University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Integrating project-based learning and work-based learning into a coherent program: is the sum worth more than its parts?

(USC Thesis Other)

Integrating project-based learning and work-based learning into a coherent program: is the sum worth more than its parts?

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Integrating Project-Based Learning and Work-Based Learning Into a Coherent Program:
Is the Sum Worth More Than Its Parts?
by
Kristoffer Elias David Munden

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2022

© Copyright by Kristoffer Elias David Munden 2022
All Rights Reserved

iii

The Committee for Kristoffer Elias David Munden certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Chip Kimball
Darline P. Robles
Lawrence Picus, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv

Abstract
The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to learn how alumni of the Explore program at an
International School in Southeast Asia (ISSA) perceive the advantages and disadvantages of the
project-based learning (PBL) and work-based learning (WBL) aspects of the program and how,
if at all, they applied their learning to their lives after completing the program. Applying a
cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) framework, the study collected data about each of the
activity system components to understand how they all contributed to the outcome of application
of knowledge and skills after program completion. Students perceived the advantages of PBL to
be the development of skills such as time management, problem solving, collaboration, and
research skills. They perceived the disadvantages of PBL to be the open-ended nature of projects,
some projects lacked authenticity, and they felt that peers in traditional classes learned more
content. Students perceived the advantages of WBL to be the development of career skills, that
their internship helped them decide on a college major or career, and that they felt they were
engaging in authentic work. Disadvantages were mostly limited to lower-quality internships that
were not closely aligned with students’ interests and were not engaged in meaningful work.
Students also reported having difficulties managing a schedule involving them attending their
internships during the school year. Alumni reported that they were able to apply their learning
after completing the program in many ways, including applying their time management and
career skills, and feeling a strong sense of preparation for college.
Keywords: project-based learning, work-based learning, secondary, internships, cultural-
historical activity theory, high school, 21
st
century skills, interdisciplinary
v

Dedication
To all my students, past and present, who have helped me become the educator I am today.

vi

Acknowledgements
Bringing a dissertation to completion is no small task, and though my name is written as
its author, so many people have contributed to making this work possible. First, I would like to
say thank you to my amazing dissertation committee, Dr. Larry Picus, Dr. Darline Robles & Dr.
Chip Kimball. Your advice and guidance have helped me throughout this entire process.
Having incredible colleagues has been a joy. I must extend my deep gratitude to my
outstanding colleagues in 6A and Quest. We have worked and laughed together over the years to
create incredible learning opportunities for our students. Our work together has served as the
origin for my dissertation and has deepened my passion for providing students with authentic and
meaningful learning experiences. Let’s open our own school one day!
Clearing my Saturdays for the past three years has not been fun, but being able to
complete this program alongside my USC cohort has made the experience more bearable. Thank
you, cohort, for sharing your thoughts and perspectives throughout all of our classes; you have
shaped my thinking over these past three years. Thank you as well for the countless laughs,
venting sessions, and hallway chats that have made this experience more enjoyable. I cannot wait
to see where our adventures lead us now that we are done with our doctorates!
I would also like to thank my family and friends. You have been alongside me every step
of the way, and my desire to spend time with you has helped keep me efficient while completing
this degree! Thank you to my father, Brian. Though you are no longer with us, I hope I have
made you proud. My mother, Eloisa, also deserves a special thank you. She has always been my
greatest cheerleader and has always believed in me no matter what. I can only hope that this
dissertation will live up to the standards she has set out in her many “dissertations” over the
years.
vii

Lastly, I would like to especially thank my soulmate, Nadia. Thank you for your love and
support as I completed this doctorate. Thank you for making me smile and encouraging me
through my frustrations, and yes, thank you as well for coming in to the office to distract me. I
could not imagine life without you. Now that this chapter is closed, I can’t wait to find out
what’s next.

viii

Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... xiii
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. xiv
Chapter 1: Overview of the Study .................................................................................................. 1
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 5
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 7
Importance of the Study ...................................................................................................... 8
Limitations .......................................................................................................................... 9
Delimitations ..................................................................................................................... 10
Assumptions ...................................................................................................................... 10
Definitions ......................................................................................................................... 10
Chapter 2: Literature Review ........................................................................................................ 12
Experiential Learning Theory ........................................................................................... 12
Work-Based Learning & Internships ................................................................................ 13
Overview of WBL ......................................................................................................... 13
Advantages of WBL ..................................................................................................... 15
Internships ..................................................................................................................... 16
Key Features and Characteristics of Internships ........................................................... 17
Implementation of Internships ...................................................................................... 19
Effects of Internships .................................................................................................... 20
ix

Limitations of WBL ...................................................................................................... 21
Project-Based Learning ..................................................................................................... 22
Historical and Theoretical Background of PBL ............................................................ 23
Main Features of PBL ................................................................................................... 24
Effects of PBL ............................................................................................................... 26
Limitations of PBL ....................................................................................................... 28
Interdisciplinary PBL .................................................................................................... 29
Conclusion & Gap in the Literature .................................................................................. 32
Chapter 3: Methodology ............................................................................................................... 34
Conceptual Framework: Cultural-Historical Activity Framework ................................... 36
Sampling Procedures ........................................................................................................ 40
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 41
Survey Instrument Design ............................................................................................. 41
Interview Protocol Design ............................................................................................ 43
Data Collection Procedures ............................................................................................... 43
Survey ........................................................................................................................... 43
Interviews ...................................................................................................................... 44
Data Analysis Approach ................................................................................................... 45
Quantitative Analysis .................................................................................................... 45
Qualitative Analysis ...................................................................................................... 45
Combined Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Data ............................................ 46
Positionality & Role of the Researcher ............................................................................. 46
Ethical Considerations ...................................................................................................... 48
x

Credibility & Trustworthiness .......................................................................................... 50
Chapter 4: Results, Findings & Discussion .................................................................................. 53
Overview of Participants ................................................................................................... 54
Quantitative Results .......................................................................................................... 56
Discussion of Quantitative Results for Project-Based Learning ....................................... 65
Discussion of Quantitative Results for Work-Based Learning ......................................... 66
Qualitative Findings .......................................................................................................... 68
Subject ........................................................................................................................... 71
Following Interests .................................................................................................... 71
Self-Efficacy ............................................................................................................. 71
Community ................................................................................................................... 72
Closeness of Relationships ....................................................................................... 72
Disconnection from the Larger School Community ................................................. 73
Strong Connection with Advisors ............................................................................. 73
Usefulness of Mentors .............................................................................................. 74
Professional Community at Work ............................................................................. 74
Division of Labor .......................................................................................................... 74
Minimization at Work ............................................................................................... 75
Student Ownership of Time at School ...................................................................... 75
Challenges Working in Project Groups .................................................................... 76
Rules ............................................................................................................................. 76
Tools ............................................................................................................................. 77
Project-Based Learning ............................................................................................. 77
xi

Interdisciplinary. ................................................................................................... 77
Student-Designed Study & Sense of Ownership. ................................................. 77
Authenticity. .......................................................................................................... 78
Open-Endedness. .................................................................................................. 78
Repetitiveness & Lack of Action. ......................................................................... 79
Internships ................................................................................................................. 79
Real-World Experience. ........................................................................................ 79
Level of Interest. ................................................................................................... 79
Difficulties Managing the Schedule. ..................................................................... 80
Object ............................................................................................................................ 80
Time Management & Productivity ........................................................................... 81
Career Skills .............................................................................................................. 81
Research Skills .......................................................................................................... 81
Less Compared to Traditional Learning ................................................................... 82
Outcome ........................................................................................................................ 82
Career Skills .............................................................................................................. 82
Research Skills .......................................................................................................... 83
Time Management & Productivity ........................................................................... 83
Seeking Similar Experiences .................................................................................... 84
Confidence & College Readiness ............................................................................. 84
Synthesis ........................................................................................................................... 85
RQ 1: Advantages and Disadvantages of PBL and WBL in Explore ........................... 85
Project-Based Learning ............................................................................................. 85
xii

Work-Based Learning ............................................................................................... 86
Overall Impressions of Explore ................................................................................ 89
RQ 2: How Alumni Have Applied Their Learning ...................................................... 90
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 91
Chapter 5: Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 94
Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................ 95
RQ 1: Advantages and Disadvantages of PBL and WBL in Explore ........................... 95
RQ 2: How Alumni Have Applied Their Learning ...................................................... 99
Limitations of the Study .................................................................................................... 99
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................. 101
Implications for PBL ................................................................................................... 102
Implications for WBL ................................................................................................. 104
Overall Implications .................................................................................................... 105
Recommendations for Research ..................................................................................... 106
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 108
References ................................................................................................................................... 110
Appendix A: Survey Instrument ................................................................................................. 120
Appendix B: Semi-Structured Interview Protocol ...................................................................... 130
Appendix C: Study Information Sheet ........................................................................................ 134

xiii

List of Tables
Table 1: Study Participant Demographics .................................................................................... 55
Table 2: Pseudonyms and Profiles of Interview Participants ....................................................... 56
Table 3: Survey Items Associated with Variable Names .............................................................. 58
Table 4: Strong Relationships (r s ≥ 0.6) Between PBL and WBL Variables ............................... 62
Table 5: Results From an Exploratory Factor Analysis of the Explore Alumni Survey .............. 63
Table 6: Themes, Sub-Themes, and Sub-Sub-Themes ................................................................. 70

xiv

List of Figures
Figure 1: Convergent Parallel Design ........................................................................................... 35
Figure 2: Activity System of the Explore Program ...................................................................... 38
Figure 3: Survey Results for Project-Based Learning Items ........................................................ 57
Figure 4: Survey Results for Work-Based Learning Items ........................................................... 57
Figure 5: Distribution of Summed Project-Based Learning Items ............................................... 60
Figure 6: Distribution of Summed Work-Based Learning Items .................................................. 60
Figure 7: Spearman’s Rho Between All Variables in the Explore Survey ................................... 61
Figure 8: Activity System of the Explore Program ...................................................................... 69

1
Chapter 1: Overview of the Study
Now that we are in the third decade of the 21
st
century, some of the more traditional jobs
of the 20
th
century have diminished, and we must now prepare students for jobs and a future that
we cannot even fathom right now. As technology improves, jobs that used to be done by humans
are now increasingly done by computers (Dede, 2009; Levy & Murnane, 2013; Mirra & Garcia,
2021). Moving forward, the jobs that will exist will be the jobs that computers cannot do; these
jobs require problem identification, problem solving, and complex communication (Dede, 2009;
Patrinos, 2020; Voogt & Roblin, 2010). Hence, schools and educators have been working hard to
prepare students with 21
st
century skills to ensure that they are able to achieve their dreams after
their schooling ends.
One school that has worked very hard to prepare students for the future is International
School in Southeast Asia (ISSA)
1
. ISSA is a large, private, K-12 international school in a large
city in Southeast Asia that primarily serves the wealthy expatriate community of the city. ISSA
has a highly diverse student body with over 60 different citizenships represented, the majority of
whom are American. Given the school’s expatriate community, there is a relatively high level of
student turnover with the average tenure being approximately four years.
ISSA prides itself on having a “tradition of innovation” (ISSA superintendent, 2016) and
explicitly states in its mission and vision statement that they aim to cultivate thinkers prepared
for the future.
2
One innovation that the school has introduced is the high school Explore
3

program, a year-long program for Grades 11 and 12 students. The program is designed to prepare
students for college and beyond with an explicit focus on 21
st
century skills (Bright et al., 2015).

1
A pseudonym is used to protect the school site’s identity.
2
The URL of the school website is not given to protect the school site’s identity.
3
A pseudonym is used to protect the program’s identity.

2
Explore brings together elements of project-based learning (PBL) and work-based learning
(WBL) through interdisciplinary units and experiential learning opportunities that emphasize
connections to the real world (school website, 2021). In the original white paper proposing the
program, the Explore advisors discussed how the program is designed to teach 21
st
century skills
and provide students with practice at essential skills required in college and beyond through
inquiry and a personalized approach (Bright et al., 2015). The desire to prepare students for the
future with 21
st
century skills is apparent in the Explore program.
Explore is interdisciplinary in nature and students receive course credit in English,
science, mathematics, and social studies. All these disciplines are integrated and the curriculum
is structured around several units in which students complete projects that seek to answer a
driving question. Students are given high levels of autonomy in selecting their own driving
questions and final products. Students also complete a major project: the year-long student-
designed study (SDS) on a topic of their choice, that typically culminates in a thesis paper.
Another major aspect of Explore is its internships program in which students complete an
unpaid, off-campus internship over 10-12 weeks. Students apply to, and are hired by,
organizations that are aligned with their skills and interests. Students receive high levels of
support from their Explore advisors and internship supervisors in the form of regular check-ins
and feedback surveys. The internships program is closely integrated into the curriculum as
students complete a variety of assignments designed to capture their learning from their
internships. Students also earn course grades based on their performance at their internship.
(Note that in Explore, internships are referred to as “partnerships;” in this study, both terms are
used interchangeably.) The PBL and WBL elements of Explore are explicitly designed to prepare
students with 21
st
century skills.

3
Several frameworks have outlined what constitutes 21
st
century skills, all of which share
many similarities. One noted framework is from the Partnership for 21
st
Century Learning
(2019). Included in the framework is a variety of learning and innovation skills (critical thinking,
communication, collaboration, and creativity) and life and career skills (e.g., flexibility,
adaptability, and self-direction). The enGauge Framework, from the North Central Regional
Educational Laboratory (NCREL), included digital-age literacy, inventive thinking, effective
communication, and high productivity (Lemke, 2002). Finally, the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD, 2018) released their Learning Framework 2030 that
called for “future-ready students” to exercise “agency” through development of knowledge,
skills, and attitudes and values. Among these skills are critical and creative thinking, learning to
learn, self-regulation, and collaboration (OECD, 2018).
The numerous overlaps between these different frameworks suggest that there is
crystallization around what experts believe students need to be successful in the future.
Fundamentally, these skills are about critical thinking and collaboration, as these will enable
students to apply and adapt knowledge and skills rather than recall and reproduce knowledge.
Put another way, 21
st
century skills involve “higher-order thinking skills, deeper learning
outcomes, and complex thinking and communication skills” (Saavedra & Opfer, 2012, p. 8).
Even more succinctly, Wagner (2015) described 21
st
century skills as “What the world cares
about – what matters most – is what our students can do with what they know” (p. 178). These
21
st
century skills, then, are less about rote memorization and more about thinking and
application of knowledge. Students should be doers and creators, not merely reproducers.
Saavedra and Opfer (2012) argued that in order to learn 21
st
century skills, 21
st
century
teaching needs to occur. They listed nine “lessons” that they have learned from educational

4
researchers about how to teach 21
st
century skills. The lessons are making learning relevant to
students’ lives, teaching through academic disciplines, developing higher-order thinking skills
that promote deep understanding, encouraging learning transfer to new contexts, teaching
students how to learn, addressing misunderstandings directly to improve and deepen
understanding, prioritizing collaboration, using technology to support learning, and fostering
creativity.
Many approaches to teaching and learning have been introduced or modified to teach 21
st

century skills and embody these different lessons. These various approaches include inquiry-
based instruction, problem- and project-based learning, work-based learning, performance-based
assessments, personalized learning, competency-based frameworks, authentic learning, just to
name a few (Chu et al., 2021; Gervais, 2016; Kivunja, 2014; Martinez, 2022). Proponents of all
of these approaches believe that they will all better prepare students for the future.
Interesting to note is that many of these approaches are grounded in educational theory
from decades ago, even though they all aim to teach 21
st
century skills. For example, the ideas of
Dewey (1910), Kilpatrick (1918), and Vygostky (cited in Schunk, 2020) about constructivist
pedagogy have influenced many of these approaches mentioned in the previous paragraph. So,
while the theoretical background of all these approaches is not new, educators have found new
and innovative ways to operationalize them in an effort to help prepare students for the future.
A very commonly implemented learning approach is project-based learning (PBL). In
PBL, students drive their learning by creating a project that answers a driving question framed
around a real-world problem (Bell, 2010). Students are able to demonstrate high degrees of
agency by designing their inquiry and engaging in a variety of self-directed research skills (Bell,
2010). There is a broad research base, discussed in Chapter 2, that documents the

5
implementation and effects of PBL. Among the notable effects of PBL including improved
learning motivation and problem solving skills, higher performance on standardized tests,
increased creativity, and stronger collaboration (Chiang & Lee, 2016; Holmes & Hwang, 2016;
Krajcik et al., 2021; Virtue & Hinnant-Crawford, 2019).
Another learning approach that aims to teach 21
st
century skills is work-based learning
(WBL). Although there are fewer examples of implementation than for PBL, it is compelling
because it directly aims for students’ career readiness. Many models of WBL exist, but they all
seek to enhance students’ learning by connecting academics to the real world (Darche et al.,
2009). Similar to PBL, there is also a broad research base that has documented the
implementation and effects of WBL. Specific to 21
st
century skills, WBL has been documented
to increase student engagement, critical thinking, and collaboration (Hsu et al., 2010; James,
2018; Rice, 2018). This research will be discussed in-depth in Chapter 2.
This all suggests that, although we are now into the third decade of the 21
st
century, there
are many robust efforts to continue preparing students for the future. We have a clear
understanding of what knowledge and skills students will need to be successful in the future, and
there are many compelling approaches to learning that seek to help students develop these skills.
It truly is an exciting time for education as practitioners continue to innovate to meet students’
needs. In Explore, for example, the program was designed to innovate by combining multiple
approaches to learning as they attempt to facilitate learning for students in the best way possible.
Statement of the Problem
While research exists that studies the perceptions of students engaging in PBL or WBL,
less is known about what student perceptions are of a program that combines both of these
approaches. PBL and WBL are approaches to learning employed by educators as they seek to

6
prepare students for the future by increasing students’ engagement in learning, bolstering
academic outcomes, and developing students’ skills in areas such as critical thinking and
collaboration (Chanlin, 2008; Chen & Yang, 2019; Virtue & Hinnant-Crawford, 2019). Although
many schools have adopted elements of these various approaches to teaching 21
st
century skills,
few have attempted to blend all of them into one coherent program. ISSA is doing just this in
their Explore program, which is an immersive, one-year program of approximately 15-30 Grade
11 and 12 students.
Specific to WBL, there is less literature about how internships are implemented for high
school students and how high school students perceive internships. One of the reasons for this is
simply that there are fewer programs that implement WBL in high schools and hence fewer
programs to study. There are internship programs for high school students, however, they tend to
be purpose-built. Examples include High Tech High and National Academy Foundation (NAF;
Behrend et al., 2014; Murillo et al., 2017). In the case of High Tech High, this is a charter school
network that has been purpose-built to implement experiential learning opportunities. NAF, on
the other hand, is a non-profit organization that matches students with paid internship
opportunities and does not function as a school (NAF, 2020). There are many reasons why fewer
traditional schools implement internships, but one of the most common is the way high school
timetables are designed (Darche et al., 2009). Thus, if we could gain a better understanding of
students’ perceptions of internships in high school and how valuable they are, this could
encourage schools to prioritize offering internships and modifying their schedules in order to
allow for them to happen.
There are also relatively fewer studies of the longer-term effects of PBL and WBL. While
the immediate and short-term effects (i.e., with data gathered soon after completion of the

7
program) of PBL and WBL have been documented (Condliffe et al., 2017; Darche et al., 2009;
Symonds et al., 2011; Thomas, 2000), we know less about the longer-term effects. For example,
do we know whether students have been able to apply something that they learned as a student in
a high school class implementing PBL to their life while in university? Or, to what extent have
students applied lessons learned during a high school internship to getting their first internships
in college? It is important to learn the answers to these questions and those similar so that we can
gain a deeper understanding of students’ learning from these approaches to learning.
In summary, although there are many studies of implementation of PBL and WBL in
secondary schools (Enderling et al., 2020; Gamboa et al., 2013; Saavedra et al., 2021; Virtue &
Hinnant-Crawford, 2019), there is little research that studies school-based programs that
combine WBL and PBL into one coherent program. This study will shed light on how students
perceive a program that combines these two approaches. Moreover, not much research has been
conducted on what students perceive to be the benefits of the program and how the program has
influenced their lives after completing it. Hence, this study will focus on what students perceive
to be the advantages and disadvantages of engaging in the work-based and project-based learning
aspects of the program and how they apply it to their lives after completing the program.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this mixed methods study is to understand what alumni of the Explore
program perceive to be the advantages and disadvantages of the PBL and WBL aspects of the
program. In addition, because Explore prioritizes real-world application of learning, the study
also intends to gain a better understanding of how, if at all, alumni of the Explore program have
been able to apply their learning to their lives after Explore.
The research questions of this study are:

8
RQ1: What do Explore alumni perceive to be the advantages and disadvantages of their
project-based learning and work-based learning experiences in Explore?
RQ2: How have Explore alumni applied their learning from Explore to their experiences
after completing the program?
Importance of the Study
This study will make a significant contribution to our understanding of how students
perceive the advantages and disadvantages of PBL and WBL, and how students are able to apply
their learning to their lives afterwards. This is important because it will help educators make key
instructional decisions about what they might prioritize for implementation. For example, if we
learn that students perceive one of the greatest advantages of PBL is that they are able to
improve their time management skills, educators might find ways to prioritize project
management even more during a PBL experience. In another example, if we learn that students
perceive a lack of supervision at their workplace as one of the greatest disadvantages of WBL,
educators might use this understanding to inform changes to how supervisors are prepared to
support their student interns.
Another reason why this study is important is that it will make a large contribution to our
understanding of how high school students perceive WBL, and specifically, internships. Limited
research exists at the high school level of students’ experiences, so the research conducted in this
study will contributed to a limited body of research. It may serve as encouragement to schools
that may be interested in facilitating internships for their students.
Moreover, this study is important because it will inform us about how students perceive
the Explore program. This will benefit not just educators and administrators at ISSA, but those at
other schools as well. This can help inform modifications or improvements to Explore. It may

9
also help inform those who are looking to establish similar programs to Explore, or are
investigating how they might innovate in their own contexts.
Finally, from an equity standpoint, PBL and WBL have been documented to greatly
benefit minoritized students and help them become more prepared for college and career (Darche
et al., 2009; Saavedra et al., 2021). By contributing to the research documenting the advantages
of these approaches to learning, and how students apply what they learn, more schools may
choose to begin implementing PBL and WBL. This will help create to more equitable outcomes
for all students and give minoritized students more opportunities to succeed.
Limitations
This study has several limitations. First, the study has limited generalizability due to the
small population size being studied and the unique context of the school. ISSA is a well-
resourced school that is willing and able to employ three full-time teachers to teach 15-30
Explore students. As a result, student perceptions will be heavily influenced by the relatively low
teacher to student ratio present in the program. Moreover, there are only about 80 students in
total who have completed the program since its inception. Second, because Explore students are
being asked about their experiences a few years after having completed the program, they may
not remember exact details about their experiences. A third limitation is that this study is being
conducted by one researcher which limits the number of interviews that can be conducted in the
given timeframe, and increases the potential bias present in the interpretation and analysis of
data. A fourth limitation of this study is that students from the first cohort of Explore students did
not complete an internship, meaning that fewer Explore students completed internships than
those who did PBL. Finally, because students voluntarily apply to and join Explore, a limitation
is that the students who join Explore may be more likely to appreciate hands-on learning

10
approaches such as PBL and WBL and hence would be more likely to perceive it positively,
limiting our understanding of how students might negatively perceive it. They may also be more
likely to find ways to apply their learning from the program afterwards.
Delimitations
This study is delimited to students who completed the Explore program at ISSA. A
second delimitation is that the study will only gather data on students’ perceptions through a
survey and interviews. The survey will be sent to all alumni of Explore aged 18 or older (N =
81), and only a select number of alumni will be selected to be interviewed (n = 9). A third
delimitation is that completion of the survey will be voluntary, and participants for the interview
will only be chosen from those who indicate a willingness to be interviewed. Next, the study will
not control for the teachers involved in the Explore program because of the small number of
teachers involved and the desire to avoid the study turning into an evaluation of the teachers. A
final delimitation is that the study will utilize a cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT)
framework that will structure that data collection and analysis of the study.
Assumptions
This study makes several assumptions. First, it assumes that the study participants are
truthful in their responses and that they accurately recall their experiences from Explore. Second,
the study assumes that participants are familiar with PBL and WBL. Finally, it is assumed that
participant responses are independent of each other (e.g., students will have not discussed their
survey responses prior to submitting them).
Definitions
Internships: This study draws heavily on Darche et al.’s (2009) definition of internships.
They define internships as a form of work-based learning that provides students an opportunity

11
for more in-depth engagement and learning at a workplace sustained over an extended period of
time (i.e., several months rather than one or two visits). All of the internships studied were
unpaid. In the Explore program, internships are part of the partnerships program and are called
partnerships. The terms internships and partnerships are used interchangeably in this study.
Project-Based Learning (PBL): This study defines PBL using the five characteristics of
PBL as described by Thomas (2000). These are:
• Projects are the primary teaching strategy in that students learn the objectives through the
project;
• Questions drive the main learning associated with the project;
• The main aspects of the project enable students to develop new knowledge and skills;
• Projects are mostly student-directed;
• Projects are authentic (and involve real-life challenges).
Projects: A project is the instructional unit that culminates in the creation of an authentic
product.
Work-Based Learning (WBL): This draws on Darche et al.’s (2009) description of WBL
as a form of learning that enhances learning in schools with learning that takes place through
authentic activity at a workplace and gives students access to resources that they would not have
access to at school. Because the form of WBL that is implemented by Explore is internships, the
study specifically defines WBL as internships.

