted Finnish upper-secondary-level pupils studying the basics of Newtonian mechanics through PBL
Summary
General interest in learning physics was very high among the students, but the perceived easiness of the subject was polarized (Table 6). RQ3: What Differences Emerge in the Learning Outcomes of Gifted Students in the PBL Compared with the Traditionally Instructed Group?. According to the Shapiro–Wilk test of normality, both pretest and post-test scores in the PBL and the control groups were normally distributed (pprePBL = .567, ppreControl = .059, ppostPBL = .934, ppostControl = .345). Given that Levene’s test showed equal variances (ppre = .299, ppost = .716), we compared the scores using t-tests. Technical problems prevented one student in the PBL group from finishing her pretest and, her post-test result was omitted from the analysis. No statistically significant differences in the total scores were found between the groups in either test (Table 7)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