12
Chapter 2: Literature Review
This literature review will focus on the operationalization of work-based learning (WBL)
and project-based learning (PBL), mostly at the high school level. The theoretical background,
main features, effects, and limitations of both of these approaches to learning will be discussed.
Because both WBL and PBL are also forms of experiential learning, experiential learning theory
(ELT) will also be explained in order to provide some broader context to the theory behind both
approaches. It is also important to note that this review will focus on project-based learning, and
not problem-based learning. After examining the existing recent research on WBL and PBL, the
gap in the research will be identified: that there is a dearth of research into the longer-term
effects (i.e., after a period of time after students complete the learning program) of WBL and
PBL, and even more particularly, research examining the longer-term effects of a program that
combines both WBL and PBL into one coherent program.
Experiential Learning Theory
Kolb and Kolb (2009) defined experiential learning theory (ELT) as a “learning cycle
driven by the resolution of the dual dialectics of action/reflection and experience/abstraction” (p.
43). Grounded in the constructivist learning theories of Piaget, Vygotsky, and Dewey (Kolb &
Kolb, 2009; Schunk, 2020), ELT centers learning around the learner and the learner’s
experiences. Through experiential learning, learners create knowledge by engaging in concrete
experiences that they reflect upon in order to form abstract concepts that can be actively tested in
a recursive process (Kolb & Kolb, 2009). According to Sharlanova (2004), this process is broken
down into four phases: concrete experience (doing), reflexive observation (observing and
reflecting), abstract conceptualizing (thinking), and active experimenting (planning). Learners
can enter the cycle at any point; however, the process must be followed consecutively and

13
several times (Sharlanova, 2004). In effect, experiential learning is a recursive cycle of doing,
reflection, and application.
Work-based learning and project-based learning are both types of experiential learning
(Efstratia, 2014; Sharlanova, 2004). Both these types of learning ground themselves in students’
experiences in order to foster reflection and knowledge construction. In WBL, the experience is
the form of WBL – whether it be job shadowing, an internship, etc. In PBL, the experience is
both the process of students constructing their own knowledge and understandings through the
project, and the application of the project to an authentic, real-world context. Both forms of
learning are focused on the real world of application, rather than abstract concepts alone (Hsu &
Roth, 2010; Kokotsaki et al., 2016; O’Neill, 20160, Virtue & Hinnant-Crawford, 2019).
Work-Based Learning & Internships
In this section of the literature review, work-based learning (WBL) will be discussed
broadly. This will be followed by a more in-depth discussion of the form of WBL that is the
focus of this study: internships. Internships will be defined, and their main features, benefits, and
limitations will be explained.
Overview of WBL
Work-based learning enhances learning in schools with learning that takes place through
authentic activity at a workplace that is informed by workplace standards (Darche et al., 2009).
In the last 15 years, WBL has received more attention in the United States high school context
due to more and more employers finding that young people are not ready to engage in the
workplace (Symonds et al., 2011). In fact, Symonds and colleagues (2011) noted that there is a
growing gap among young adults in the United States in the skills and work ethic needed for
many jobs that pay a middle-class wage. Hence, there has been more importance placed on

14
developing students’ skills necessary for success in not only college but also the workplace
(Symonds et al., 2011). In fact, according to the OECD (2010), WBL is a good place for students
to learn both hard and soft skills required for success in a career in a real-world context.
Darche and colleagues (2009) identified three minimum characteristics for a learning
experience to count as WBL: 1) direct and systematic input from the employer and/or
community, 2) depth of experience, and 3) a connection to educational curricula. Through direct
input from the employer and/or community, students are exposed to a community of practice
outside of the classroom that makes the WBL authentic. Depth of experience requires that
students spend extended of periods of time engaged in authentic activities that build technical,
academic, or workplace skills. Finally, WBL must also support the building of academic and
technical content knowledge, and a variety of skills such as higher-order thinking and workplace
interpersonal skills.
There are numerous forms of WBL with varying levels of involvement from students and
professionals. According to Darche et al. (2009), they include career-related student
competitions, internships, school-based enterprises, social enterprises for learning, service
learning, simulated workplace experiences and enterprises, technical mentoring, work
experience, and youth apprenticeships. The intensity of these different forms of WBL range
greatly in terms of their level of engagement. For example, in career-related student
competitions, students are not embedded within a workplace but rather complete activities that
demonstrate career-related skills and are judged by professionals (Darche et al., 2009). In school-
based enterprises, students sell goods or services to an authentic audience but still take place in
the school environment. A less involved form of WBL, simulated workplace experiences and

15
enterprises are implemented as a simulation involving professionals when it would be difficult
(or legally impossible) for students to engage in actual work (Moyer et al., 2017).
A highly intensive form of WBL that takes place over several years is youth
apprenticeships. Typically involving crafts or trades, high school students build academic and
technical skills in high school and enter a formal apprenticeship program after completing high
school. Apprenticeships are quite common in northern and central Europe, with 40-70% of
students after Grades 9 or 10 completing some form of apprenticeship over their following three
years of schooling (Symonds et al., 2011). Commonly, students in these programs spend one to
two days at school and three to four days at a workplace each week. These extended and in-depth
experiences build up to a qualification that opens doors to employment for students. Although
these apprenticeships have many benefits, because programs often track students and commit
them to a pathway early on in their educational careers in either middle or lower secondary
school (Symonds et al., 2011).
Advantages of WBL
The OECD (2010) identified four main advantages of WBL. First, WBL provides a high-
quality learning environment involving authentic work that enables students to pick up hard
skills (i.e., practical training in the use of specialized equipment) and soft skills (i.e., problem-
solving and conflict management among colleagues). Second, WBL allows for two-way
communication between students and employers. Students gain first-hand insight into the daily
reality of a job, while employers get to see the true characteristics of a student/employee. Third,
WBL allows students to effect productive benefits to an employer, especially as students have
higher levels of experience and skills. Finally, WBL is a way to indicate which skills or
profession are in demand in the labor market. Although these advantages are present in all forms

16
of WBL, they become more apparent with more in-depth WBL experiences such as
apprenticeships. The difference between apprenticeships and internships will be described later
in this chapter.
Internships
Internships are a form of WBL in which students engage in sustained experiences over
the course of weeks or months in a workplace where they engage in authentic work and have
access to tools and resources they would otherwise not have available at school (Darche et al.,
2009; OECD, 2010). Fundamentally, internships are meant to be a learning experience for
students that is contextualized in the real world of application, instead of within the classroom
and the world of theory (Hsu & Venegas, 2018; O’Neill, 2010). Moreover, internships aim to
help students see the connection between what they learn in the classroom, their desired career
goals, and the requisite post-secondary education they might need to pursue in order to achieve
these goals (O’Neill, 2010). Finally, internships can help differentiate students in a highly
competitive college admissions process (Murillo et al., 2017) and provide students with valuable
professional contacts (Graham, 2013).
In the United States, internships have become a component of educational reform efforts
that aim to increase high school graduation rates, career exploration, and enrollment in college,
especially for minoritized students (Graham, 2013; Murillo et al., 2017; Symonds et al., 2011).
Murillo and colleagues (2017) also noted that internships are a key source of information about
college and careers that is usually inaccessible to marginalized students, but is widely available
to students from more affluent parents and communities.
Despite the appeal of internships, they are underutilized among high school students in
the United States. For example, in Texas, out of over 265,000 high school seniors, less than

17
1,000 were enrolled in a class designed for students to complete an internship in the business
community (Graham, 2013). Researchers also have noted that because of a variety of
understandings of and preparation for internships, students can have varying levels of quality in
their internships (Darche et al., 2009; Gamboa et al., 2013; O’Neill, 2010). When internships are
of low quality, students can become frustrated by the lack of meaning to the experience and will
view internships simply as resume fillers rather than authentic learning experiences (O’Neill,
2010).
Key Features and Characteristics of Internships
National Academy Foundation (NAF) is a non-profit education organization that
advocates for and helps implement WBL for over 100,000 students across the United States
(Rice, 2018). NAF situates internships within a continuum of WBL that progresses from building
awareness of careers through workplace tours, career and job fairs, and informational interviews
to exploring specific careers through job shadowing and career mentoring, all the way to explicit
preparation for the world of work through work experience, internships, and apprenticeships
(NAF, 2013). Hence, in 2013 NAF published a set of “gold standards” for high school
internships. These standards synthesized 25 years of NAF’s understanding of effective practices
for internships and aimed to help create high quality internship experiences for students
participating in their programs (NAF, 2013). The NAF’s gold standards for internships include
the following:
1. Internships are part of a continuum of WBL,
2. Internships are compensated,
3. Internships drive education equity (internships are available to all students and
appropriate supports are implemented),

18
4. Internships are based on students’ interests and learning objectives,
5. Internships align with academic learning (i.e., the curriculum incorporates learning
from the workplace and 21
st
Century skills),
6. Internships produce valuable work that benefits the employer,
7. All participants are prepared for and reflect upon the experience (including school
staff, teachers, students, and employers),
8. Systems support students throughout the entire internship,
9. Interns are assessed against individual learning plans that take into account learning
objectives, and
10. Internships take place in safe and supportive environments (NAF, 2013).
NAF’s gold standards apply not just to students, but to all stakeholders, including employers.
The active preparation and engagement of all stakeholders is essential to the success of any
internship program (Darche et al., 2009; NAF, 2013; OECD, 2010).
Finally, it is important to distinguish internships from apprenticeships, which also engage
students in extended work experiences. Internships typically do not culminate in a qualification
from which students can get a job within a specific craft or trade (Symonds et al., 2011). While
apprenticeships and internships both aim to prepare students for the workplace and ease the
transition from schooling to the world of work, internships are more focused on advancing
students to college and providing students with a schema that will help students connect, process,
and apply their learning in college (Graham, 2013; Murillo et al., 2017).
There is also a far stronger aspect of career exploration within internships that is not
present in apprenticeships. Because apprenticeships culminate in a qualification, students are
more committed to the eventual outcome. Internships, however, are intended to help students

19
explore careers firsthand, and can even either confirm or disconfirm students’ career aspirations
(Darche et al., 2009; Enderling et al., 2020; Gamboa et al., 2013; Graham, 2013; Hsu & Roth,
2010; Papadimitriou, 2014; Rice, 2018; Rothman & Sisman, 2016). This means that students are
not necessarily committed to the field of their internship, and can change their minds based on
their experiences.
Implementation of Internships
Researchers have documented a wide variety of ways in which internships have been
implemented, both at the high school and university levels. Some programs are optional, while
others are a requirement for high school graduation (Graham, 2013). The duration and timeframe
of internships also vary greatly. Internships can take place exclusively over the summer
(Enderling et al., 2020; Fernandez-Repollet et al., 2018), exclusively during the school year
(Graham, 2013; Miner, 2016), or in a hybrid model during the school year and the summer (Hsu
& Venegas, 2018). Some require only five hours per week at work over a duration of 10-15
weeks (Graham, 2013; Murillo et al., 2017), whereas others require 100-120 hours in total (Hsu
et al., 2010; Rice, 2018). Internships typically culminate in students completing some sort of
long-term project or presentation that summarizes their accomplishments and learning over the
course of the internship (Enderling et al., 2020; Graham, 2013; Murillo et al., 2017; O’Neill,
2010).
Reflection appears to be a critical component in implementing internships. O’Neill
(2010), in her review of internships at the post-secondary level, found that reflection was
common to all the programs she studied. This can be corroborated through the articles examined
for this literature review. Darche et al. (2009) underscored the importance of including a
reflection component since it helps students connect their learning from the workplace to their

20
learning in the classroom. Murillo et al. (2017) also highlighted incorporating reflection into
internships as a way to promote greater understanding of students’ “place in the world” (p. 250)
in the context of social justice and equity.
Effects of Internships
Numerous effects of internships have been documented. First, internships allow students
to engage in authentic learning with a community of practice. Hsu and Venegas (2018) found
that a science internship bridged the gap between high school student learning science as discrete
pieces of knowledge versus experiencing science in an authentic laboratory with real-world
application. Examining the internship through cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT,
described further in Ch. 3), they found that students were able to share scientific findings and
share it with an authentic community of practice. Similar results were also found by Enderling
and colleagues (2020) in their study of students completing a mathematical oncology internship
at the Moffitt Cancer Center. Hsu and Roth (2009), in their study of students completing science
internships at university laboratories, likewise found that students felt that they became more and
more a part of the scientific community.
Second, internships have a strong influence on students’ college majors and career
aspirations. Papadimitriou (2014) studied a mandatory high school internship program and
reported that 65% of students agreed that their internship helped them decide on a career. Many
students claimed either that their internship confirmed their career choice, while others reported
that their internship made them realize the field of their internship was not one they would like to
pursue in college. In a study of an optional internship class at the university level, Rothman and
Sisman (2016) found similar results regarding internships’ influence on career aspirations. The
same researchers also concluded that, because students are able to discern more carefully their

21
careers, employers would potentially benefit through lower turnover and job dissatisfaction.
Fernandez-Repollet et al. (2018) likewise reported that students who completed a short
internship with follow-up mentoring in the healthcare field reported greater interest in pursuing a
healthcare-related career.
Third, internships also develop students’ skills that are necessary in the workplace.
Handugan (2019) found that high school interns perceived that they learned valuable work
experience and knowledge, which in turn increased their feelings of self-efficacy. Rice (2018)
reported that a majority of high school interns in an NAF program were able to show mastery of
numerous workplace skills such as collaboration and teamwork, information management,
initiative and self-direction, and critical thinking and problem solving. James (2018), in a study
of required college-level internships, cited specific skills in which students perceived growth:
problem solving, job interviewing, networking, resume writing, oral presentation, interpersonal
communication, and written communication.
Finally, there is also evidence to suggest that internships, and WBL more broadly, can
lead to higher graduation rates among high school students. In a longitudinal study of cohorts of
NAF students from 2011-2015, it was found that students enrolled in NAF in ninth grade are 3%
more likely to graduate than peers who did not enroll in NAF (NAF, 2013). This increased to
10% among students identified as “at-risk” and completed the NAF program through to twelfth
grade. Because NAF places high value in WBL, and all students are required to complete an
internship, the connection between internships and graduation rates is apparent.
Limitations of WBL
Although WBL can be a powerful form of experiential learning, it can have limitations.
Most of the studies examined in this review had internships that lasted for at least several months

22
(Graham, 2013; Hsu & Venegas, 2018; Hsu & Roth, 2010; Murillo et al., 2017). In a study of
Greek university students completing 2-3 month internships, Mihail (2006) found that students
wished that the internship were longer (four to six months) in order to become fully productive
and useful to the employer. Research has also shown that internships and other forms of WBL
must be well-supported by all stakeholders, and in particular school staff and employers (Darche
et al., 2009; Mihail, 2006; Miner, 2016). Darche et al. (2009) especially underscored the
importance of making WBL an institutionalized feature of schools so that the success of a WBL
program would not be predicated on a single teacher. Miner (2016) and Darche et al. (2009) also
discussed how employers must be adequately trained to support students in internships.
However, Gamboa et al. (2013), in a study of 12
th
grade vocational school students in Portugal,
found that the preparation of internship supervisors was not a strong predictor of whether the
internship supported students’ career exploration (instead, they found that other measures of
internship quality such as autonomy, supervisor support, and colleagues’ feedback, were far
stronger predictors). These limitations suggest the importance of the length of an internship and
the various factors that may influence the effectiveness of an internship.
Project-Based Learning
PBL is an approach to teaching and learning that aims to make learning more engaging
and applicable for students. Unlike a traditional or didactic approach to teaching, PBL is student-
driven, inquiry-based, and teacher-facilitated (Helle et al., 2006). In PBL, students pose
questions which drive inquiry and culminate in the presentation of a final product to an authentic
audience. Project-based learning is different from problem-based learning in that, while project-
based learning culminates in a final product, problem-based learning does not (Helle et al.,
2006). Problem-based learning will not be discussed extensively in this review as Explore

23
explicitly focuses on project-based learning. The historical theoretical background, main
features, and benefits of PBL will be discussed in this section of the literature review.
Historical and Theoretical Background of PBL
The origins of PBL can be found in the work of seminal scholars such as Dewey,
Vygotsky, and Kilpatrick. Dewey (1910) argued that the primary role of education is to develop
students’ capacities in critical examination and inquiry, and that the learner must take the
initiative to develop those capacities. Dewey believed that inquiry would help maintain one’s
natural curiosity and ought to be the primary purpose of education (Helle et al., 2006). Dewey’s
arguments connect directly to PBL being driven primarily by student inquiry. Vygotsky’s
sociocultural theory of learning emphasized the importance of interpersonal, cultural, historical,
and individual factors on learning (Schunk, 2020). Taken together, Dewey’s beliefs about
learning and Vygotsky’s sociocultural learning theory connect directly many features of PBL
including its emphasis on student-generated questions and collaborative work.
Kilpatrick, one of Dewey’s students and colleagues, can be considered the pioneer of
project-based learning through his development of the project method. Kilpatrick believed that
projects, or “purposeful acts” mirrored the way individuals in the real world live a worthy life. In
his seminal work, Kilpatrick (1918) outlined four types of projects: Type 1 (creating a product),
Type 2 (enjoying an aesthetic experience), Type 3 (solving a particular complex problem), and
Type 4 (acquiring or developing a new skill). Type 1 products are most aligned with the modern
conception of PBL. In fact, the four stages of Type 1 projects (purposing, planning, executing,
and judging) are strikingly similar to many methods of executing PBL.

24
Main Features of PBL
There is no universally-agreed upon set of criteria for what constitutes PBL (Condliffe et
al., 2017; Helle et al., 2006; Thomas, 2000). Thomas (2000) authored one of the seminal
literature reviews on the subject of PBL. In his review, Thomas identified five essential criteria
for what constitutes PBL:
• Projects are the primary teaching strategy in that students learn the objectives
through the project;
• Questions drive the main learning associated with the project;
• The main aspects of the project enable students to develop new knowledge and
skills;
• Projects are mostly student-directed;
• Projects are authentic (not “school-like” [Thomas, 2000, p. 4]) and involve real-
life challenges.
Thomas offered these five criteria in an effort to differentiate PBL from other related learning
approaches (e.g., experiential learning or simply assigning projects) and to help identify articles
germane to his literature review. Hence, Thomas argued that a project must fulfill all five of
these criteria in order to be classified as PBL.
Condliffe et al.’s (2017) literature review of PBL directly expanded upon Thomas’s
work. They identified several design principles aligned to curriculum design, instructional
approaches, and assessment design. These principles were identified because they either were
commonly described in the literature or they helped demonstrate the many different aspects of
PBL present in the literature. Many of the principles that Condliffe et al. (2017) described are
similar to what Thomas identified, however additional principles they described included the

25
importance of dedicating extended periods of time to PBL, building high levels of student
engagement at the outset of a project, the use of scaffolds to support learning, encouraging high
levels of collaboration among students, providing numerous opportunities for reflection and
feedback, and finally, the presentation of work to an authentic public audience. Condliffe et al.
(2017) also emphasized how there continued to be some inconsistency on what the most salient
features of PBL are. For example, some researchers strongly emphasize the importance of
collaborative work (Chen & Yang, 2019; Chiang & Lee, 2016), others did not address it (Parker
et al., 2013). According to Condliffe et al. (2017), the lack of a set definition meant that PBL can
be a more “dynamic concept” (p. 12) and promote innovation. However, they also noted that
without a clear consensus, it can be difficult for practitioners to evaluate a program or the overall
effectiveness of PBL.
PBLWorks (formerly known as the Buck Institute for Education) is an organization that
has been providing professional development for teachers in PBL for over 20 years (PBLWorks,
2019). In fact, many scholars have studied programs that implement PBL according to
PBLWorks standards (Chen & Yang, 2019; Mosier et al., 2017; Parker et al., 2013; Ravitz, 2008;
Saavedra et al., 2021). PBLWorks (2019) published a list of “essential project design elements”
that they consider to be the “gold standard” in PBL. These elements include posing a challenging
problem or question; deep and sustained inquiry over time; being authentic in terms of context,
tools, or impact on others; allowing students to have voice and choice in the project design;
continuous reflection on learning; ongoing critique and revision; and the creation of a public
product. The similarities between this list and the lists offered by Thomas (2000) and Condliffe
et al. (2017) are obvious: they all stress inquiry, the centrality of the project, and ways to engage
students in learning.

26
Effects of PBL
There is a large body of research that has documented the effects of PBL in a variety of
subjects and at a variety of levels. PBL has been shown to improve students’ outcomes – both in
terms of academic achievement, and in other aspects including engagement, motivation,
problem-solving, reflection, and collaboration. These various effects will be discussed in this
section of the literature review.
The positive impact of PBL on students’ motivation for learning and self-regulation have
been well-documented. In a study of high school students enrolled in a national network of PBL
schools, Virtue and Hinnant-Crawford (2019) found that students were able to identify why a
particular project was important to themselves, their peers, and community. Students also
showed high levels of excitement and felt rewarded for their hard work. Mosier et al. (2017) also
documented how students could see the real-world relevance of their work in the same network
of PBL schools studied by Virtue and Hinnant-Crawford (2019). PBL has also been shown to
increase students’ levels of intrinsic goal orientation in a study of eighth and ninth grade math
(Holmes & Hwang, 2016). Saavedra and colleagues (2021) were also able to find higher levels
of student engagement due to PBL in a randomized controlled trial experiment comparing PBL
against traditional instruction. Grant (2011) found that students in an eighth-grade geometry
class showed persistence and self-motivation throughout the projects in the course, especially
since students had to organize themselves in order to complete the public product of the project.
Improved critical thinking and problem-solving skills are also associated with PBL. In a
quasi-experimental study of vocational high school students in Taiwan, students in a PBL
program showed stronger problem-solving skills over their peers in a traditional program
(Chiang & Lee, 2016). Holmes and Hwang (2016) likewise found that eighth and ninth grade

27
students enrolled in a PBL program doubled their use of math problem solving strategies within
one year.
Researchers have also demonstrated the effects of PBL on reflection and collaboration.
Krajcik et al. (2021) conducted a rigorous randomized control trial among third grade science
students in Michigan and found statistically significant evidence that showed PBL students had
higher levels of collaboration and reflection as measured through a social and emotional learning
(SEL) survey instrument. Several researchers have also noted that students engaging in PBL
have a greater appreciation of learning from peers, a propensity to give and receive feedback,
and frequently revise their work (Bradley-Levine & Mosier, 2014; Chen & Yang, 2019; Holmes
& Hwang, 2016; Krajcik et al., 2021; Mosier et al., 2017; Saavedra et al., 2021).
PBL has also been demonstrated to increase students’ academic achievement. Chen and
Yang’s (2019) meta-analysis of 46 effect sizes from 30 journal articles published between 1998
and 2017, covering over 12,000 students at almost 200 schools in nine countries, demonstrated
that PBL has a medium to large effect size on academic achievement across a variety of
disciplines. Parker and colleagues (2013) conducted a quasi-experiment that found students
taking part in a PBL AP Government class had a higher average AP score with a far higher “high
pass” (AP score ≥ 4) rate than traditionally-instructed students. Saavedra et al. (2021) conducted
a quasi-experiment with school-level randomization that also found a higher percentage of
students earning passing scores on the AP Government and AP Environmental Science exams in
just the first year of PBL implementation than students in a traditional program. PBL has also
caused academic success at the elementary level. Krajcik et al. (2021) conducted a randomized
control trial to study third-grade science classes and found that PBL outperformed traditional
instruction as shown by an 8% increase in science standardized test scores.

28
Limitations of PBL
Although there is a broad body of research that illuminates the benefits of PBL, there are
still some limitations. Some studies have shown that PBL does not actually increase students’
standardized test scores. For example, Holmes and Hwang (2016) found that among eighth and
ninth grade students in Michigan, students in the traditional instruction control school showed a
higher percentage of content mastery than in the PBL school (however, it must be noted that
there was less variance in scores in the PBL school versus the control). The same researchers
also found that White students performed much better than students of color in the traditional
instruction control school than in the PBL school. They concluded that although there were
differences along racial lines, socio-economic status was a stronger predictor of academic
success in the PBL school (Holmes & Hwang, 2016).
Many of the limitations of PBL are found when studying student perceptions. For
example, some students believe that PBL is better suited to subjects like social studies or English
rather than math (Virtue & Hinnant-Crawford, 2019). This is inconsistent, however, with a large
body of research that demonstrates PBL’s efficacy in math (Chen & Yang, 2019). In addition,
because many students are so engrained in traditional models of schooling involving lectures,
readings, homework, tests, and quizzes, they can find a PBL approach jarring (Grant, 2011).
Some students claimed that they felt like they were missing out on content because traditional
approaches were able to work through content more quickly, or they became overwhelmed by
the open-ended nature of PBL (Grant, 2011; Parker et al., 2013; Virtue & Hinnant-Crawford,
2019). However, other researchers, such as Parker et al. (2013) found that some students were
even surprised by how much they learned in PBL, and that it prepared them well for AP exams.

29
Some researchers have found discrepancies in how well students in problem-based
learning acquire knowledge and skills. Dochy et al. (2003), in a meta-analysis of the effects of
problem-based learning, found some positive and negative effects on students. They found that
problem-based learning had an overall positive impact on students’ skills. However, problem-
based learning had a negative effect on students’ knowledge in the first two years of
implementation. The researchers noted that although students in problem-based learning classes
acquired less knowledge, their retention was stronger due to problem-based learning’s focus on
elaboration of knowledge. Although this meta-analysis focused on problem-based learning, it is
still somewhat relevant to the scope of this literature review due to the many similarities between
project-based learning and problem-based learning.
Another limitation of PBL is the extent to which practitioners can implement it across a
variety of disciplines. Virtue and Hinnant-Crawford (2019) concluded that there is a far greater
PBL implementation in English and social studies classes than math or science classes (ELA). In
fact, it has also been found that math teachers have more difficulty in implementing PBL in their
classes than teachers of other disciplines partly because of the need to teach to state exams
(Condliffe et al., 2017). However, this finding was directly contradicted somewhat by Chen and
Yang (2019) who found that PBL was more widely used in science and mathematics. They noted
smaller effect sizes of PBL in math classes; however, longitudinally, math performance was
stronger with PBL than with traditional instruction. It seems that there is disagreement in the
literature over which disciplines are more inclined to a PBL approach.
Interdisciplinary PBL
Interdisciplinary learning incorporates an understanding from a variety of disciplines and
applies this knowledge to solve real-life problems and to arrive at an integrated understanding of

30
an issue (Ng et al., 2010). Teachers often take an interdisciplinary approach to conducting PBL
(Kodkanon et al., 2018; Noble et al., 2020). A possible reason for this, according to Applebee
and colleagues (2007), is that interdisciplinary curricula are often “linked with instructional
approaches that emphasize the active engagement in the exploration of challenging subject
matter” (p. 1007). Noble et al. (2020) reinforced this point and reported that teachers find that
PBL is a good way to integrate content across subject areas. Moreover, Capraro and Jones (2013)
contended that well-designed PBL is interdisciplinary in nature because PBL is naturally
integrative.
Several researchers have noted that there is currently a somewhat limited body of
research about interdisciplinary approaches at the high school level (Applebee et. al, 2007;
Kodkanon et al., 2018). This was reinforced in the research conducted for this literature review.
Of the research identified, most of it examined teacher perceptions about the implementation of
PBL (Applebee et al., 2007; Kodkanon et al., 2018; Noble et al., 2020; Weinberg & Sample
McMeeking, 2017). One study was identified that examines student perceptions (Ng et al.,
2010). The various studies seem to suggest that the research currently aims to examine how
interdisciplinary curricula are implemented rather than studying their effects.
Although limited, there has been some research that documented some of the benefits to
students from interdisciplinary PBL (Capraro & Jones, 2013; Kodkanon et al., 2018; Ng et al.,
2010). Kodkanon et al. (2018) found that teachers perceived students to have increased interest,
engagement, more questions, and better connections of knowledge across subjects in an
interdisciplinary team-teaching approach. Moreover, teachers reported that interdisciplinary
approaches allow students to make connections across subjects and see how individual subjects
“reinforce and complement each other” (p. 7). Ng et al. (2010), in a study of student perceptions,

31
found that students were also able to apply their learning from previous courses to their current
interdisciplinary project. Due to the integrated aspect of interdisciplinary PBL, subject curricula
appear to be less fragmented and hence are more coherent (Capraro & Jones, 2013). Finally,
interdisciplinary PBL allows for more flexibility to allow students to pursue their own interests,
and because of its application nature, it can meet the needs of diverse learners (Capraro & Jones,
2013).
There appears to be a continuum of implementation of interdisciplinary curricula
(Applebee et al., 2007; Noble et al., 2020). On one end, content and standards from multiple
classes is integrated, whereas on the other end, the curriculum is completely reconstructed and
synthesized among several disciplines. It also appears that as the curriculum becomes more
interdisciplinary, the level of cooperation required of teachers increases (Applebee et al., 2007).
This level of planning is often cited as a barrier to implementing interdisciplinary curricula
because school schedules often do not accommodate this for teachers, and teachers are forced to
collaborate after school hours (Applebee et al., 2007; Capraro & Jones, 2013; Noble et al., 2020;
Weinberg & Sample McMeeking, 2017).
There are several other limitations of interdisciplinary PBL. Aside from the time required
to plan and implement it, there are fewer resources (such as textbooks) for teachers to use
(Capraro & Jones, 2013; Weinberg & Sample McMeeking, 2017). Another limitation is that
secondary teachers, in particular, see themselves as content experts in their own content, and not
others (Weinberg & Sample McMeeking, 2017). Finally, traditional high school schedules are
built to facilitate disciplinary teaching and learning, which makes interdisciplinary approaches
possible only when students are shared or specific interdisciplinary courses are developed (Noble
et al., 2020; Weinberg & Sample McMeeking, 2017).

32
Although there was limited research available with regard to interdisciplinary PBL, there
seems to be consensus that planning and implementing it poses several challenges. However,
there are several potential benefits to students that make it a viable approach to implementing
PBL. Because Explore is a program that aims to implement interdisciplinary PBL, this study will
hopefully shed more light on student perceptions of this approach to teaching and learning.
Conclusion & Gap in the Literature
This literature review examined much of the current research related to WBL
(particularly internships) and PBL as they are operationalized in the high school setting. Both of
these approaches to learning have high relevance to students as they are forms of experiential
learning grounded in constructivist learning theories. On their own, both approaches have been
documented to positively influence students’ learning outcomes. However, this review has
revealed that there is no current research that examines learning programs that combine both
WBL and PBL into one coherent program. Moreover, there is also very little research on the
student perceptions of interdisciplinary PBL. One may assume that, at the very least, the benefits
that students enjoy would be equal to the sum of the benefits of both parts, however, this might
not necessarily be the case. It might be that the cumulative influence of both PBL and WBL
together are greater than each on their own; or, it may even be that the influences are diminished
through doing too much.
The review also revealed some limitations in conducting studies of the long-term effects
of WBL and PBL. Rice (2018) discussed how some benefits of internships might not be
perceived until well after the internship is over; however, it would be challenging to study this
because of the many intervening variables that would confound the data. Fernandez-Repollet et
al. (2018) discussed that, while it would be very beneficial to know the long-term effects of

33
health care internships on college majors, this would be extremely difficult due to the challenges
of following up with students throughout their post-secondary educational careers. In one
longitudinal study reviewed, Cook et al. (2004) found that the positive perceptions of college
internships remained fairly constant over a 10-year period. An additional study (Gamboa et al.,
2013) used a longitudinal approach to examine the effects of internship quality on career
exploration, however, the post-effects were only measured at 14 weeks after the conclusion of
the internship. This time gap would hardly provide a glimpse into the longer-term effects of the
internship. In the realm of PBL, there is also limited research into the long-term effects of the
learning approach. For example, while Holmes and Hwang (2016) measured the academic
effects of PBL in a secondary mathematics class, results were only gathered at the end of two
years of implementation. Condliffe et al. (2017) identified that PBL is associated with higher
graduation rates, however, they did not identify any studies that look at longer-term effects of
PBL. In addition, although Summers and Dickinson (2012) conducted a four-year longitudinal
study of the influences of PBL on college and career readiness, the study did not follow along
students through to their post-secondary outcomes. This study is poised to contribute to the
literature by revealing the longer-term influences of participating in WBL and PBL in high
school, and in particular, doing both in a coherent, year-long program.

34
Chapter 3: Methodology
The purpose of this study was to understand what alumni of the ISSA Explore program
perceive to be the advantages and disadvantages of the project-based (PBL) and work-based
(WBL) learning aspects of the program, and how they have applied what they learned in the
program to their lives afterwards. Because the Explore program is unique in that it combines
PBL and WBL elements into a coherent year-long program, it is beneficial to understand what
long-term effects exist, if any, and whether these effects differ from what is already documented
about these approaches individually. The research questions of this study were:
RQ1: What do Explore alumni perceive to be the advantages and disadvantages of their
project-based learning and work-based learning experiences in Explore?
RQ2: How have Explore alumni applied their learning from Explore to their experiences
after completing the program?
To answer these questions, I employed a mixed methods convergent parallel design
(Lochmiller & Lester, 2017). Figure 1 shows the convergent parallel design of this study. Using
this approach, I collected and analyzed quantitative data from a survey consisting of closed-
ended Likert-like questions that was sent to all alumni of the Explore program aged 18 and
above. Qualitative data was collected from purposively sampled interviews. I compared and
contrasted the findings from both the quantitative and qualitative portions of the study in order to
reach a deeper understanding of Explore alumni’s perceptions.

35
Figure 1
Convergent Parallel Design

Note. Figure adapted from Lochmiller and Lester, 2017, p. 218.
Mixed methods approaches have been used in the past to study similar topics. For
example, Rice (2018) also utilized a convergent mixed methods design in order to more deeply
understand how the structure of an internship program impacted students’ perceptions of the
value of the internship. Murillo et al. (2017) likewise used a mixed methods approach consisting
of interviews, observations, and survey instruments to study how internships helped prepare low-
income students of color for college and career. In the realm of PBL, Chiang & Lee (2016)
applied a convergent mixed methods quasi-experiment that analyzed survey data along with
classroom observations, student work, and interviews to gain a deeper understanding of students’
opinions regarding PBL. Similarly, Parker et al. (2013) employed a mixed quasi-experiment
method to understand how PBL helped achieve deeper learning in a high school AP class. In the
study, they analyzed AP exam scores and conducted “large-group, fishbowl format” (p. 1439)
interviews of students.
A mixed methods approach was ideal in order to find the answers to my research
questions because taking a solely quantitative or qualitative approach would not lead to both a
broad and deep understanding. For example, a quantitative approach using a survey with closed-
Interpretation &
Conclusion
Compare, Contrast, &
Relate
Quantitative Data
Collection & Analysis
(Survey)
Qualitative Data
Collection & Analysis
(Interviews)

36
and open-ended questions that asked about Explore alumni’s perceptions would have resulted in
a good overview of what the general themes might be, however, it would not have allowed me to
deeply understand how and why Explore students arrived at their perceptions. Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) suggested that qualitative research is “interested in understanding how people
interpret their experiences, how they construct their worlds, and what meaning they attribute to
their experiences” (p. 6). Although a qualitative approach would allow me to gain an
understanding of Explore alumni’s experiences, using only this approach would leave out having
a broad, high-level understanding of the overall perceptions that a quantitative survey would be
able to provide. This rationale is well-supported by the literature given the number of studies that
aim to understand student perceptions that use mixed approaches (Chiang & Lee, 2016; Murillo
et al., 2017; Parker et al., 2013; Rice, 2018). As a result, this study not only complemented this
body of mixed methods research on the topics of WBL and PBL, but it was also unique in its aim
to understand how a program that implements both WBL and PBL influences students after
completing the program.
The remainder of this chapter will describe the conceptual framework guiding the study,
the sample and population studied, the survey and interview instruments used, and how data
analysis will be conducted.
Conceptual Framework: Cultural-Historical Activity Framework
Conceptual frameworks help researchers lay out the various phenomena and their
relationships in order to guide the goals and methodology of a study (Maxwell, 2013). I chose to
frame my study around the cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) framework. The CHAT
framework is grounded in Vygotsky’s sociocultural learning theory which suggests that artifacts
mediate all human activity and can also impact the interactions between individuals and their

37
communities (Hsu & Venegas, 2018) and was made more well-known by the work of Engeström
(Nussbaumer, 2011). According to Foot (2014), three main assumptions underlie CHAT: 1)
humans act as a collective and learn by doing, 2) humans use tools to learn and communicate,
and 3) communities are integral in making and interpreting meaning. The CHAT framework
helps us analyze relationships not just between individual components of a system, but the
system as a whole by taking into account goals and contexts (Batiibwe, 2019).
The CHAT framework was an appropriate lens for this study because of the inherent
complexity of the Explore program. By its nature, Explore attempts to bring together
interdisciplinary, project-based learning and work-based learning in order to provide students an
exemplary learning experience. A multitude of factors go into the desired outcome of Explore,
which is for students to apply what they learned in the program to their lives. Furthermore,
CHAT has been frequently utilized to study classroom contexts. In a review of the use of CHAT
in educational research from 2000 to 2009, Nussbaum (2011) found that over 1,500 studies
mentioned CHAT and 21 studies explicitly used CHAT as a conceptual framework within the
study. Nussbaum (2011) concluded that CHAT can be very helpful in understanding “certain
complex situational teaching and learning activities” (p. 46). It can thus be concluded that the
CHAT framework is appropriate to help analyze these complex interrelated factors related to the
study.

38
Figure 2
Activity System of the Explore Program
There are seven components present within each activity system: subject, object, tools,
rules, community, division of labor, and outcome (Hsu & Venegas, 2018). The components of
the Explore activity system are shown in Figure 2. The subject was the primary group the study
examined; in this case, Explore students. The object was the goal of the activity as it is pursued
by the subject that in turn translates into an outcome. For the purposes of this study, the goal was
for Explore students to develop academic and non-academic skills. These eventually became the
outcome of students applying their learning to their lives after completing the program. The
community were groups and individuals who operated within the activity system – peers, the
Explore advisors (teachers), internship supervisors, mentors, and guest speakers. Tools helped
Outcome
Application of
learning after
completing
Explore Program
Tools
Lessons, Partnerships Program,
Mentorship Program, Projects &
assignments, LinkedIn, Teamie
Subject
Students
Rules
Partnership & Mentorship
Agreements, Standards and
Rubrics, Child Protection,
Safe Distancing
Community
Explore Advisors,
Partnership Supervisors,
Mentors, Peers
Division of Labor
Advisor, Mentor, and
Supervisor Roles;
Collaboration among
peers
Object
Academic & non-
academic skills

39
facilitate the activity. In Explore, these tools included lessons, the internships program, projects
and assignments, and digital tools such as Teamie (a learning management system) and LinkedIn
(a professional networking site used during the internships program). Rules spelled out the norms
and expectation for the interactions that took place in the activity. Rules in Explore included the
agreements governing the internships and mentorships program, standards and rubrics on
assignments, and various child protection and COVID safe distancing rules. Finally, the division
of labor told us how aspects of the activity are split up among various groups or individuals.
Roles within Explore included advisors, mentors, supervisors, and ways in which peers decided
to work together.
As depicted in Figure 1, all of these factors were interconnected and impacted one
another. For example, the structure of the Explore internships program (tools and rules)
influenced how students (subjects) and their advisors and supervisors (community and division
of labor) behaved, which will all influenced the skills students developed (object). It was how
students applied these skills they developed (outcome) that was the main topic of interest in this
study. CHAT allows us to systematically analyze these complex interrelationships within the
systemic whole.
The survey instrument and interview protocols used in this study were centered around
how the subjects (Explore alumni) interacted with the tools, rules, community, and division of
labor to work towards the program’s object (academic and non-academic skills gained from
engaging in WBL and PBL) and ultimate outcomes of application of learning after completing
the program.

40

Sampling Procedures
The Explore program at ISSA began in the 2016-2017 school year. As of the end of the
2020-2021 school year, five cohorts totaling 81 students have completed the program. Explore
has implemented PBL since the start of the program, however, the WBL internships program
(also called partnerships) was started in the 2017-2018 school year. Thus, all Explore alumni
engaged in PBL but only 61 completed an internship. The majority of the first cohort of Explore
alumni graduated from four-year colleges and universities in 2021, while the majority of the first
cohort of Explore alumni who have completed an internship will entered their final year of
college in 2021. The majority of Explore alumni are attending college in the United States, with
some students attending universities throughout Europe, Australia, and Asia. During their time in
Explore, the alumni worked at a large range of organizations for their internship. These included
non-profits, marketing firms, research labs, finance companies, and more. The variety of types of
internships is particularly valuable as this will provide broad insights into the long-term
perceptions of the influences of WBL that are not specific to a specific field.
A two-tier purposeful sample was used for this study. Merriam and Tisdell (2016)
described two-tier sampling as first selecting a broader case, then conducting sampling within the
case for further study. In the first tier, the entire population of Explore alumni (81 students) was
surveyed. The second tier was a purposeful sample composed of survey respondents who
indicated a willingness to be interviewed. According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), purposeful
sampling is used when we desire to discover and understand, and thus we should select a sample
from which we stand to learn the most.

41
Essential in purposeful sampling is the use of a clear set of criteria for selection and
rationale for these criteria being used (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The goal of the purposeful
sample was to capture the diversity of views on the Explore program. After conducting a
preliminary analysis of my survey, I identified Explore alumni who indicated a willingness to be
interviewed who generally had more positive and negative views. Although interview participant
selection was largely be driven by the results of the survey, I was also mindful to interview a
diverse range of alumni. Examples of demographic characteristics that I considered included
whether the participant took Explore as an 11
th
or 12
th
grade student (approximately 10% of
Explore alumni completed the program as an 11
th
grader), their graduation year, and gender.
With regard to the number of participants, I aimed to reach a point of redundancy or
saturation where I begin hearing the same responses and no new insights are gained (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). This was reached after interviewing the initial nine participants. Additional
interviews were not required because interviews were already showing similar findings.
Instrumentation
The instrumentation for this study included a closed-ended survey composed of Likert-
like items which was sent to all alumni of the Explore program. This survey provided me with
quantitative data, while the interview provided me with qualitative data. The design of each
instrument will now be described in-depth.
Survey Instrument Design
A survey was used to collect quantitative data in the form of Likert-type items. A survey
was selected as the appropriate form of data collection in order to capture as much data as
possible from the population of Explore alumni. According to Robinson and Leonard (2018),
surveys are able to measure attributes, behaviors, abilities, and thoughts of participants. This

42
aligned well with the purpose of this survey. The purpose of the survey was to gather data from
Explore alumni to help answer both research questions. Demographic information was collected
(such as year of graduation, gender, etc.). Specific survey items were related specifically to either
the PBL or WBL aspects of Explore, and how students have applied their learning after
completing the program.
Because no existing survey instrument existed to model after, I wrote all of the survey
items. Constructs referred to in the survey were identified according to various aspects of PBL
and WBL found in the literature review and the study’s conceptual framework. For example,
several questions pertain to the various skills that students gain from doing PBL or WBL as
identified in the literature. In addition, items were developed to ensure that all aspects of the
activity system in the conceptual framework were addressed. The survey instrument was
developed according to the guidelines described in Robinson and Leonard (2018), specifically
the guidance on composing question stems and avoiding problematic question wording. In order
to address researcher bias, I ensured that questions addressed both the positive and negative
aspects of WBL and PBL.
The closed-ended questions utilized a 4-point Likert-type scale with no midpoint
(Robinson & Leonard, 2018). I decided to not give participants a midpoint/neutral option
because I was interested in learning about how alumni of Explore perceive the advantages and
disadvantages of the program, and I did not anticipate participants truly being neutral on any of
the constructs that are being surveyed. In addition, providing a midpoint/neutral option may have
resulted in less usable data. Because participants will have already completed Explore, and may
have completed it several years ago, they needed to exert some mental effort to remember their
experiences. Given a midpoint/neutral option, participants may have selected neutral as an easy

43
response rather than taking the time to think back and remember their experiences in Explore.
Please refer to Appendix A to see the full survey.
Interview Protocol Design
The interview protocol was semi-structured and composed of open-ended questions that
allowed me to gain a deeper understanding of participants’ perspectives and allowed participants
to give me their most salient responses (Patton, 2002). The protocol was broken down broadly
into three categories: questions about PBL, questions about WBL, and questions about Explore
in general. The questions were designed according to the principles of asking good qualitative
interview questions as described by Patton (2002), such as asking singular questions and
attending to the clarity of question wording. The overall interview protocol was semi-structured;
according to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), semi-structured interview protocols provide flexibility
in what interview questions are asked, the order, and allow the interview flow to be determined
by the responses shared by the interviewee. This structure was beneficial for this study because
the interviews occurred after survey data was collected, and individual survey results influenced
the content of the interview. Please refer to Appendix B to see the full interview protocol.
Data Collection Procedures
This study followed a mixed methods convergent parallel design (Lochmiller & Lester,
2017) that compared and contrasted data collected from a quantitative survey and qualitative
interviews. Each of these two aspects will have their own data collection procedures, which will
be discussed in this section.
Survey
After IRB approval was granted, the survey instrument was emailed to all alumni of
Explore which included a link to the survey and a description of the study, research questions,

44
goals and purpose, and role of the researcher. Explore students’ contact information was
retrieved from the internal ISSA database of alumni, with permission of the Director of Alumni
Relations. Participants were incentivized to take the survey by being entered into a random
drawing to win one of two US$50 (or its equivalent in local currency) gift cards. The survey was
sent to potential participants after IRB approval was obtained. Participants had one month to
complete the survey, and reminder emails were sent to participants once a week. Survey
responses were kept anonymous; however, participants will have had the option to indicate their
willingness to participate in an interview. In this case, the results of the survey were not
anonymous. The survey was administered online via Qualtrics.
Interviews
As discussed in the section on sampling procedures, interview participants were
purposively sampled from survey participants who indicated a willingness to participate in an
interview in order to capture a diverse set of perspectives on the Explore program. Interviews
lasted approximately 30-60 minutes. Participants were incentivized to participate in the interview
by receiving a US$30 (or its equivalent in local currency) gift card. Given the international
nature of Explore alumni, and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, interviews took place online
over Zoom. I asked for participants’ consent to record the audio and video of the interviews. The
recordings were stored in Zoom cloud storage online. Transcription of the interviews was
generated by uploading the recordings to Otter.AI. I also manually edited the transcripts for
accuracy. The interviews took place after all the survey data was collected. Given the number of
interviews to be completed and the challenges of scheduling across many time zones, this phase
of the study lasted from October to December, 2021.

45
Because the interview protocol was semi-structured, this gave me flexibility in terms of
the order of questions asked and which questions were asked. The questions asked were
dependent on the initial responses given by participants, the level of saturation I reached for a
particular concept or research question, and the time constraints of the interview.
Data Analysis Approach
This study utilized a mixed methods convergent parallel design (Lochmiller & Lester,
2017). Data for this study will came from a quantitative survey and a series of qualitative
interviews. Both data sets were analyzed separately and the results of both were compared,
contrasted, and synthesized to arrive at answers to the study’s research questions.
Quantitative Analysis
Exploratory data analysis (EDA) was conducted. Jebb et al. (2017), EDA is an inductive
approach to data analysis that answers the question, “What is going on here?” (p. 267). For
demographic items, I calculated and reported frequencies and percentages using RStudio. These
results are presented in tabular format in Chapter 4. For Likert-type survey items, I calculated
summary statistics (mean and standard deviation) and generated histograms. Doing this helped
me induce themes and meaning from the quantitative data (Jebb et al., 2017). I also added
together the scores of the Likert-type items for PBL and WBL. Strongly agree was equivalent to
4 points, while strongly disagree was equivalent to 1 point. These summed scores allowed me to
get a broad feeling for how positively or negatively a participant viewed either aspect of Explore.
I calculated measures of the strength of bivariate relationships (Spearman’s rho) as these
relationships were important for analysis. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was also conducted
in RStudio in order to analyze the salient latent variables of the survey.
Qualitative Analysis

46
Qualitative data was generated through interviews. I began the analysis of my qualitative
data by reading over all interview transcripts and jotted down my initial tentative thoughts,
reactions, and hypotheses (Maxwell, 2013). I then engaged in a more formalized inductive
coding process to analyze the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In the first stage (open coding) I
first associated the data with the various categories of the CHAT framework. In the second stage
(selective coding), I induced sub-themes from the data. I used Atlas.ti to conduct this analysis
process.
After the coding process was completed, I engaged in member checking in order to
ensure that my biases did not lead me to misinterpret meaning intended by my participants. I sent
the codes and relevant quotes to the respective interview participants and invited them to reach
out if they had any concerns about my analysis. No interview participants shared any concerns
with me.
Combined Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Data
Once the quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed on their own, I then compared,
contrasted, and related the major themes that emerged. Finally, I analyzed how the different
themes related to each factor of the CHAT framework and how they informed the final outcome
of the activity system (application of learning after completing Explore). This ultimately helped
me answer the two research questions of this study.
Positionality & Role of the Researcher
Milner (2007) reminds us of the importance of “researching the self” and “researching
the self in relation to others” (p. 395) – in other words, how the researcher’s identity influences
both the research itself and its participants. Since I was studying the perceptions of alumni of the
program I teach, it was even more important that I considered my power and positionality with

47
regard to my research participants. I had power over my participants not only in my role as
researcher but also as a teacher at their high school alma mater. This power stemmed from the
fact that they might know me as a teacher, or I may have even taught them directly, or know
some of their former teachers. In addition, although I identify as a Person of Color of mixed
White and Filipino heritage, to many I may “pass” as White. Given the history of White-
dominated pedagogies, practices, and values at ISSA, participants may have associated me with
this hegemonic power dynamic. To moderate this, one strategy I used was to work to earn the
trust of my research participants. I was completely transparent about the research purpose and
goals, how I would use my participants’ responses, and I attempted to shift more power to my
participants by allowing them to engage in a member checking process. In addition, I gave my
participants more power by reminding them of their ability to cease their participation at any
time for any reason whatsoever.
One of the biggest factors that influenced my approach and interest in this topic was that I
am currently an advisor in the Explore program. Moreover, I am the Explore advisor who is in
charge of matching students with potential internships. This meant that I was highly involved in
the design of the internships program and was in charge of ensuring that students were matched
with the most appropriate organizations. I also had several years of experience in implementing
PBL as a teacher. I believe deeply in the power of project-based and work-based learning, which
was what motivated me to teach in the Explore program in the first place. These factors made me
biased towards documenting the program in the most positive way possible.
The deep knowledge I have of the program also influenced the types of questions I ask. It
also gave me additional access to documents and students who participated in the program. In
addition, because I have been an advisor to many of the potential research participants, reactivity

48
may be a concern. Maxwell (2013) explained that it is impossible to eliminate reactivity; rather,
we should understand it and aim to use it productively. Hence, I hope that my relationship with
many of the alumni will made them feel more comfortable to share with me their honest opinions
of the program, whether positive or negative. Since I was in a position of power as a researcher
and teacher (whether or not the participants personally knew me), I was sure to emphasize that I
would like to learn about the positive and negative aspects of the program.
My positionality may have ultimately led to confirmation bias. As a practitioner and
advisor to many potential research participants, I had a working theory of what the alumni may
perceive the benefits to be and how they may have ultimately applied what they learned in
Explore to their lives. This may have led me to be somewhat dismissive of data that goes against
my preconceived notions. Although I view my knowledge in and of practice as an asset that I
bring to this study, I did employ a variety of strategies to mitigate confirmation bias such as
triangulation between the quantitative and qualitative results of the study, and member checking.
According to Maxwell (2013), being aware of one’s personal, practical, and intellectual
goals is important because these goals will have a direct impact on the entire research
methodology – from the framing of the questions, selection of methods, data collection and
analysis, and more. Being transparent about these goals (both in the writing process and written
into the final dissertation) reminded me of my positive bias toward Explore and that I should also
seek negative perceptions or other data that would counter any preconceptions I may have had
going into the study.
Ethical Considerations
Ethics in research fundamentally is all about protecting the rights, interests, and privacy
of participants in a study (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In particular,

49
Glesne (2011) discussed in depth the importance of research participants’ right to privacy.
Throughout the research process, I respected the privacy of my research participants, especially
in cases where I discussing my emergent research findings with colleagues. I avoided discussing
emergent research findings with my colleagues who knew any of the interview participants. In
addition, I was extremely careful when discussing any information that may have been used to
reveal the identity of a research participant. This was of particular importance when it came to
discussing the qualitative findings. I ensured that I revealed just enough demographic
information to demonstrate how the participant helped me arrive at a representative sample of
interview participants while not revealing too much information that would allow my colleagues
to infer who the participant might be.
I also actively sought out the informed consent of my research participants. Informed
consent is important because it tells participants that their participation in the study is voluntary,
can be stopped at any time, and how the study might affect their well-being (Glesne, 2011). I was
completely transparent with my participants about the purpose and goals of my study. Since the
participants were alumni, I also hoped that the purpose and goals of the study encouraged them
to participate as well. On the other hand, due to my positionality (as discussed previously),
participants may have felt coerced to participate; I made sure that I constantly reminded
participants of the voluntary nature of their participation and their right to terminate their
participation at any time.
There are ethical considerations specific to interviews that I considered. Although I did
not ask questions of a deeply personal, sensitive, or controversial nature, it was impossible to
rule out that my interview questions may have surfaced negative or painful emotions and feelings
in my participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Once again, I emphasized participants’ ability to

50
cease participation at any time, for any reason. I also refrained from pressuring potential
participants to participate in an interview (Rubin & Rubin, 2011). This was especially important
because I was a current advisor in the Explore program and I knew some of the participants
personally. Again, I emphasized that participation was voluntary and was extremely clear about
the purpose and goals of the study.
Credibility & Trustworthiness
My personal biases, reactivity of participants, and response bias were all factors that may
have impacted the credibility and trustworthiness of the qualitative portion of my study. As I
discussed previously, my positive bias toward Explore required that I actively sought
disconfirming evidence. The reactivity of my participants was also a consideration given my
position of power as a researcher and teacher involved in Explore – my participants may have
modified their answers to be more positive or less critical of the program. To counter this, I
ensured that I asked questions that invited critical or differing viewpoints – in effect, finding
“discrepant evidence and negative cases” (Maxwell, 2013, p. 127). In addition, because I knew I
was not able to get 100% participation from all Explore alumni (approximately 80 students), I
offered a small financial incentive in the form of a gift card for those who took the survey and
participated in the interview. The presence of the incentive may have encouraged some
participants and even disincentivized others. In addition, my selection of interview participants
may have reflected my own bias; hence, I clearly documented why I chose selected participants
(see Chapter 4).
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) and Maxwell (2013) provided many strategies that have
helped me shore up the credibility and trustworthiness of my study. First, I used triangulation by
comparing and contrasting my qualitative and quantitative data to identify salient themes. In

51
addition, I used member checking for my interviews by inviting interview participants to review
my codes and evidence to ensure that my interpretation of what they said matched their own
experiences. One downside to this member checking strategy was that it became an additional
request of my research participants, however, this greatly improved the credibility and of my
study.
Salkind (2016) described reliability as the consistency of an instrument while validity is
whether the instrument actually measured what it intended to measure. Considering both of these
factors was important for my study as I surveyed the population of all Explore alumni (81
students). Because I was doing a mixed methods study, I had the benefit of being able to more
extensively triangulate my data. I was able to compare and contrast the data from the survey with
the data I gained from the interviews. While this process was still influenced by my positionality
as a researcher, the benefit of triangulation was that I had multiple data points to back up
whatever conclusions I made.
Another advantage I had is that I did not rely on a subsample of the population I am
studying; rather, I aimed to survey the entire population. This was only possible because I have
access to the contact information of all Explore alumni (through the ISSA alumni database), they
were somewhat easy to contact since the vast majority of them are still enrolled in university,
and the population size was small enough to be manageable by one researcher. Conducting a
census was beneficial since I was not relying on a sampling method that may have ultimately
resulted in sampling variability (Diez et al., 2019). However, a concern was response bias. For
example, it is possible that students who had positive perceptions of their experience in Explore
or those who have found it very applicable to their lives were more likely to participate in order
to help the program. This was in contrast to those who did not enjoy or find their experience

52
beneficial and hence may have been less likely to voluntarily participate in a study of the
program. The complement of qualitative interview data and triangulation, however, helped
moderate this potential response bias.

53
Chapter 4: Results, Findings & Discussion
The purposes of this mixed method study were to gain a deeper understanding of how
alumni of the Explore program at International School in Southeast Asia perceive the advantages
and disadvantages of the work- and project-based aspects of the program and to understand how,
if at all, they have been able to apply their learning to their experiences after completing the
program. The research questions were:
RQ1: What do Explore alumni perceive to be the advantages and disadvantages of their
project-based learning and work-based learning experiences in Explore?
RQ2: How have Explore alumni applied their learning from Explore to their experiences
after completing the program?
This study used a mixed methods, convergent parallel design that collected quantitative
data from a survey and qualitative data from semi-structured interviews. A survey was
distributed to all alumni of Explore aged 18 or older (N = 81). Survey participants (n = 47) had
the option to indicate their interest in being interviewed. Interview participants (n = 9) were
purposefully selected from all participants who indicated a willingness to be interviewed to
capture a broad range of opinions about the Explore program. The study used a cultural-
historical activity theory (CHAT) framework to inform the data collection and analysis.
This chapter will summarize the key findings of the study and discuss their meaning.
First, the survey and interview participants will be described. Next, the quantitative results will
be shared. Next, the qualitative findings will be reported, broken down by each factor of the
Explore activity system. Finally, in the discussion, the findings will be synthesized in order to
answer the study’s two research questions.

54
Overview of Participants
The population of interest for this study was all alumni of Explore aged 18 or older (N =
81). Out of those eligible to participate, 47 (58%) completed the survey. Of these participants, 36
(44%) indicated a willingness to be interviewed as part of the study. A total of 11 participants
were purposively selected to be interviewed, and 9 completed the interview (11% of the total
population). Two selected interview participants did not respond to multiple requests to schedule
the interview. An overview of the demographics of all participants in the study can be found in
Table 1, while the interview participants are shown in Table 2.
To select interview participants, their scores for PBL and WBL were grouped according
to high (≥45), middle (40-44), and low scores (≤39). From there, participants were purposively
selected in order to attain a balance between genders and graduation years, and to ensure there
was representation from students who did Explore in Grade 11. Graduation year was a very
important demographic to control so the study could gain a broad understanding of themes that
emerged across all years of Explore.

55
Table 1
Study Participant Demographics
Demographic Survey Participants Interview Participants
n % n %
Gender
Female
Male
Non-Binary

26
20
1

55
43
2

5
4
0

56
44
0
Year of graduation
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021

13
6
6
9
13

28
13
13
19
28

2
2
0
3
2

22
22
0*
33
22
Did Explore in
Grade 11
Grade 12

7
40

15
85

2
7

22
78
Did an internship in Explore
Yes
No

31
16

66
34

6
3

67
33
Immediate activity after graduation
Went straight to
college/university
National Service**
Gap Year

30

8
9

64

17
19

6

2
1

67

22
11
Current activity
Studying
Working
Seeking work
Gap year

36
9
1
1

77
19
2
2

6
3
0
0

67
33
0
0

Note. N = 81, n = 47.
* Although no interview participants graduated in 2019, two participants who graduated in 2020
did Explore in Grade 11 and thus were in the same cohort as the 2019 graduating class.
** Some graduates were citizens of countries (e.g., Singapore, Republic of Korea) that have
compulsory military service.

56
Table 2
Pseudonyms and Profiles of Interview Participants
Pseudonym Did Explore in Grade Graduation Year Current Activity
Alan 12 2017 Studying in college
Elaine 12 2018 Studying in college
Eric 12 2021 Completing National Service
Farah 11 2020 Studying in college
Janet 12 2020 Studying in college
Richard 12 2018 Studying in college
Robert 12 2017 Working full time
Sandra 11 2020 Studying in college
Vera 12 2021 Studying in college

Quantitative Results
A total of 47 participants completed the survey. The survey asked participants a variety
of questions related to their experiences engaging in the project-based (PBL) and work-based
learning (WBL) aspects of Explore. Of the 47 participants, 16 did not do an internship as part of
Explore (these participants were part of the first cohort of Explore students; WBL was not part of
the program at that time). Hence, these participants did not complete the survey questions about
WBL.
The results of the survey’s PBL items are shown in Figure 3, while the results for WBL
are shown in Figure 4. Both figures show the percentage of Strongly Agree/Agree and Strongly
Disagree/Disagree responses for each question. For visibility’s sake, the figures show variable
names; the survey item each variable is associated with is listed in Table 3. Overall, participants
responded to the PBL items more favorably, with 88.8% of the overall responses positive,
compared to 68.3% for the WBL items. It is notable that 100% and 93.3% of participants rated
engaging in their projects and internships, respectively, as valuable.

57
Figure 3
Survey Results for Project-Based Learning Items

Note. The meaning of each variable name is listed in Table 3.

Figure 4

Survey Results for Work-Based Learning Items

Note. The meaning of each variable name is listed in Table 3.

58
Table 3
Survey Items Associated with Variable Names
Variable Name Survey Item
pbl_apply I have been able to apply the skills I learned through doing projects in
Explore to my life after completing the program.
pbl_collab
I was able to develop my collaboration skills through the projects in Explore.
pbl_knowexpect In general, I knew what was expected of me when completing projects in
Explore.
pbl_openended The open-ended nature of the projects in Explore overwhelmed me. (Scale
reversed)
pbl_probsolv
I was able to develop my problem solving skills through projects in Explore.
pbl_reflection
I was able to develop my reflection skills through the projects in Explore.
pbl_relevance Through the projects in Explore, I was able to see the real-world relevance
of what I was learning.
pbl_timemgmt I was able to develop time management skills through the projects in
Explore.
pbl_tools I had access to the tools I needed to be successful in completing projects in
Explore.
pbl_tradpeers I feel like my peers taking more traditional classes learned more content than
me. (Scale reversed)
pbl_understanding As a result of projects in Explore, I was able to gain a deeper understanding
of the topics I was studying.
pbl_valuable
Engaging in projects was valuable to me.
wbl_apply I have been able to apply what I learned at my partnership to my life after
Explore.
wbl_career My internship helped me get a better idea of what career I would like to
pursue.
wbl_collab
My partnership helped me develop my collaboration skills.
wbl_community
I felt like I was part of a community at work.
wbl_knowexp
I knew what was expected of me at work.
wbl_major My partnership helped me get a better idea of what I would like to major in
at college/university.
wbl_networking
My partnership helped me develop my networking skills.
wbl_probsolv
My partnership helped me develop my problem solving skills.
wbl_relevance My internship helped me see the connection between things I learned at
school and the real world.
wbl_timemgmt
My partnership helped me develop my time management skills.
wbl_tools
I had access to the tools I needed to be successful in my work.
wbl_valuable
My internship was a valuable experience.

59
As part of the exploratory data analysis of the surveys, various statistical analyses were
conducted. Each of the survey item responses had points assigned for each choice, with
“Strongly Agree” being associated with 4, “Agree” at 3, “Disagree” at 2, and “Strongly
Disagree” at 1. The scores of all items were summed, with the exception of survey items
“Compared to the partnerships program, doing PBL was more valuable to me” and “Compared
to doing PBL in Explore, the partnerships program was more valuable to me” because not every
respondent did an internship. This would enable scores for both sections to be easily compared.
The minimum possible score was 12 (i.e., rating each item as “Strongly Disagree”) and the
maximum possible score was 48 (i.e., rating each item as “Strongly Agree”). The mean PBL
score was 40.19 with a standard deviation of 4.26. The mean WBL score was 34.7 with a
standard deviation of 7.24. No outliers were present. The distributions of scores can be shown in
Figures 5 and 6. The scores for PBL (Figure 5) are unimodal and somewhat normally distributed
with a slight left skew. The scores for WBL (Figure 6) are far more dispersed with some
clustering around the scores of 30-38.

60
Figure 5
Distribution of Summed Project-Based Learning Items

Figure 6
Distribution of Summed Work-Based Learning Items

61
Correlational analysis of the summed PBL and WBL scores was also conducted. Because
this data was interval in nature, Spearman’s Rank-Order Correlation was calculated using
RStudio (Akoglu, 2018). The results of this analysis are presented in Figure 7, while the strong
relationships (r s ≥ 0.6) and p-values are listed in Table 4.

Figure 7
Spearman’s Rho Between All Variables in the Explore Survey

Note. The meaning of each variable name is listed in Table 3.

62

Table 4
Strong Relationships (rs ≥ 0.6) Between PBL and WBL Variables
Variable 1 Variable 2 rs p
• In general, I knew what was
expected of me when completing
projects in Explore.
• I had access to the tools I needed
to be successful in completing
projects in Explore.

0.73 <.001
• I have been able to apply what I
learned at my internship to my
life after Explore.
• My internship helped me develop
my problem solving skills.

0.73 <.001
• My internship helped me get a
better idea of what I would like to
major in at college/university.
• My internship helped me get a
better idea of what career I would
like to pursue.

0.72 <.001
• I felt like I was part of a
community at work.
• My internship helped me develop
my networking skills.
0.68 <.001
• My internship helped me develop
my problem solving skills.

0.67 <.001
• My internship was a valuable
experience.
• My internship helped me see the
connection between things I
learned at school and the real
world.
0.67 <.001
• I felt like I was part of a
community at work.
0.67 <.001
• I have been able to apply what I
learned at my internship to my
life after Explore.
0.62 <.001

• My internship helped me develop
my collaboration skills.
0.62 <.001
• My internship helped me see the
connection between things I
learned at school and the real
world.
0.61 <.001

Note. rs = Spearman’s rho.

63
Finally, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was also conducted on all the variables in the
survey. Although EFA has many practical uses, the goal for EFA in this study was to reduce the
large number of variables in the survey to a smaller number of overarching factors, and to get a
better understanding of how the underlying variables interact with each other (Williams et al.,
2010). Scree plots were generated, and it was revealed that four factors were appropriate for the
data. This was verified after implementing a varimax rotation and a clean factor structure was
found (Costello & Osborne, 2005). The results of the EFA are presented in Table 5, with the
factor loading for each item and factor presented. Factor loadings ≥0.4 are considered important,
and ≥0.5 are practically significant (Williams et al., 2010).
The first factor encompassed survey items mostly dealing with the internship and is
called “Internships.” The second factor mostly encompassed items about projects and is called
“Projects.” The third factor, “Cross-Cutting Skills,” encompassed questions about transferable
skills learned through the projects and internships. The final factor, “Expectations & Tools” only
had three items related that were about tools and expectations at the internship and the
development of problem solving skills.

Table 5
Results From an Exploratory Factor Analysis of the Explore Alumni Survey
Survey Item Factor loading
1 2 3 4
Factor 1: Internships
• I have been able to apply what I learned at my
internship to my life after Explore.
0.81

0.24
• My internship helped me develop my problem
solving skills.
0.76

0.19
• My internship helped me see the connection between
things I learned at school and the real world.
0.75 -0.11 0.12

64
• My internship was a valuable experience. 0.70

0.28 0.36
• My internship helped me get a better idea of what
career I would like to pursue.
0.69 0.28

-0.41
• My internship helped me develop my collaboration
skills.
0.69

0.15 0.14
• I feel like my peers taking more traditional classes
learned more content than me. (Scale reversed)
0.55 0.21 -0.31

• My internship helped me develop my time
management skills.
0.40

0.32 0.40
Factor 2: Projects
• I had access to the tools I needed to be successful in
completing projects in Explore.
0.13 0.95 -0.26 0.10
• In general, I knew what was expected of me when
completing projects in Explore.

0.79 -0.13

• As a result of projects in Explore, I was able to gain
a deeper understanding of the topics I was studying.
0.37 0.59 0.38 0.24
• I have been able to apply the skills I learned through
doing projects in Explore to my life after completing
the program.
0.35 0.58 0.22

• I was able to develop my collaboration skills through
the projects in Explore.

0.51 0.31 0.21
• The open-ended nature of the projects in Explore
overwhelmed me. (Scale reversed)

0.38

-0.18
• Engaging in projects was valuable to me.

0.35

0.30
Factor 3: Cross-Cutting Skills
• I was able to develop time management skills
through the projects in Explore.
-0.12 0.28 0.69 0.21
• I was able to develop my reflection skills through the
projects in Explore.

-0.15 0.64

• My internship helped me develop my networking
skills.
0.35 -0.15 0.59 0.30
• My internship helped me get a better idea of what I
would like to major in at college/university.
0.55 0.35 0.54 -0.54
• I felt like I was part of a community at work. 0.45 -0.25 0.53 0.35
• Through the projects in Explore, I was able to see
the real-world relevance of what I was learning.
0.11 0.14 0.37

Factor 4: Expectations & Tools
• I knew what was expected of me at work. 0.24

0.54

65
• I was able to develop my problem solving skills
through projects in Explore.

0.30 0.29 0.54
• I had access to the tools I needed to be successful in
my work.
0.21

0.20 0.43
Note. A maximum-likelihood factor analysis was conducted with a varimax rotation. Factor
loadings above .40 are in bold and reverse-scored items are denoted with (Scale reversed).

Discussion of Quantitative Results for Project-Based Learning
The quantitative results demonstrated that students viewed the PBL in Explore very
favorably, with 100% of the survey respondents saying that engaging in projects was valuable.
The distribution of PBL scores was normally distributed, with a mean score of 40.19 (out of a
possible 48) and a relatively low standard deviation – suggesting very consistent, positive
perceptions of the PBL in Explore. In addition, almost all the variables that were addressed on
the survey – had over 90% of respondents either strongly agreeing or agreeing. Only three
variables (knowing the expectations, open-endedness, traditional peers learning more content)
had less than 80% either strongly agreeing or agreeing.
The exploratory factor analysis of the survey revealed that projects were a salient latent
variable. The strongest factor loadings were for the items related to whether respondents felt they
had the tools needed to be successful in projects (0.95) and whether they knew what was
expected of them (0.79). This suggests that tools and knowing expectations were very important
to students in Explore. In addition, each of these items also had a 92% and 79% strongly
agree/agree rating from participants, and had a strong correlation (r s = 0.73, p < .001). These
were the only two PBL variables that had a strong correlation. This was likely because there was
low variance in the data since most participants were generally very positive about the PBL in
Explore.

66
The lowest survey ratings were for the open-ended nature of projects in Explore and
peers in traditional classes learning more. Almost 30% of respondents responded negatively,
suggesting that they felt overwhelmed by the open-ended nature of the projects. For whether
peers in traditional classes learned more, almost 40% of respondents responded negatively – this
meant that 40% of respondents felt that their peers in non-PBL classes learned more content.
These findings were consistent with the findings of other researchers that found some students
being overwhelmed by the open-ended nature of PBL (Grant, 2011; Parker et al., 2013; Virtue &
Hinnant-Crawford, 2019). In addition, Dochy et al.’s (2003) findings that problem-based
learning had a negative effect on students’ content knowledge can explain why many Explore
students felt that their peers in other classes learned more content.
Despite these shortcomings, the survey revealed that respondents felt very strongly that
they still learned many other skills through PBL. These skills included problem solving,
collaboration, time management, and reflection skills. In addition, respondents also strongly
reported that they could see the real-world relevance and gain a deeper understanding of what
they were learning. These findings are in line with those of other researchers who noted the
various soft skills that are developed through PBL (Chiang & Lee, 2016; Holmes & Hwang,
2016; Krajcik et al., 2021).
Discussion of Quantitative Results for Work-Based Learning
In contrast to the results of the PBL items, the WBL items were far more dispersed. The
mean WBL score was 34.7 (out of 48) with a relatively high standard deviation. This level of
dispersion was apparent given the relatively flat distribution, with an almost equal number of
scores at the high end (>40) and the low end (<30). There appeared to be some clustering of

67
scores in the middle (31-38). This distribution clearly suggests that students either loved, hated,
or were neutral on, their internships.
The exploratory factor analysis showed that internships was a latent variable in the
survey. The highest factor loadings were applying the learning from the internship to life
afterwards (0.81), developing problem solving skills (0.76), seeing the connection between
school and the real world (0.75), the internship being valuable (0.70), career discernment (0.69),
and developing collaboration skills (0.69). These high factor loadings mean that these variables
had the strongest influence on the perception of the internships.
Many WBL variables were strongly correlated to each other. For example, application of
learning to life after the internship was strongly correlated with the development of problem
solving skills (r s = 0.73, p < 0.001). In addition, there was a strong correlation between whether
the internship helped students discern their college major and their future career path (r s = 0.72, p
< 0.001). The variables that were most strongly correlated (e.g., r s > 0.6) with whether the
student found the internship valuable were whether the internship helped them see the
connection between things they learned at school and the real world, whether they felt they were
a part of a community, and whether they were able to apply what they learned.
In contrast to PBL, only 77% of respondents reported that their internship was a valuable
experience. While this is still a high percentage, it means that almost a quarter of students did not
find their internships valuable. Based on the correlations discussed above, it can thus be inferred
that these students did not find that their internship helped them see the connection between
school and the real world, did not feel as though they were part of a community, and did not
apply what they learned in their internship to the real world. It is important to note that only 57%
of respondents felt like they were part of a community at work, and 60% felt that their internship

68
helped them see the connection between school and the real world. These results were in line
with other studies that found that the success of an internship is highly dependent on the support
from all stakeholders and involved and the level of training that employers receive (Darche et al.,
2009; Miner, 2016).
Despite these disadvantages, the survey still revealed several advantages. Over 70% of
respondents reported that their internship helped them discern their desired career – a very
similar level to that reported by Papadimitriou’s (2014) study of a high school internship
program. In addition, over 60% of respondents found that their internship helped them develop
their time management, problem solving, networking, and collaboration skills. These skills are
broadly in line with the workplace skills developed through internships (James, 2018; Rice
2018).
Qualitative Findings
This study used a cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) conceptual framework. The
qualitative interview data was coded using an inductive process. In the first stage (open coding),
the interview data was coded according to the different components of the activity system. In this
activity system, the components included subject, community, division of labor, rules, tools,
object, and outcome (Hsu & Venegas, 2018). In the second stage (selective coding), the data was
organized into sub-themes. The findings of this two-stage coding process will be shared in this
section. The activity system is shown again in Figure 8, while the themes are presented in Table
6 The pseudonyms and profiles of the interview participants are shown in Table 2. Following
Table 6, the themes are discussed in depth, beginning with Subject.

69
Figure 8
Activity System of the Explore Program

70
Table 6
Themes, Sub-Themes, and Sub-Sub-Themes
Themes Sub-Themes Sub-Sub-Themes
Subject Following Interests
Self-Efficacy

Community Closeness of Relationships
Disconnection from the Larger School
Community
Strong Connection with Advisors
Usefulness of Mentors
Professional Community at Work

Division of Labor Minimization at Work
Student Ownership of Time at School
Challenges Working in Project Groups

Rules No sub-themes identified
Tools Project-Based Learning (PBL) Interdisciplinary
Student-Designed Study (SDS)
& Sense of Ownership
Authenticity
Open-Endedness
Repetitiveness & Lack of
Action
Ownership
Internships Real-World Experience
Level of Interest
Difficulties Managing the
Schedule
Object Career Skills
Research Skills
Time Management & Productivity
Less Compared to Traditional Learning

Outcome Career Skills
Research Skills
Time Management & Productivity
Seeking Similar Experiences
Confidence & College Readiness

71
Subject
The subject of the Explore activity system is the students in the program. Two sub-
themes related to this component were induced: following interests and self-efficacy.
Following Interests
Two-thirds of the interview participants described how Explore allowed them to follow
their own interests, and discover new ones. Several participants described how the projects in
Explore allowed them to learn and do things they otherwise would not have done on their own,
expanding their interests and also helping them discern what they were not interested in. Eric
mentioned that participating in Explore gave him the opportunity to “develop specific passion
projects that we had thought of over the past few years in high school … [Explore] gave me the
time to actually make it a reality.” Another student, Robert, mentioned that through Explore, he
was “doing something that [I was] genuinely interested in … And I could be graded for
something that I was putting 100% effort into, and that I was interested in.” Janet also
emphasized this poignantly when she said, “Explore is the ultimate time and place to … learn
things that you want to learn, but you have no idea how to approach it, because someone is going
to hold your hand.”
Self-Efficacy
Several participants also described how Explore helped them gain a higher sense of self-
efficacy. Many students described how the projects and internships were able to give them a high
sense of accomplishment after being able to complete something. For example, Elaine felt a high
level of self-efficacy because she was able to publish original work as part of her internship. This
was significant to her because she believed that few of her peers were able to publish their work
while in high school. The yearlong student-designed study also gave students a strong feeling of

72
self-efficacy. Since the scope of the project was so large (essentially writing a short thesis over
the course of the school year), three students almost felt a sense of surprise at having been able to
complete the project. Farah exemplified this when she said, “I was learning so much” and that
she felt she was “learning through magic … I didn’t realize that I was learning.”
Community
The community is composed of the individuals participating in the activity system. In this
context, the community is composed of the team of three Explore teachers (called advisors) and
peers in and out of Explore. The community is also extended to the community students are a
part of at their off-campus internships.
This component of the activity system was one of the most salient among interview
participants, with 8 out of 9 participants discussing it. The sub-themes generated for this
component include closeness of relationships, disconnection from the larger school community,
strong connection with advisors, usefulness of mentors, and professional community at work.
Closeness of Relationships
Almost half of the interview participants (4 out of 9) discussed the friendships they
formed within Explore. According to Janet, because Explore is composed of a small cohort of
approximately 15-20 students, “it’s kind of hard to not interact with certain people.” One student,
however, shared that because of the small size of the Explore cohorts, “there can be drama.”
Many of the interview participants shared that they developed good friendships in the
program, and are still in touch with many of their fellow students. Richard underscored this
theme by sharing that he remembers the friendships he formed in Explore more than his
academic achievements. These relationships were formed because of the amount of time students

73
spent together in Explore’s flexible schedule and because they were going through a shared
experience.
Another factor that helped strengthen the relationships was the Explore “launch trip”
which is a retreat that Explore students and advisors take prior to the start of the regular school
year. Past launch trips went to places such as Mongolia, Canada, and Malaysia for students to
engage in bonding and outdoor education. Students described these trips as bonding experiences
that set the foundation for relationships throughout the school year.
Disconnection from the Larger School Community
This sub-theme is the main disadvantage participants described when discussing the
Explore community. Two participants shared that being in Explore somewhat felt like they were
away from the general student population at International School in Southeast Asia (ISSA). This
feeling was exacerbated when students were engaging in their off-campus internships. This point
was demonstrated well by Vera when she mentioned, “I felt like because of how much I was
going in and out of school … it just felt like … I was losing touch with things … there would be
moving parts in school that would move on without me.”
Strong Connection with Advisors
Almost all participants (7 out of 9) mentioned that they had a strong connection with the
three advisors (teachers) in Explore. These advisors worked exclusively in the program and did
not teach any classes outside of Explore. One reason for the closeness with advisors is that
students in Explore call the advisors by their first names, rather than by their last names, as is the
norm in the rest of ISSA. Participants discussed how the first-name basis meant there was less of
a power gap between students and the advisors. For Richard, this was a significant shift that he
had to get used to. He said, “I was so used to having teachers being the authority … And now the

74
teachers are more mentors. They’re here to guide you.” Another student, Alan, also said that
because there were three advisors in Explore, different students could gravitate to individual
advisors based on their personalities. On the other hand, Janet mentioned that the quality of
Explore was somewhat dependent on the quality and interests of the advisors.
Usefulness of Mentors
Throughout the year, Explore students work with outside mentors. Three students
highlighted the usefulness of having these outside mentors because they were actual
professionals from their fields. For example, Richard was particularly struck because he was able
to do research with a professor at a local university who assisted him with a project. Elaine
shared that one of the reasons she found her mentor was so useful was because they were able to
schedule one-on-one meetings to get their perspective and input.
Professional Community at Work
Many participants also brought up the community they were a part of as part of their
internship. Several discussed the professional atmosphere they experienced. Richard, in
particular, was stricken by the professional atmosphere at work because it was “almost like a
wakeup call for what’s coming after graduation.” Another student, Eric, discussed how the
community at work was far more hierarchical, which was in direct contrast to the community at
school. Given his standing in the hierarchy, this made Eric want to avoid showing inexperience.
However, with time, he was able to become more and more comfortable within the community,
allowing him to ask more questions and learn more through the process.
Division of Labor
Division of labor refers to how aspects of the activity are split up. In Explore, the division
of labor was quite different at students’ internships and at school. This was revealed through the

75
sub-themes related to this component: minimization at work, student ownership of time at
school, and working in project groups.
Minimization at Work
Although not a majority, a significant number of participants (4 out of 9) discussed how
they felt somewhat minimized at their internships and hence received fewer, or less meaningful,
tasks. Richard had the impression that he was not getting larger tasks because he was a
“temporary intern” and school was helping mediate the employer-employee relationship. Farah
echoed this, and needed to receive assistance from an Explore advisor in advocating to receive
more work at her internship. Sandra perhaps used the strongest language to describe this
relationship, mentioning that she felt like she “was being coddled by everyone.”
Student Ownership of Time at School
Unlike many school programs, students in Explore have greater ownership over how they
spend their time at school. This was a recurring theme that several (4 out of 9) participants
mentioned. Overall, students enjoyed having more freedom over how they spent their time at
school. Robert described that this freedom “open[ed] us up to a new way of thinking that …
regular school would have never really given us.” One new way of thinking was having a
stronger sense of responsibility over work completion and deadlines since students felt that
Explore advisors did not coddle students over deadlines like other teachers. Another new way of
thinking was how having a flexible schedule allowed students to prioritize their time in ways that
aligned with their interests. These new ways of thinking were also encompassed in the various
skills (specifically time management) they learned from this division of labor; this will be
discussed in the Object section.

76
While students enjoyed having more ownership of their time, the freedom was jarring at
first. Many mentioned that the freedom was so different – scary, in fact – from their previous
experiences in less flexible learning environments. Farah described it as “very different, which
was terrifying” and Alan shared that “freedom can be scary, especially when it comes to learning
… It’s totally different from the typical school that we were so used to for 11 years.” In addition,
the freedom also led some to procrastination. As mentioned previously, because the Explore
advisors did not micromanage students with respect to deadlines, it was up to students to manage
their schedules appropriately to space out long-term projects. Richard described how he
struggled with this, and ended up having to spend many late nights catching up on work that he
should have planned out better.
Challenges Working in Project Groups
Several students mentioned some difficulties they had when working in groups on
projects. Despite this, students still viewed working in groups as a learning experience because
they perceived it as an opportunity to work with people with differing opinions. Alan, in
particular, emphasized that working in groups was an opportunity to learn how other people
work and to get different perspectives.
Rules
Rules are the formal and informal guidelines that participants in the activity system
follow. This did not seem to be a highly salient component of the system with only one student
(Robert) mentioning rules. This was done in the context of concerns students had about grades
and how grades from Explore would influence students’ grade point averages (GPAs). It is worth
noting that Robert graduated in 2017 and was part of the first cohort of students to participate in

77
Explore. He described how people were “stressed” about “small details in this new program, how
it's going to impact their grades.”
Tools
Tools are the aspects that help facilitate the activity within the system. These can include
tangible tools (such as books or calculators) and intangible tools (such as assignments and
programs). Given the focus of this study to understand more about Explore’s PBL and WBL
aspects, this was a highly salient component. PBL and internships emerged as the two main sub-
themes, with several sub-sub-themes under each. For ease of reading, these sub-themes and sub-
sub-themes are presented in Table 6 above.
Project-Based Learning
The PBL in Explore was highly salient, with 8 out of 9 participants discussing this sub-
theme. Several sub-sub-themes were identified, including interdisciplinary, student-designed
study and sense of ownership, authenticity, open-endedness, and repetitiveness and lack of
action.
Interdisciplinary. Explore aims to be an interdisciplinary program, and many of its
projects are interdisciplinary in nature. Several participants explained that they enjoyed how
projects gave them an opportunity to integrate different subjects and they could see how learning
from one discipline applied to another. Vera found the interdisciplinary nature “the biggest
strength of [Explore]” since it allowed her to synthesize her learning from various subjects.
Student-Designed Study & Sense of Ownership. One project was especially notable,
with 4 out of 9 participants mentioning it: the student-designed study (SDS). This project is a
year-long study aligned with a student’s interests. Students mentioned how they thought
everything they learned could apply to the SDS – and Elaine described it as “hugely impactful

78
and pivotal.” Since the project was based on a student’s interest, students described how it led to
high levels of motivation and ownership in the project. Most students’ SDSs are a research
paper, and Eric described it as “actually something we’re kind of proud of.” Eric, however, did
not “look fondly upon” his SDS because he found it did not have high levels of real-world
applicability.
Authenticity. This was an important aspect of the projects to several participants. Several
described the projects as being applicable to real life and that they dealt with real-world data and
issues. Janet, however, did mention a project that did not have a high level of authenticity and
hence did not enjoy the project as much because she could not “attach personal value to it.” For
this project, Janet also emphasized the importance of projects being planned well; if a project is
not planned well, then “students don’t understand what the point is, and it feels like a waste of
time.” One student, Robert, highlighted the importance of having an authentic audience for
projects.
Open-Endedness. Many students discussed the open-ended nature of many of the
projects in Explore. Eric explained how he found the open-endedness a little overwhelming
because, prior to Explore, “we were taught to find just that one solution.” With open-ended
projects, Eric said, “you start to self-doubt … check everything, then look for a different
answer.”
Alan, a member of the first cohort of Explore students, described how students were able
to develop their own rubrics for projects. However, he mentioned that this led to not knowing
what the “minimum” would be for a project. According to Alan, this would be important so “that
way we can know where to start from.” It is worth noting, however, that Alan was the only
interview participant to mention this.

79
Repetitiveness & Lack of Action. A few participants mentioned that the projects in
Explore were somewhat repetitive, in particular, with lots of presentations. Vera also mentioned
that she ended up doing lots of infographics. She also discussed how several projects “didn’t
engage in action” – and that this was a disadvantage because she wanted to be able to engage
with more people outside of Explore.
Internships
This was another highly salient sub-theme with all 7 participants who did an internship in
Explore bringing this up. Several sub-themes were induced, including real-world experience,
level of interest, and difficulties managing the schedule.
Real-World Experience. Participants described the internships as valuable because the
internships gave them an opportunity to learn out of the classroom and reach out to professionals.
Vera mentioned her internship as “a great way to get out of my bubble.” Several participants also
detailed how being surrounded by professionals in a professional environment gave them insight
in how different companies work. This point was emphasized by Sandra, who did her internship
on the ISSA campus; she felt that her internship was less authentic because she was “surrounded
by teachers.” The real-world experience was also beneficial because participants were able to
add their internships to their resume, especially if it aligns with their desired major or career
field.
Level of Interest. One thing that became clear was that participants did not consistently
have high levels of interest in their internships. Some students were in internships that were
highly aligned with their desired majors or careers and found their internship very interesting and
valuable.

80
Others, however, found them less interesting because of a lack of alignment. Sandra, who
was not highly interested in her internship field, stated that she did not feel like she had much of
a choice in her internship placement. However, for Farah, who also was not in an internship
aligned with her interests, her internship was still a valuable experience because it allowed her
“to do something different.” Juliet also was not highly interested in her internship – however, she
was able to use the experience to decide what she did not want to pursue in the future. She said,
“it made me cross out a couple of options because I tried new things, and I hated it.”
Difficulties Managing the Schedule. Several participants described the challenges
associated with having to split their time between school and their internship because they
attended their internship on alternating school days. Some students did not enjoy that they would
be separated from their peers at their internship. However, they recognized that this was a fair
tradeoff because they had an opportunity to explore their interests at work. Vera specifically
called the internship schedule “confusing” as it sometimes was not consistent, and made it
difficult to juggle commitments between her internship and school. Richard found the
differences between the schedule in Explore versus at his internship “jarring” because the
schedule in Explore was very flexible, but at work, it was far more structured with a fixed
schedule. He felt so strongly about this that he even thought to himself, “I kind of felt like I was
wasting my time for this kind of job.”
Object
The object of an activity system is the specific goal(s) that the subjects pursue. In this
case, the object is the specific academic and non-academic skills developed in the program. In
Explore, students found these skills to be highly applicable to their lives and based in the real
world. All of the participants mentioned this highly salient theme. Several skills emerged as

81
salient sub-themes: career skills, research skills, time management and productivity, less
compared to traditional learning, and college readiness.
Time Management & Productivity
This was the most salient sub-theme, with 8 out of 9 participants discussing this. These
skills were primarily developed through the flexible structure of the Explore program and the
internships. Elaine described how the advisors gave students a high degree of responsibility over
organizing their project tasks – which in turn, built independence and forced students to become
better at managing their time. Of course, not all students learned time management easily. Robert
and Vera discussed how they “learned [time management] the hard way” by making mistakes
along the way.
Career Skills
This theme encompassed the variety of career-related skills participants mentioned. This
included how to write resumes, how to network with professionals, and how to participate in
professional interviews. Many participants described how this was the first time in their lives that
they were able to learn about and develop these skills. Also related to this theme was how
students were able to develop their presentation and public speaking skills through the many oral
presentations in the program.
Research Skills
Because the year-long SDS is a major project in Explore, many referred to the research
skills they developed. These skills included the specific skills of writing a literature review,
developing study methods, and understanding how to read academic literature. Participants also
found that engaging in a year-long research project was valuable in and of itself as it allowed
them to deeply understand the research process overall.

82
Less Compared to Traditional Learning
One student, Eric, shared that he felt that his peers in traditional classes learned more
content than he did in Explore. For example, he wished that he had received “more in depth
statistics classes.” He went on to describe that he was not able to learn as much content
(specifically in math and physics) through Explore, but was able to pick up more soft skills such
as time management, presentation skills, and independence.
Outcome
The outcome of the activity system is what pursuing the object of the activity system
amounts to. In other words, this is the students’ actual development of academic and non-
academic skills and how students apply these skills to their lives after completing the program.
This was an extremely salient theme, with every interview participant discussing how they have
been able to apply what they learned in Explore to their lives after graduation. Several sub-
themes emerged, namely career skills, research skills, confidence, time management and
productivity, and seeking similar experiences. The final sub-theme, college readiness, also
seemed to encompass all the other sub-themes as well.
Career Skills
Participants were able to apply what they learned from their Explore internships, with 4
out of 9 discussing how these skills helped them in their college experiences. One major aspect
was networking. Because they learned how to network in Explore, they found it easier
approaching professors for help, reaching out to potential college internships, and even running
for student government positions. Alan summed this theme up well: “The one thing that I will
say benefited me the most out of everything … is knowing how to communicate and how to
network as much as possible. I wouldn’t be here [in my current job] if I didn’t go out of my way

83
to network.” Another very tangible example that Farah provided is how she was able to draw on
her internship in Explore to help her answer interview questions for a new internship. She cited
the example of being able to draw on her experiences at her Explore internship to answer the
typical interview question of, “When was a time that you struggled in a team?” Related to
networking, Elaine found that because she had experience working with diverse individuals at
her Explore internship, she was able to navigate relationships with professors, peers, and co-
workers better.
Finally, several participants also mentioned that simply having the internship on their
resume helped them have an advantage over their peers when applying for internships and other
work opportunities in college. Farah crystallized this point when she described how her Explore
internship helped her differentiate herself from other university students who did not have any
prior work experience.
Research Skills
Four out of 9 participants also described how they were able to apply the research skills
they learned in Explore to assignments in college. Sandra felt like she was well ahead of her
peers in a writing course because she already knew how to write a literature review. Vera was
also able to apply the qualitative interviewing skills she learned in Explore to a project. It is
important to note, however, that Richard, who is studying at an art school, found the research
skills he learned in Explore to be less applicable.
Time Management & Productivity
This was the most salient outcome, with 5 participants describing how they were able to
apply their time management skills from Explore to their current experiences – whether they
were currently enrolled in college or already working. Robert, who is currently working as a

84
freelance teacher, described how he is able to manage his schedule effectively because of how he
learned to manage his calendar in Explore. Farah and Vera both described how their experiences
with the SDS helped them learn how to manage large projects effectively and spread tasks out.
Finally, Janet mentioned how the flexible schedule in Explore helped prepare her for the flexible
schedule she was experiencing in college.
Seeking Similar Experiences
While mentioned by only two participants, it is worth noting that they chose to seek out
similar experiences to Explore in college. Farah intentionally sought out experiential learning
opportunities at her college. For example, she joined a club that offered consulting services to
local businesses. Juliet also enrolled in an interdisciplinary program in college thanks to her
experiences with interdisciplinary approaches in Explore.
Confidence & College Readiness
Many participants found that their experiences in Explore helped them feel more
confident and ready for university. Not only did they have a great sense of confidence out of
being able to work in a professional setting through their internship, but they also look at the
Explore holistically. They found that overall, it helped them transition into college more easily
thanks to the many skills they learned (especially time management). Alan’s comments
demonstrated this theme well:
I talk to all of my [Explore] peers, and they all say the same thing. They are thankful that
they had done Explore because they were able to transition into college pretty easily. And
knowing that [ISSA] is a college preparatory school, you might as well prep them for
actual college instead of eight classes.

85
Synthesis
The main purpose of this mixed methods study was to explore the perceptions of Explore
alumni specific to their project-based and work-based learning experiences in the program, and
to see how they have applied, if at all, their learning from Explore to their lives afterwards. The
two research questions were:
RQ1: What do Explore alumni perceive to be the advantages and disadvantages of their
project-based learning and work-based learning experiences in Explore?
RQ2: How have Explore alumni applied their learning from Explore to their experiences
after completing the program?
In this section, the quantitative results and qualitative findings will be synthesized to
answer these two research questions. In addition, the study’s CHAT framework will be used to
structure the discussion.
RQ 1: Advantages and Disadvantages of PBL and WBL in Explore
In this section, each distinct part of the research question will be synthesized. Given the
study’s CHAT framework, it is also important to address the students’ overall impressions of the
Explore program.
Project-Based Learning
Overall, students viewed the PBL in Explore very favorably. Students reported being able
to develop a variety of soft skills such as time management, problem solving, and collaboration.
The development of formal research skills was also a major advantage given the importance in
Explore of the student-designed study (SDS). Throughout the projects in Explore, it was also
clear that students were able to pursue their own interests and develop new ones. Moreover,
students found that the projects were mostly very authentic – this is possibly given the

86
interdisciplinary approach and applicability to real life of Explore’s projects. Given all these
different factors related to the tools and object of the Explore activity system, the subjects
(students) were able to develop a strong sense of ownership, self-efficacy, and even pride out of
what they were able to accomplish through the projects in Explore.
No approach to learning is perfect, and several disadvantages of the projects in Explore
were identified. While some appreciated the open-ended nature of PBL, many (almost 30%)
found it overwhelming. Part of this seems to have been due to the nature of some of the projects
(for example, the opportunity to find several answers or approaches), but partially due to the
opportunity for students to develop rubrics for the projects. In addition, some students found that
some projects seemed repetitive and not applicable to life. Many students (almost 40%) also felt
that their peers in traditional classes learned more content than them.
These results are largely in line with what was expected from the existing literature
related to PBL. One major area that these findings did contribute to is that of interdisciplinary
approaches to PBL at the high school level. Several researchers have noted that many PBL
practitioners take an interdisciplinary approach (Applebee et al., 20017; Capraro & Jones, 2013;
Noble et al., 2020). However, many studies of interdisciplinary PBL at the high school level look
at teacher perceptions (Applebee et al., 2007; Kodkanon et al., 2018; Noble et al., 2020;
Weinberg & Sample McMeeking, 2017). Hence, this study has developed our understanding of
student perceptions of interdisciplinary PBL at the high school level.
Work-Based Learning
Explore students viewed the internships program favorably, though not as
overwhelmingly as they viewed the projects. Some of the major advantages of the WBL in
Explore were the development of career skills (such as resume writing, interviews, and

87
networking) and other general skills (such as problem solving and collaboration). In addition, it
was apparent that the internships helped student discern either their career or college major
choices. As shown by the survey and interviews, for some students, this was confirmatory – i.e.,
they were in an internship aligned with their interest and served to confirm they were on the right
path. For other students, however, their internship gave them an idea of what not to pursue. This
point was strongly supported by the survey data which revealed a strong correlation between the
internship and whether it helped them get a better idea of what to pursue as a major and as a
career.
Another major advantage of the WBL in Explore is how it gave students authentic, real-
world experience. This advantage was strongest for students that did their internships with an
organization outside their school; for students who worked on-campus, the authenticity was
diminished. Moreover, another distinct advantage is that students were able to put their
internship on the resume, which helped them gain employment later on in college. This was also
reinforced by the emergent theme of students being able to be exposed to what a professional
workplace looks like.
The disadvantages of the WBL in Explore became apparent in lower-quality internships.
Students had less favorable views of their internship when it was not necessarily aligned with
their interest, or when the internship did not provide them with meaningful work opportunities or
helped them feel as though they were part of a community. In these cases, students felt
minimized at work and that they were not contributing meaningfully. However, even in low-
interest internships, students still reported that the internship helped them develop their career
skills.

88
Several structural disadvantages were noted. Although this was not a common theme, one
thing to note about the structure of the WBL in Explore is the extent to which it is managed by
the Explore advisors. One student explained how their internship was decided for them by an
Explore advisor, and that it was very loosely aligned to their interests. Another structural
disadvantage is the schedule of Explore. Many students described how they had difficulty
managing the schedule of going to work on some days and going to school on others. This had a
knock-on effect of diminishing their sense of community at school. In some cases, as well, the
difference between the more flexible schedule of Explore and the structured schedule of a
workplace was jarring. Finally, while many students reported that their internship helped them
see the connection between school and the real world, this did not emerge as a strong theme
through the interviews, suggesting that students did not perceive this as a strong advantage of the
program.
Similar to the findings for PBL, the findings for WBL are in line with what is expected
from the literature. The advantages of being able to develop important career skills and use the
internship as an opportunity for discernment of future activities were in line with previous
studies (Graham, 2013; Handugan, 2019; James, 2018; O’Neill, 2010). On the negative end,
similar to findings shown by O’Neill (2010), when students are in a low quality internship, they
can become frustrated and take away the bare minimum of it being an entry in their resume.
More notable than the findings of this study that are similar to previous studies is what
did not emerge from this study. Previous research (Mihail, 2006) revealed that students preferred
longer internships of four to six months; in Explore, no students reported wishing their internship
was longer. Moreover, while reflection was certainly part of the WBL in Explore, this did not
emerge as a theme among the students, even though several researchers have identified the

89
importance of reflection in helping students assign broader meaning to their internships (Darche
et al., 2009; Murillo et al., 2017).
Overall Impressions of Explore
Given the CHAT framework utilized in this study, it is no surprise that the findings also
revealed that it is impossible to look at the PBL and WBL aspects of the program discretely.
Instead, we must look at the overall Explore activity system to better understand its advantages
and disadvantages, especially because it is difficult to pinpoint their sources to either PBL or
WBL, or even a combination of the two.
Looking at Explore holistically, one of the major advantages of the program is the strong
sense of community that emerged – not only among students, but also with the advisors. In this
case, the PBL and WBL aspects likely reinforced this given that all students were going through
novel experiences together and received plenty of direct support from the Explore advisors. The
disadvantage of being in a shared novel experience, of course, is that students reported feeling
disconnected from the broader ISSA community. This stemmed from being off-campus often for
the internship, and by being enrolled in the Explore courses rather than traditional courses.
Another major disadvantage was the trouble many students experienced managing the open-
ended and flexible schedule of Explore.
From the skills standpoint, students reported learning about various skills such as time
management, problem solving, collaboration, and networking. While the interviews and survey
revealed these skills being developed discretely through the PBL and WBL, the amount of
overlap between these skills suggests that the development in one aspect reinforced the
development in another aspect. For example, developing time management and collaboration

90
skills through the projects in Explore likely reinforced the time management and collaboration in
the internship.
Finally, it is important to discuss how Explore would not be able to implement its
interdisciplinary PBL and internship opportunities if it were not a purpose-built program within
ISSA. It is extremely difficult to implement interdisciplinary PBL, especially at the high school
level (Noble et al., 2020; Weinberg & Sample McMeeking, 2017). Moreover, it is difficult to
implement an internship program without strong school-based support from teachers,
administrators, and other stakeholders (Darche et al., 2009; NAF, 2013; OECD, 2010). The
advantages of the PBL and WBL in Explore would not have been as apparent had Explore not
been its own program.
RQ 2: How Alumni Have Applied Their Learning
This research question is largely addressed by examining the outcome of the activity
system. According to CHAT, the outcome is the overall effect of the subjects in the activity
system pursuing an object (Hsu & Venegas, 2018). This study interpreted the outcome of the
Explore activity system being how alumni of the program were able to implement their learning
from Explore to their lives. Five major sub-themes emerged from the outcome theme: career
skills, research skills, time management and productivity, seeking similar experiences, and
confidence and college readiness.
The outcome of the career skills was clearly from the tool of internships in Explore. The
WBL proved to be highly beneficial to students. Many reported how they were able to either
directly apply the skills of writing a resume and interviewing to getting a job in college. In
addition, simply having job experience was a differentiating factor from their peers who did not
have any experience at all.

91
The outcome of research skills was directly drawn from the PBL aspect of Explore.
However, it mostly came from one specific project, the SDS. This was a yearlong project that all
Explore students completed, and helped students learn how to engage in formal academic
research. Given that all interview participants in this study enrolled in colleges, it is no surprise
that they found the research skills to be highly applicable to their college learning experiences.
While these first two outcomes are clearly connected to either PBL or WBL, the final
three outcomes of time management and productivity, seeking similar experiences, and
confidence and college readiness are drawn from the holistic Explore experience. One of the
clearest messages that interview participants shared is that participation in Explore helped them
feel more ready for college. This was due to a variety of factors, including the skills they learned,
in particular their time management and research, and their internship experiences. In addition,
the fact that students could pursue their interests and engage in rigorous and meaningful work in
Explore through the projects and internships also meant that they had a strong sense of self-
efficacy and confidence going into college. Finally, the fact that two participants reported
seeking out experiences in college similar to Explore is a testament to the overall impact of the
program.
Summary
This chapter shared and discussed the quantitative findings of this study and reported out
the qualitative findings. These findings and results were synthesized to answer the study’s two
research questions. The study found that alumni perceived that the main advantages of the PBL
aspects of Explore were the skills they developed, including time management, problem solving,
collaboration, and research skills. Other advantages included students found the projects to be
authentic, meaningful, and allowed them to pursue their own interests. This led to an increased

92
sense of ownership, self-efficacy, and pride. Disadvantages of the PBL included that some
students found the open-ended nature to be overwhelming, and that they seemed to learn less
content than their peers in traditional classes.
The study identified several advantages of the WBL in Explore. These were the
development of career skills like networking, interviewing, and resume writing, and broader
skills such as time management, problem solving, and collaboration. Students also found that
some internships helped them discern what they would like to pursue in college or as a career.
Finally, students found the authentic work-based experience to be an advantage. Disadvantages
of the WBL included that not all internships were high quality. In these lower-quality
internships, students found them to be less valuable and less part of a community. Other
disadvantages included that not all internships were fully aligned with students’ interests, and
managing the schedule of being at school on some days and at work on others was challenging.
Since the study utilized a CHAT framework, several advantages and disadvantages of the
Explore program overall were identified. There was a strong sense of community in the program,
and many of the skills learned in the PBL and WBL aspects reinforced each other. A major
disadvantage of Explore was that because it is a purpose-built program, some students felt
disconnected from the broader ISSA school community.
The study was also able to answer the research question about how alumni have applied
their learning. The main ways alumni have done this have been through applying their career
skills to finding employment in college and beyond, and by applying research skills to their
college classes. Another major outcome was due to the skills they developed (especially time
management) and the overall sense of self-efficacy and pride from completing Explore. This
helped students feel very well-prepared for college, and in some cases, even encouraged them to

93
pursue other opportunities similar to Explore. These outcomes were drawn not only from the
PBL and WBL aspects individually, but also from Explore as a whole.

94
Chapter 5: Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to gain a deeper understanding of the Explore program at
an International School in Southeast Asia (ISSA). This program was chosen to be studied
because it is an innovative program that combines project- and work-based learning into one
coherent program. Explore’s explicit goal is to equip students with essential 21
st
century skills
required for success in college and beyond through inquiry and a personalized approach (Bright
et al., 2015).
Project-based (PBL) and work-based learning (WBL) are two approaches that educators
use to help equip students with 21
st
century skills. These approaches to teaching and learning
have been studied extensively, and their effects have been well-documented (Condliffe et al.,
2017; Darche et al., 2009; Helle et al., 2006; OECD, 2010). However, several gaps in the
literature remain. There is relatively little research on how internships at the high school level
affect students, simply because there are fewer high school internship programs because of the
constraints of a typical high school schedule (Darche et al., 2009). Most of the research on PBL
also focuses on the immediate and short-term effects of PBL, rather than gathering the
perceptions of students who have gone through PBL courses or programs. Moreover, because
there are very few programs like Explore that combine WBL and PBL into one program, there is
no research that has focused on programs like this.
The goal of this study was to help address these gaps in the literature. Specifically, the
study aimed to learn more about how alumni of the Explore program perceive the advantages
and disadvantages of the project- and work-based learning aspects of the program. In addition,
the study also aimed to understand how these alumni have applied their learning from Explore to
their lives after completing the program. A cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) framework

95
was used to structure the data collection and analysis of the study because this would help better
understand the complex relationships in the Explore. This was particularly important because the
study wished to examine these two components (PBL and WBL) and understand how they have
impacted alumni overall. The research questions of this study were:
RQ1: What do Explore alumni perceive to be the advantages and disadvantages of their
project-based learning and work-based learning experiences in Explore?
RQ2: How have Explore alumni applied their learning from Explore to their experiences
after completing the program?
This study used a mixed methods, convergent parallel design that collected quantitative
data from a survey and qualitative data from semi-structured interviews. The survey was
completed by 47 alumni of the Explore program, aged 18 or older. From the survey respondents,
11 were purposively selected and invited to participate in an interview. The interview
participants were selected to get a broad range of perspectives (both positive and negative) and
range of demographics including graduation year, gender, and whether they did Explore in Grade
11 or Grade 12. Of the 11 participants invited, nine completed an interview. The qualitative data
was thematically coded according to the study’s CHAT framework, while exploratory data
analysis was conducted on the quantitative survey data to unearth key insights.
Summary of Findings
The study was able to successfully answer the research questions. This section will
summarize the findings for each research question.
RQ 1: Advantages and Disadvantages of PBL and WBL in Explore
Participants identified several advantages of the PBL in Explore. All survey respondents
(100%) found the projects in Explore too be valuable. Students reported that they were able to

96
develop a variety of soft skills including time management, problem solving, and collaboration.
They also mentioned that learning research skills through one of Explore’s main projects, the
year-long student designed study, was a major advantage especially for college. Participants also
found they were able to follow their interests through the projects in Explore and discover new
ones. Finally, participants felt that the projects felt authentic and applicable to their lives. All of
this culminated in participants feeling high levels of ownership over their work, self-efficacy,
and pride.
Participants also identified several disadvantages of the PBL in Explore. Some students
found the open-ended nature of the projects to be overwhelming. This stemmed from the many
potential answers to a driving question, or that students in early years of Explore were
responsible for designing the rubrics for their projects. Some students found some projects did
not feel authentic or applicable to their lives. Finally, many students also perceived that students
in traditional classes learned more content.
In terms of the WBL, participants identified several major advantages. About 77% of
survey respondents found their internship to be a valuable experience. Students reported being
able to learn important career skills such as writing resumes, participating in job interviews, and
networking. They also developed more general executive functioning skills like problem solving,
collaboration, and time management. Many students also shared that the internship experience in
Explore helped them discern their preferred college majors or careers. In some cases, this was
confirmatory; in others, the internship helped them discern what they did not want to do.
Furthermore, the internships gave students authentic, real-world work experiences that gave
them a glimpse into the professional world. This helped many differentiate themselves when
applying to jobs or internships later on because they already had work experience.

97
The disadvantages of WBL perceived by students were mostly related to lower-quality
internships. These internships tended to not be closely aligned with students’ interests, nor did
they provide meaningful work opportunities. This resulted in students feeling like they were not
part of a community at work, and that they were not able to contribute meaningfully. A
disadvantage reported by students regardless of the quality of their internship was that managing
the schedule was challenging since they were off-campus for work and ended up feeling
disconnected from the school community. Another disadvantage was the amount of control the
Explore advisors had over selecting internships, which resulted in some students being placed in
internships not completely aligned with their interests.
Since the study used a CHAT framework, the findings revealed the importance of looking
at the advantages and disadvantages of the Explore program overall since these informed
students’ perceptions of the discrete PBL and WBL aspects. One of the biggest advantages that
students identified was the close-knit community within Explore. This was because students
received high levels of feedback and support from the Explore advisors, and that they were going
through a novel, shared experience with their peers. There was also a lot of overlap between the
skills learned through the internships and the projects, suggesting that there was reinforcement of
learning in both aspects.
The main disadvantage of the program overall was that students felt disconnected from
the broader school community. Not only were they in a separate program taking courses with a
small cohort, but they were also off-campus on many school days to attend their internships. The
open-ended and flexible schedule was also a disadvantage reported by many students because the
schedule and structure of Explore was so different from the traditional high school timetable of
ISSA.

98
The advantages and disadvantages of PBL and WBL revealed through this study were
largely in line with what was expected from the extant literature. One area that this study
particularly contributed to is the perceptions of students in interdisciplinary PBL. Many
researchers have identified that interdisciplinary PBL can be highly authentic and meaningful to
students, however, it is difficult to implement, especially at the high school level, because of the
subject specialization of teachers and constraints of traditional timetables (Applebee et al., 2017;
Capraro & Jones, 2013; Noble et al., 2020). Hence, the literature on interdisciplinary PBL at the
high school is more limited, and most focus on teacher perceptions rather than student
perceptions (Applebee et al., 2007; Kodkanon et al., 2018; Noble et al., 2020; Weinberg &
Sample McMeeking, 2017).
Another area that this study was able to contribute to is the field of high school
internships. Researchers have noted how, because there are fewer high school internship
programs, it is more difficult to study them (Darche et al., 2009; OECD, 2018). This study, then,
was able to contribute to the understanding of how students perceive the advantages and
disadvantages of WBL, and specifically, internships. One important finding of this study was
how students did not mention how they wished their internships were longer; this contrasts with
Mihail’s (2006) work that reported how students wished their internships were four to six
months. In contrast, Explore’s internships typically lasted only 11-12 weeks. Students also did
not touch on the importance of reflection or how they developed their reflection skills through
the internships. This differs from what other researchers have found regarding how important
reflection is to help students find broader meaning to their internships (Darche et al., 2009;
Murillo et al., 2017).

99

RQ 2: How Alumni Have Applied Their Learning
To answer this research question, the outcome of the Explore activity system was
examined. This study defined the outcome of the activity system as how the subjects of the
activity system (students) were able to apply the object of the activity system (skills learned
through Explore) to their lives after completing the program. There were five main outcomes
identified through this study: career skills, research skills, time management and productivity,
seeking similar experiences, and confidence and college readiness. Students shared that the
career skills they learned in Explore were very helpful when applying to jobs or internships.
They felt like they had an advantage over their peers who did not already have job or internship
experience. Students also found that they were able to apply the research skills they learned in
Explore to their college classes. In terms of time management and productivity, students felt that
they were able to handle the more open-ended schedule of college better and manage large
assignments thanks to their experiences in Explore. These first three outcomes helped contribute
to the last two outcomes of how students sought experiences like Explore, and an overall feeling
of confidence and readiness for college. Several participants reported how they either pursued
interdisciplinary studies in college or joined programs that gave them opportunities to engage in
authentic tasks. Moreover, the high levels of self-efficacy helped students feel ready to tackle the
challenges of college.
Limitations of the Study
This study had several limitations. Although 58% of Explore’s eligible alumni
participated in the survey, increasing this sample size would have yielded more accurate survey
results. The sample size of 9 interview participants, however, was adequate since these

100
interviews reached a saturation point of not picking up much new information with subsequent
interviews. The survey instrument proved to be a fairly reliable measure of the two major
constructs of PBL and WBL. However, one variable that should have been addressed in the
survey was reflection, especially since this did not emerge as a theme from the qualitative
interviews. The extant literature suggested that reflection was important for both PBL and WBL
(Bradley-Levine & Mosier, 2014; Darche et al., 2009; Krajcik et al., 2021; O’Neill, 2010;), so it
would have been valuable to gather more data on this in this study.
Another limitation to note is that this study did not control for teacher and program
differences. There has been teacher turnover since the inception of the program. One of the
original advisors left the program at the end of the 2018-2019 school year and was replaced by a
new advisor. The remaining two advisors then left the program at the end of the 2019-2020
school year, giving a full new slate of advisors beginning in the 2020-2021 school year. Explore
advisors have significant control over the implementation of the program, and it is possible that
these decisions influenced students’ perceptions.
The biggest limitation of this study is its somewhat limited generalizability. While in
qualitative research the concept of user generalizability allows readers to determine for
themselves whether a study’s findings are applicable to other situations (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016), it is important to note the somewhat unique nature of Explore. Explore is a purpose-built
program with the explicit goals of implementing interdisciplinary PBL and authentic WBL
opportunities through internships. The difficulties of implementing interdisciplinary PBL and
internships at the high school level have been well-documented (Applebee et al., 2007; Darche et
al., 2009; Kodkanon et al., 2018; Noble et al., 2020; OECD, 2018; Weinberg & Sample
McMeeking, 2017). Hence, programs like Explore are a rarity – especially since it combines

101
both of these difficult-to-implement approaches at the high school level. Moreover, the school
where Explore is, ISSA, is an extremely well-resourced international school that prides itself on
its “tradition of innovation” (ISSA superintendent, 2016). Finally, given that this study examined
one program in one school, it is difficult to determine whether alumni of other similar programs
might share the same perceptions. These factors make it challenging to determine whether this
study’s findings would apply in other contexts. Nonetheless, this study’s findings are still helpful
in understanding PBL and WBL at the high school level.
Finally, it is important to note the researcher’s positionality as a potential limitation to
this study’s findings. I am currently an advisor in the Explore program, and my personal bias
may have influenced how I have interpreted, analyzed, and reported out the data. I took several
steps to address this potential bias, from the design of the study to intentionally seek out negative
opinions to using triangulation between the quantitative and qualitative data. I also engaged in a
member checking process where I shared the key themes that emerged from each participant’s
interview to ensure I truthfully and completely captured each participant’s perceptions. Finally, I
guaranteed confidentiality to each participant to help them feel more comfortable in sharing
negative opinions about Explore or individuals connected to the program.
Implications for Practice
This study has given us important insights into student perceptions of interdisciplinary
PBL and WBL at the high school level, and more importantly, insights into their outcomes – how
students have been able to apply their learning in the longer-term after they have completed these
programs. The study revealed several advantages and disadvantages of each of these approaches.
In both cases, the advantages clearly outweigh the disadvantages. Moreover, the close alignment
between the advantages and the outcomes of these approaches to learning suggests that the

102
learning persists and makes a positive difference in students’ lives. Teachers and administrators
can use the findings of this study to guide them in their own journeys to innovate and truly
prepare students with 21
st
-century skills and prepare them with the most impactful skills
necessary for success in college and career. The remainder of this section will discuss these
implications for practice that teachers and administrators might take away from this study.
Implications for PBL
This study underscored the importance of making PBL authentic and meaningful for
students. One thing that was clear through this study is that students seemed to enjoy the projects
in Explore and were able to see how the projects applied to their lives. Educators should ensure
that projects address problems in which students see value and are geared toward an authentic
product and audience. In other words, projects should be geared more toward the real world
rather than just the school world. One way this might be accomplished is by centering projects
around real-world problem. Inspiration for this can come from the school or local communities.
Once a project is centered around a relevant problem, educators should maximize student voice
by given them voice and choice in the ultimate product they create and the audience to whom it
is presented. The audience should not need only be the teacher and classroom community – it
should be the relevant stakeholders to the problem being addressed.
Students perceived that their peers in traditional classes learned more content than them.
While this may be true (after all, a student enrolled in a physics class will likely learn more
physics content than a student in an open-ended, interdisciplinary PBL course), it is important to
name this upfront. Educators and schools must be clear about the value they ascribe to learning
content or skills. Many schools try to have their cake and it too by claiming they value content
and skills equally. However, for schools to truly prepare students for the world, real-world,

103
applicable skills must be the primary focus. The most salient skills perceived by participants in
this study – time management, problem solving, research, collaboration – are incredibly
important 21
st
century skills. When skills are placed at the forefront and students are given the
support and space to follow their passions and interests, content knowledge will follow.
In Explore, students earn some credits in Explore and others in traditional classes. Hence,
one way that ISSA or other schools might address the prioritization of skills development is by
communicating how Explore is a complement and enhancement to the traditional high school
approach. Specifically, students can apply the content they learn in their traditional classes to
their projects in Explore, and they can also apply the skills they develop in Explore to their work
in their traditional classes. Moreover, ISSA can also communicate that the content students learn
in Explore projects are directly related to the projects students complete, thus ensuring that
students learn content “just in time” rather than “just in case.”
Many students reported feeling overwhelmed by the open-ended nature of PBL in
Explore. While open-endedness is not inherently a bad thing, it is important to ensure that
students receive appropriate levels of scaffolding and support. Just as we would not give a brand-
new driver the keys to a sports car and tell them to drive to an unknown destination, we would
not tell students to make a project about something they are interested in. Students should still be
given some parameters and expectations to guide them. The responsibility for scaffolding lies on
the Explore advisors, who must get to know their students well in order to provide the
appropriate amounts of support. In the beginning of the school year, there should be higher levels
of support with more concrete expectations given as students become accustomed to a new
approach to learning. As the year goes on, however, students become more familiar with the

104
approach and are able to take on more responsibilities and take even more control over their
learning.
Implications for WBL
The benefits students gained from the internships in Explore demonstrate the importance
of providing high school students with opportunities to gain real-world work experience. This
study demonstrated many advantages ranging from skill development to helping students
determine their career paths. More importantly, they give students a glimpse into their futures
working in professional settings. While there are many barriers and challenges to implementing
internships at the high school level, these benefits seem important enough to warrant finding
more ways to make these opportunities happen. Indeed, implementing internships may be too
challenging for some schools given scheduling and resource constraints. However, it is important
to remember that WBL opportunities lie on a spectrum, and there are less intensive forms such as
job shadowing and career competitions (Darche et al., 2009) that may provide similar benefits to
those demonstrated in this study. Job shadowing, for example, is far less time and resource-
intensive than implementing an internship program since these are not long-term commitments,
and they may still give students a glimpse into the professional world and aid in the discernment
of college and career choices. Schools seeking to incorporate more WBL opportunities, then,
should investigate what form might work best for their unique contexts.
The range of internship quality reported by participants suggests the importance of
preparing internship supervisors to manage high school interns. Traditionally, interns are mostly
college students with higher levels of knowledge and skill, and they are also closer in age to
employees than high school students. Hence, managing high school interns can be completely
new to some organizations or supervisors. Teachers should work closely with internship

105
supervisors to help them better understand the level of knowledge and skills that students have
and share with them promising practices of how to work with high school students. Doing this
would likely help ensure that students feel like they are part of a community and work and are
being given authentic and meaningful work.
It is also important for students’ expectations regarding their internships to be managed
appropriately as well. Because high school students do not have professional-level knowledge
and skills yet, they cannot expect to engage in the same level of work as their work colleagues,
especially at the very beginning of an internship. Before the start of an internship, teachers
should share with students what they might expect at their internship, including what the work
environment might feel like, and what sorts of tasks they might be asked to do. This will help
students manage expectations appropriately, so they are not surprised or disappointed if they are
not doing the most exciting or engaging work at the beginning of their internship. In order to
make this happen, it is important that teachers and internship supervisors work together to have
an understanding of the types of tasks and activities students will be expected to do. Teachers
will be able to support supervisors by sharing them the sorts of tasks and level of engagement
students might be capable of and what they might be able to work towards over time.
Overall Implications
The results have shown that Explore has lasting, positive impacts on its students. It has
been successful in providing students with authentic and meaningful learning, whether through
its projects or internships program. While the study has also shown that there are some important
disadvantages to the PBL and WBL, they are outweighed by the advantages. Alumni have found
that they have been able to apply numerous skills to their lives after completing the program and
have felt high levels of self-efficacy and confidence. Many have reported that Explore was an

106
ideal way to transition from traditional high school classes to the more open and flexible college
environment. Given these advantages, a key implication of this study is that more schools should
consider implementing programs similar to Explore that combine elements of PBL and WBL.
Given the intensity of resources required for Explore (it is staffed at a 1:10 ratio of teachers to
students), not all schools will be able to make this happen. However, schools should consider
how they might introduce a program that provides authentic learning experiences through
interdisciplinary PBL and WBL. It was apparent that alumni from Explore felt very well
prepared for college; perhaps the authentic nature of the work in Explore contributed to this.
More schools should then prepare students for college and the real world rather than prepare
them for standardized tests and traditional classroom assessments.
Recommendations for Research
This study has made several contributions to our understanding of how students perceive
the advantages and disadvantages of a cohesive program that combines interdisciplinary PBL
and WBL through internships. In addition, this study has also helped us gain a better
understanding of how these students have applied their learning to their lives after completing
the program, either in college or in their jobs.
To continue building on these new understandings, there are several possible avenues for
future research. First, to address one of the biggest limitations of the limited scope of this study,
research should be conducted on other similar programs (if at all) to see the extent to which the
findings are similar or different. Second, it is worth conducting additional research to better
understand what role, if at all, reflection has played, in informing students’ perceptions of PBL
or WBL.

107
Specific to WBL at the high school level, additional research is needed into how a
supervisor influences students’ perceptions of the internship and the extent to which these
students can develop skills. It would also be beneficial to study the impacts high school interns
have on their internship organizations – for example, whether it be through their interactions
with their colleagues and supervisors, or if they are able to produce a material benefit to the
organization. Furthermore, since the internship structure (in particular, days and duration) did not
emerge as a salient theme in this study, it would be beneficial to study further how the internship
structure influences students’ perceptions. Since the literature review of this study found that
there is no strong agreement on the best structure and duration of an internship, this would be a
very important area of study.
Finally, because this study has recommended that there should be more programs like
Explore, it may be beneficial to conduct a study to better understand what characteristics drew
students to Explore. To what extent is there is a selection bias in Explore and students’
perceptions? Because students elect to join Explore, were they already more likely to develop the
skills identified in this study and end up applying them in their lives? Or, would the impacts of
Explore also apply to students who might not have joined the program voluntarily? This would
be a very important area to consider especially if more students have an opportunity to join a
program like Explore, and would help address the question of what sort of student is most
interested in participating.
This study used a CHAT framework to structure data collection and analysis. This
approach proved to be extremely helpful and revealed the powerful connections between each
aspect of the activity system and helped demonstrate the extent to which the benefits of PBL
influenced the benefits of WBL, and vice versa. It would be helpful to have a better

108
understanding of the extent to which other less salient aspects of the activity system (in
particular, rules) played a role in the overall system. Finally, a study that takes the Explore
advisors as the subject would give us a different and equally valuable perspective to help us gain
an even more thorough understanding of the Explore program.
Conclusion
Noted education scholar Tony Wagner has written extensively about how schools might
better prepare students for the future. He has argued that schools must create cultures of
innovation that allow for interdisciplinary approaches, collaboration, problem-solving, and
intrinsic motivation (Wagner, 2012). ISSA is a school that is doing just this through its Explore
program. By combining PBL and WBL into a coherent program, Explore has been able to
amplify the advantages of each of these approaches to learning. What this has culminated in a
powerful program that truly prepares its students for college and career success with relevant
21
st
-century skills.
The findings of this study have helped us gain a better understanding of how students
perceived Explore. This study aimed to get a better understanding of the Explore program at
ISSA. It focused on understanding what students perceived to be the advantages and
disadvantages of the PBL and WBL aspects of the program. It also sought to understand how
alumni of the program have been able to apply what they learned to their lives afterwards. This
study found that students identified many advantages of PBL, including the development of
various skills, the ability to follow one’s interests and discover new ones, and developing high
levels of self-efficacy and pride in their work. For WBL, the main advantages included being
able to gain real-world work experience and important career skills. Disadvantages of the PBL
included not learning as much content and feeling overwhelmed by the open-ended nature of

109
PBL. Disadvantages of WBL were mostly limited to lower-quality internships where students
did not have an opportunity to engage in meaningful work or feel as though they were part of a
community. Finally, participants were able to clearly identify how they have applied what they
learned in Explore to their lives afterwards. They reported feeling well-prepared for college and
were able to apply many of their career skills and research skills.
Explore has been able to deliver on its promise of providing a relevant, meaningful, and
impactful learning experience to its students. Indeed, it is a resource-intensive program and it
would be difficult to implement in other schools. However, in order to prepare students to be
innovators, schools need to innovate even more. Schools must find ways to overcome the
challenges of implementing innovations such as interdisciplinary PBL and internships. This
prepares students for college and the real world, instead of merely preparing them to be
successful on standardized tests and traditional assessments. Our students – and our world—
deserve better, and Explore is a model worth exploring to make this happen.

110
References
Akoglu, H. (2018). User's guide to correlation coefficients. Turkish Journal of Emergency
Medicine, 18(3), 91-93.
Applebee, A. N., Adler, M., & Flihan, S. (2007). Interdisciplinary Curricula in Middle and High
School Classrooms: Case Studies of Approaches to Curriculum and Instruction.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207308219
Batiibwe, M. (2019). Using Cultural Historical Activity Theory to understand how emerging
technologies can mediate teaching and learning in a mathematics classroom: a review of
literature. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 14(12).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-019-0110-7
Behrend, T. S., Ford, M. R., Ross, K. M., Han, E. M., Peters Burton, E., & Spillane, N. K.
(2014). Gary and Jerri-Ann Jacobs High Tech High: A case study of an inclusive STEM-
focused high school in San Diego, California. OSPrI Report, 3.
Bell, S. (2010). Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future. The Clearing
House, 83(2), 39–49.
Bradley-Levine, J., & Mosier, G. (2014). Literature Review on Project-Based Learning.
Bright, S., Poluan, D., & Walthall, K. (2015). White Paper.
Capraro, M. M., & Jones, M. (2013). Interdisciplinary STEM Project-Based Learning. In STEM
Project-Based Learning an Integrated Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics (STEM) Approach (pp. 50–58). Sense Publishers.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-143-6

111
Chanlin, L.-J. (2008). Technology integration applied to project-based learning in science.
Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(1).
https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290701757450
Chen, C. H., & Yang, Y. C. (2019). Revisiting the effects of project-based learning on students’
academic achievement: A meta-analysis investigating moderators. Educational Research
Review, 26, 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.11.001
Chiang, C. L., & Lee, H. (2016). The Effect of Project-Based Learning on Learning Motivation
and Problem-Solving Ability of Vocational High School Students. International Journal
of Information and Education Technology, 6(9), 709–712.
Chu, S. K. W., Reynolds, R. B., Tavares, N. J., Notari, M., & Lee, C. W. Y. (2021). 21st century
skills development through inquiry-based learning from theory to practice. Springer
International Publishing.
Condliffe, B., Quint, J., Visher, M. G., Bangser, M. R., Drohojowska, S., Saco, L., & Nelson, E.
(2017). Project-Based Learning: A Literature Review. www.mdrc.org.
Cook, S. J., Parker, R. S., & Pettijohn, C. E. (2004). The perceptions of interns: a longitudinal
case study. Journal of Education for Business, 79(3), 179.
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four
recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical assessment, research,
and evaluation, 10(1), 7.
Darche, S., Nayar, N., & Bracco, K. R. (2009). Work-Based Learning in California
Opportunities and Models for Expansion.

112
Dede, C. (2009). Comparing Frameworks for 21st Century Skills. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt
(Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (pp. 51–76). Solution Tree
Press.
Dewey, J. (1910). How We Think. D.C. Heath & Co.
Diez, D., Barr, C., & Cetinkaya-Rundel, M. (2019). OpenIntro Statistics (4th ed.). OpenIntro.
Dochy, F., Segers, M., van den Bossche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based
learning: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13(5), 533–568.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00025-7
Efstratia, D. (2014). Experiential Education through Project Based Learning. Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 152, 1256–1260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.362
Enderling, H., Altrock, P. M., Andor, N., Basanta, D., Brown, J. S., Gatenby, R. A., Marusyk,
A., Rejniak, K. A., Silva, A., & Anderson, A. R. A. (2020). High School Internship
Program in Integrated Mathematical Oncology (HIP IMO): Five-Year Experience at
Moffitt Cancer Center. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, 82(7).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-020-00768-1
Engeström, Y. (2014). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to
developmental research. In Learning by Expanding: An Activity-Theoretical Approach to
Developmental Research, Second Edition (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139814744
Fernandez-Repollet, E., Locatis, C., de Jesus-Monge, W. E., Maisiak, R., & Liu, W. L. (2018).
Effects of summer internship and follow-up distance mentoring programs on middle and
high school student perceptions and interest in health careers. BMC Medical Education,
18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1205-3

113
Foot, K. A. (2014). Cultural-Historical Activity Theory: Exploring a Theory to Inform Practice
and Research. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 24(3), 329–347.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2013.831011
Gamboa, V., Paixão, M. P., & Neves de Jesus, S. (2013). Internship quality predicts career
exploration of high school students. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83(1), 78–87.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2013.02.009
Gervais, J. (2016). The operational definition of competency‐based education. The Journal of
Competency‐Based Education, 1(2), 98-106.

Glesne, C. (2011). Glesne, Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction (4th ed.).
Pearson.
Graham, K. (2013). Required High School Internships. Techniques., 88(3), 52.
Grant, M. M. (2011). Learning, Beliefs, and Products: Students’ Perspectives with Project-based
Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 5(2).
https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1254
Handugan, D. R. (2019). Understanding Skills Training and Development: A Program
Evaluation of Nontraditional High School Internships [Doctoral dissertation, Concordia
University]. ProQuest.
Helle, L., Tynjälä, P., & Olkinuora, E. (2006). Project-based learning in post-secondary
education - Theory, practice and rubber sling shots. Higher Education, 51(2), 287–314.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-6386-5

114
Holmes, V.-L., & Hwang, Y. (2016). Exploring the effects of project-based learning in
secondary mathematics education. The Journal of Educational Research, 109(5), 449–
463. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2014.979911
Hsu, P. L., van Eijck, M., & Roth, W. M. (2010). Students’ representations of scientific practice
during a science internship: Reflections from an activity-theoretic perspective.
International Journal of Science Education, 32(9), 1243–1266.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903029563
Hsu, P. L., & Venegas, L. (2018). Activity features of high school students’ science learning in
an open-inquiry-based internship programme. International Journal of Science Education,
40(12), 1391–1409. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1479801
Hsu, P.-L., & Roth, W.-M. (2010). From a Sense of Stereotypically Foreign to Belonging in a
Science Community: Ways of Experiential Descriptions About High School Students’
Science Internship. Research in Science Education, 40(3), 291–311.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9121-5
James, E. A. (2018). A Qualitative and Quantitative Study of Required Internships: The
Students’ Perspective. https://doi.org/10.13023/etd.2018.226
Jebb, A. T., Parrigon, S., & Woo, S. E. (2017). Exploratory data analysis as a foundation of
inductive research. Human Resource Management Review, 27(2), 265–276.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.08.003
Kilpatrick, W. H. (1918). The project method, the use of the purposeful act in the educative
process. Teachers College, Columbia University.

115
Kivunja, C. (2014). Innovative pedagogies in higher education to become effective teachers of
21st century skills: Unpacking the learning and innovations skills domain of the new
learning paradigm. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(4), 37-48.
Kodkanon, K., Pinit, P., & Murphy, E. (2018). High-school teachers’ experiences of
interdisciplinary team teaching. Issues in Educational Research, 28(4).
Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the
literature. Improving Schools, 19(3), 267–277.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480216659733
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). Experiential learning theory: A dynamic, holistic approach to
management learning, education and development. In The SAGE Handbook of
Management Learning, Education and Development (pp. 42–68). SAGE Publications Inc.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857021038.n3
Krajcik, J., Schneider, B., Miller, E., Chen, I.-C., Bradford, L., Bartz, K., Baker, Q., Palinscar,
A., Peek-Brown, D., & Codere, S. (2021). Assessing the Effect of Project-Based
Learning on Science Learning in Elementary Schools.
Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2013). Dancing with robots: Human skills for computerized
work. Washington, DC: Third Way NEXT.
Lochmiller, C., & Lester, J. (2016). An Introduction to Educational Research: Connecting
Methods to Practice (1st ed.). SAGE.
Martinez, C. (2022). Developing 21st century teaching skills: A case study of teaching and
learning through project-based curriculum. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2024936.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: an interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE
Publications.

116
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation
(4th edition.). Jossey-Bass.
Milner, H. R. (2007). Race, Culture, and Researcher Positionality: Working Through Dangers
Seen, Unseen, and Unforeseen. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07309471
Miner, C. (2016). Better Prepared for Adulthood: A Study of Implementing a Public High
School Pilot Internship Program through Action Research [Doctoral dissertation,
University of California, Los Angeles]. ProQuest.
Mirra, N., & Garcia, A. (2021). In search of the meaning and purpose of 21st‐century literacy
learning: a critical review of research and practice. Reading research quarterly, 56(3),
463-496.
Mosier, G. G., Bradley-Levine, J., & Perkins, T. (2017). Students’ perceptions of project-based
learning within the new tech school model. International Journal of Educational Reform,
25(1), 2–16.
Moyer, R., Snodgrass, J., Klein, S., & Tebben, C. (2017). Simulated Work-Based Learning:
Instructional Approaches and Noteworthy Practices. Office of Career, Technical, and
Adult Education, US Department of Education.
Murillo, M. A., Quartz, K. H., & del Razo, J. (2017). High School Internships: Utilizing a
Community Cultural Wealth Framework to Support Career Preparation and College-
Going Among Low-Income Students of Color. Journal of Education for Students Placed
at Risk, 22(4), 237–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2017.1350182
National Academy Foundation. (2013). Preparing Youth for Life: The Gold Standards for High
School Internships.

117
National Academy Foundation. (2020, October 21). Future ready lab. NAF. Retrieved March 21,
2022, from https://naf.org/our-approach/future-ready-lab

Ng, B. L. L., Yap, K. C., & Hoh, Y. K. (2011). Students’ Perception of Interdisciplinary,
Problem-Based Learning in a Food Biotechnology Course. Journal of Food Science
Education, 10(1), 4–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4329.2010.00111.x
Noble, E., Ferris, E. A., Laforce, K. A., & Zuo, M. (2020). A Mixed-Methods Approach to
Understanding PBL Experiences in Inclusive STEM High Schools. European Journal of
STEM Education, 2020(1). https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/8356
Nussbaumer, D. (2012). An overview of cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) use in
classroom research 2000 to 2009. Educational Review, 64(1), 37–55.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2011.553947
OECD. (2010). Learning for Jobs.
OECD. (2018). The Future of Education and Skills: Education 2030.
O’Neill, N. (2010). Internships as a High-Impact Practice: Some Reflections on Quality. In Peer
Review; Washington 12(4).
Papadimitriou, M. (2014). High School Students’ Perceptions of Their Internship Experiences
and the Related Impact on Career Choices and Changes. Online Journal for Workforce
Education and Development, VII(1).
Patrinos, H. A. (2020). The Learning Challenge in the 21st Century. World Bank Policy
Research Working Paper, (9214).

118
Parker, W. C., Lo, J., Yeo, A. J., Valencia, S. W., Nguyen, D., Abbott, R. D., Nolen, S. B.,
Bransford, J. D., & Vye, N. J. (2013). Beyond Breadth-Speed-Test: Toward Deeper
Knowing and Engagement in an Advanced Placement Course. American Educational
Research Journal, 50(6), 1424–1459. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213504237
Partnership for 21st Century Learning. (2019). Framework for 21st Century Learning
Definitions.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
PBLWorks. (2019). Gold Standard PBL: Essential Project Design Elements.
Ravitz, J. (2008). Project Based Learning as a Catalyst in Reforming High Schools.
Rice, B. A. (2018). The Impact of Internship Structure on Student Perception of Internship Value
[Doctoral dissertation, Wingate University]. ProQuest.
Robinson, S., & Leonard, K. (2018). Designing Quality Survey Questions. SAGE Publications.
Rothman, M., & Sisman, R. (2016). Internship impact on career consideration among business
students. Education and Training, 58(9), 1003–1013. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-04-
2015-0027
Rubin, H., & Rubin, I. (2011). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (3rd ed.).
SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/qualitative-
interviewing/book234196
Saavedra, A. R., Liu, Y., Haderlein, S. K., Rapaport, A., Garland, M., Hoepfner, D., Morgan, K.
L., & Hu, A. (2021). Knowledge in Action Efficacy Study Over Two Years.
Saavedra, A. R., & Opfer, D. V. (2012). Learning 21st-century skills requires 21st-century
teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171209400203

119
Salkind, N. (2016). Statistics for People Who (Think They) Hate Statistics (4th ed.). SAGE
Publications.
Schunk, D. (2020). Learning Theories: An Educational Perspective (8th ed.). Pearson.
Sharlanova, V. (2004). EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING. Trakia Journal of Sciences, 2(4), 36–39.
Summers, E. J., & Dickinson, G. (2012). A Longitudinal Investigation of Project–based
Instruction and Student Achievement in High School Social Studies. Interdisciplinary
Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1313
Symonds, W. C., Schwartz, R., & Ferguson, R. F. (2011). Pathways to prosperity: Meeting the
challenge of preparing young Americans for the 21st century.
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A Review of Research on Project-Based Learning.
Virtue, E. E., & Hinnant-Crawford, B. N. (2019). “We’re doing things that are meaningful”:
Student Perspectives of Project-Based Learning Across the Disciplines. Interdisciplinary
Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1809
Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2010). 21st century skills: discussion paper. University of Twente.
Wagner, T. (2015). Foreword. In B. Lenz, J. Wells, & S. Kingston (Eds.), Transforming Schools
Using Project-Based Learning, Performance Assessment, and Common Core Standards
(pp. xvii–xx). Jossey-Bass.
Weinberg, A. E., & Sample McMeeking, L. B. (2017). Toward Meaningful Interdisciplinary
Education: High School Teachers’ Views of Mathematics and Science Integration.
School Science and Mathematics, 117(5), 204–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12224
Williams, B., Onsman, A., & Brown, T. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide
for novices. Australasian journal of paramedicine, 8(3).

120
Appendix A: Survey Instrument
Introduction to the Survey
You are receiving this survey because you are an alumnus of the Explore program at
ISSA. All alumni of the Explore program (aged 18 or older) have been invited to participate. I
hope to receive as many responses as possible. All participants who complete the survey can
choose to be entered into a random draw to be one of two winners of US$50 (or its
equivalent in local currency)!
Your responses will be extremely valuable in helping me gather data for my study about
the perceptions of Explore alumni specific to the project-based and work-based learning aspects
of the program. I am curious to learn more about what you believe are the advantages and
disadvantages of these aspects of the program, and how you might have applied your learning
from Explore to your experiences after graduating.
For the purposes of this survey, I define project-based learning and work-based learning
as follows:
Project-Based Learning (PBL): For this survey, think of projects as units in Explore that
culminated in the creation of a project in which you had voice in choice in what you
created that answered a real-world or relevant question.
Work-Based Learning (WBL): In this survey, WBL refers to the Explore partnerships
program (i.e., unpaid internships). Internships as a form of work-based learning that
provides students an opportunity for more in-depth engagement and learning at a
workplace sustained over an extended period of time (i.e., several months rather than one
or two visits). If you did not do a partnership while you were in Explore, you may skip the
questions related to WBL.

121

The survey is anonymous and optional for you to complete. You are able to skip
answering any questions you wish. However, I hope you answer all the questions as I greatly
value your opinions and your feedback can be used to help improve Explore.
If you are willing to be contacted for a follow-up interview, please enter your name and
email address when prompted. Sharing your contact information for a follow-up interview is
optional, and you may not be selected to participate in an interview. However, I hope to
interview as many alumni of Explore as possible as these interviews will help me gain a deeper
understanding of your perceptions. Note that your name will then be associated with your
responses, and your responses will no longer be anonymous. However, I will maintain your
confidentiality and privacy throughout the research process and your identity will not be revealed
to anyone other than me. All selected interview participants will receive US$30 (or its
equivalent in local currency).
I hope that my study will help improve the Explore program at ISSA and make it even
better for future Explore students. This research may even help Explore serve as a model for
other schools that are seeking to implement a similar program. Please do not hesitate to contact
me should you have any questions or concerns at munden@usc.edu. Thank you very much again
for taking the time to take this survey!
Section 1: Demographics
1. In what year did you graduate high school? a. 2021
b. 2020
c. 2019
d. 2018

122
e. 2017
2. I did Explore as a… a. Junior
b. Senior
3. After graduating from high school, I… a. Took a gap year
b. Went straight to
college/university
c. Did National Service
d. Other (please specify)
4. Currently, I am… a. Studying in college/university
b. Working full-time
c. Seeking full-time work
d. Completing National Service
e. Other (please specify)
5. With which gender do you most identify? a. Male
b. Female
c. Non-Binary
d. Not listed
e. Prefer not to say
6. What is your current/planned major of study? (If you have already graduated from
college/university, what was your major of study?)
7. In which country are you attending/did you attend/planning to attend
college/university?
8. If applicable, with which organization did you complete your partnership?

123
Section 2: Project-Based Learning
The following questions will ask you about your experiences doing projects in Explore
(also known as project-based learning). You may not remember your experiences from Explore
exactly; this is okay. Just try to pick the response that you believe most aligns with your
perspective or reaction to the statement.
9. Engaging in projects was valuable to me. a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
10. Through the projects in Explore, I was able to see the
real-world relevance of what I was learning.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
11. I was able to develop time management skills through
the projects in Explore.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
12. As a result of projects in Explore, I was able to gain a
deeper understanding of the topics I was studying.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
13. The open-ended nature of the projects in Explore
overwhelmed me.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree

124
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
14. I feel like my peers taking more traditional classes
learned more content than me.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
15. I was able to develop my reflection skills through the
projects in Explore.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
16. I was able to develop my collaboration skills through
the projects in Explore.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
17. I was able to develop my problem solving skills
through projects in Explore.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
18. In general, I knew what was expected of me when
completing projects in Explore.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree

125
19. I had access to the tools I needed to be successful in
completing projects in Explore.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
20. I have been able to apply the skills I learned through
doing projects in Explore to my life after completing
the program.

a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
21. Compared to the partnerships program, doing projects
was more valuable to me.

a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree

Section 3: Work-Based Learning
22. Did you do a partnership in Explore? a. Yes
b. No
The following questions will ask you about your experiences with work-based learning in
Explore, specifically the partnerships program. You may not remember your experiences from
your partnerships exactly; this is okay. Just try to pick the response that you believe most aligns
with your perspective or reaction to the statement.
23. My partnership was a valuable experience. a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree

126
d. Strongly Disagree
24. My partnership helped me see the connection between
things I learned at school and the real world.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
25. I felt like I was part of a community at work. a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
26. My partnership helped me get a better idea of what
career I would like to pursue.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
27. My partnership helped me get a better idea of what I
would like to major in at college/university.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
28. My partnership helped me develop my problem
solving skills.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
29. My partnership helped me develop my networking
skills.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree

127
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
30. My partnership helped me develop my collaboration
skills.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
31. My partnership helped me develop my time
management skills.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
32. I knew what was expected of me at work. a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
33. I had access to the tools I needed to be successful in
my work.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree
34. I have been able to apply what I learned at my
partnership to my life after Quest.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree

128
35. Compared to doing projects in Quest, the partnerships
program was more valuable to me.
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Disagree
d. Strongly Disagree

36. I am willing to participate in a 60-minute interview
via Zoom. All selected interview participants will
receive a US$30 gift card (or its equivalent in local
currency) to a restaurant or retailer of their choice.
a. Yes
b. No

Please enter your name and email if you are willing to be contacted to be an interview
participant. Interviews will last approximately 60 minutes and take place online via Zoom. The
interviews will help deepen my understanding of the outcomes of the Explore program. This is
completely optional.
Providing your name and contact information will allow me to see your survey responses,
however, I will maintain your privacy and confidentiality by not sharing your name or any
identifiable survey results with anyone. Interview participants will be chosen in order to capture
a diverse range of views and perspectives (both positive and negative) about the Explore
program.
All selected interview participants will receive US$30 (or its equivalent in local
currency).
37. What is your name?
38. What is your email address?

129

39. Would you like to be entered into a random draw to be
one of two winners of US$50 (or its equivalent in
local currency)? Your survey responses will remain
anonymous.
c. Yes
d. No

Closing
Thank you for taking your time to complete this survey! Your insights will make an
immensely positive impact on my study and will help me get a better understanding of the
outcomes of the Explore program.
Please do not hesitate to reach out to me if you have any questions or concerns. I can be
reached at munden@usc.edu.

130
Appendix B: Semi-Structured Interview Protocol
Introduction
Thank you for agreeing to participate in this interview which will be extremely valuable
in helping me gather data for my study about the perceptions of Explore alumni specific to the
project-based and work-based learning aspects of the program. I am curious to learn more about
what you believe are the advantages and disadvantages of these aspects of the program, and how
you might have applied your learning from Explore to your experiences now. I have selected you
to participate because you are an alumnus of Explore. I have purposefully selected participants in
order to get a representative sample of the broad diversity of students who have taken Explore.
Just to remind you, I would like to record the audio of our conversation. This will allow
me to accurately transcribe your words and ensure that I am not mishearing you. I will
anonymize the recording to protect your identity, and I will not share with anyone (even current
or past Explore teachers or students) that you are participating in this interview. I will not use
your real name in my study, however, I will include some demographic information (such as
your graduation year and major of study [if you already have one]). All of this information is
included in the waiver you have signed, and my study has been approved by the USC
Institutional Review Board to ensure I am adhering to the highest ethical practices to ensure the
protection of any participants in my study. You are welcome at any time to end your
participation if you feel uncomfortable or for any other reason at all.
Once the interview is over and I have begun analyzing the data, I will reach out to you
with excerpts of our interview and my analysis. I will do this to make sure that I am not
misrepresenting your perceptions. This process is called member checking or response

131
validation. I hope this has helped refresh your memory from signing the consent form and details
about my study.
Do you have any questions for me before we begin?
Questions with Transitions
Before we jump into specifics, I’d like to learn more about you and your overall
impressions of Explore.
1. Please tell me about what you are currently doing in school/for work.
2. Please describe your experiences from doing Explore.
3. Thinking back to your experience in the Explore program, what aspects of the program
stood out to you most?
a. What factors determined what you found to stand out most?
4. What do you think are the most valuable skills or things you learned, if any, from
participating in the Explore program?
5. Comparing both the projects you did in Explore and your partnership, which did you find
more valuable and why?
In this portion of the interview, I’d like to focus on the project-based learning aspect of
Explore. You might remember from your time in Explore how you completed various projects
throughout the year, instead of taking tests.
• Can you tell me about some things you remember about the projects you did in Explore?
• Give me an example, if any, of how the PBL in Explore helped prepare you for your life
after Explore.
• What aspects of PBL didn’t work well for you?
• What aspects of PBL worked well for you?

132
• Probes
o Can you tell me more about your response to ____?
o How did you determine your response to ____?
o What did you consider when you wrote ___/chose your response to ___?
Let’s shift gears now to the work-based learning aspect of Explore, specifically the
partnerships program.
• Please tell me about what you remember about your partnership.
• What aspects of your partnership worked well for you?
• What aspects of your partnership didn’t work well for you?
• Give me an example, if any, of how your partnership helped prepare you for your life
after Explore.
• Probes
o Can you tell me more about your response to ____?
o How did you determine your response to ____?
o What did you consider when you wrote ___/chose your response to ___?
Now that we’ve spoken about project-based learning and your partnership, let’s talk
about your life after Explore.
• Can you tell me about a time, if any, when you were able to directly apply what you
learned in Explore to an aspect of your life after you completed the program?
• What’s something you wish Explore would teach students to be able to directly apply
to an aspect of their life after completing the program?
• Suppose you were making recommendations to the current Explore advisors on how
to improve the PBL and partnerships in Explore. What advice would you give them?

133
• Probes
o Can you tell me more about your response to ____?
o How did you determine your response to ____?
o What did you consider when you wrote ___/chose your response to ___?
Closing
Thank you so much for your time and for sharing your valuable insights into the Explore
program. My goal is to use this data in order to make improvements to the program and help
make it even more impactful for future students. It will also help inform our broader practices at
ISSA and perhaps even be useful for other schools looking to implement similar programs.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions, concerns, or would like to
discuss anything further. I’ll be in touch again soon about the member checking I spoke about
earlier. Thank you again!

134
Appendix C: Study Information Sheet
INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT RESEARCH

STUDY TITLE: Integrating Project-Based Learning and Work-Based Learning Into a
Coherent Program: Is The Sum Worth More Than Its Parts?

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Kristoffer Munden, MA

FACULTY ADVISOR: Larry Picus, PhD

You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This
document explains information about this study. You should ask questions about
anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to understand what alumni of the Explore program at
International School in Southeast Asia perceive to be the advantages and
disadvantages of the project-based learning (PBL) and work-based learning (WBL)
aspects of the program. In addition, because Explore prioritizes real-world application of
learning, the study also intends to gain a better understanding of how, if at all, alumni of
the Explore program have been able to apply their learning to their lives after
completing the program.

You are invited as a possible participant because you have participated in the Explore
program.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
Participation in this study will involve taking an online survey that will take approximately
10 minutes to complete. Participants can also choose to indicate on the survey your
willingness to be selected for an interview. Interviews will take place via Zoom and will
be audio recorded and transcribed. You may decline to be audio recorded but continue
with your participation. The interviews will take approximately 60 minutes.

If you decide to take part in this study, you will be asked to take an online survey. You
can then indicate a willingness to be interviewed. Participants who are selected for an
interview will be asked to participate in a 60-minute interview that will be conducted via
Zoom. You may cease your participation in this study at any time, and for any reason.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
All participants who take the survey can choose to enter a random draw to win one of
two US$50 (or its equivalent in local currency) prizes. All interview participants will
receive US$30 (or its equivalent in local currency).

135

CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California
Institutional Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors
research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no
identifiable information will be used.

All information collected in this study will be kept confidential. It will be stored on a
password-protected cloud storage system and all work will be completed on a
password-protected computer.

Audio recordings will take place during the Zoom interviews. Participants have the right
to review and edit the audio recordings and transcripts. Only the principal investigator
will have access to these recordings and transcripts. Personal identities will be shielded
through the use of pseudonyms with only general identifying characteristics described
(such as gender, field of college major, etc.).

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact:
Principal Investigator: Kristoffer Munden
munden@usc.edu

Faculty Advisor: Larry Picus
lpicus@rossier.usc.edu

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to learn how alumni of the Explore program at an International School in Southeast Asia (ISSA) perceive the advantages and disadvantages of the project-based learning (PBL) and work-based learning (WBL) aspects of the program and how, if at all, they applied their learning to their lives after completing the program. Applying a cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) framework, the study collected data about each of the activity system components to understand how they all contributed to the outcome of application of knowledge and skills after program completion. Students perceived the advantages of PBL to be the development of skills such as time management, problem solving, collaboration, and research skills. They perceived the disadvantages of PBL to be the open-ended nature of projects, some projects lacked authenticity, and they felt that peers in traditional classes learned more content. Students perceived the advantages of WBL to be the development of career skills, that their internship helped them decide on a college major or career, and that they felt they were engaging in authentic work. Disadvantages were mostly limited to lower-quality internships that were not closely aligned with students’ interests and were not engaged in meaningful work. Students also reported having difficulties managing a schedule involving them attending their internships during the school year. Alumni reported that they were able to apply their learning after completing the program in many ways, including applying their time management and career skills, and feeling a strong sense of preparation for college.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Facilitation of authentic teaching and learning in a problem-based learning (PBL) environment

PDF

How does working in an ILE at ISSA influence teacher practice?

PDF

Globalization and the need for 21st-century skills: implications for policy education in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and project-based learning in schools in Ireland

PDF

A study of online project-based learning with Gambassa: crossroads of informal contracting and cloud management systems

PDF

Internships in the entertainment industry: From the perspectives of the students

PDF

Internships in the entertainment industry: From the perspectives of colleges and universities, and internship employers

PDF

The key essentials for learning in the 21st century: programs and practices

PDF

Principals’ leadership influence on teachers’ capacity to enact 21st-century skills curriculum

PDF

The relationship between learning style and student satisfaction in the Problem Based Learning Dental Program at the University of Southern California

PDF

Learning 21st century skills In a multicultural setting

PDF

Expanding educational access and opportunities: the globalization and foreign direct investment of multinational corporations and their influence on STEM, project-based learning and the national ...

PDF

The role of educational leadership in participation in the National Program of Science and Technology Fairs at Escuela Universitaria in the Nacional Region of Costa Rica

PDF

Exploring culturally relevant pedagogy in a Chinese immersion program: a gap analysis

PDF

Exploring the causes, effects, and interventions of underemployment among recent college graduates: an evaluation study

PDF

Influence of globalization, school leadership, and students’ participation in science competitions on 21st-century skill development, instructional practices, and female students’ interest in sci...

PDF

21st century teaching and learning with technology integration at an innovative high school: a case study

PDF

Examining the influence of project-based learning programs on the academic and non-academic development of Chinese students applying for admission to colleges in the United States

PDF

The role of globalization, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics project‐based learning, and the national science and technology fair mandate in creating 21st‐century-ready students i...

PDF

Implementing Chinese-English dual language programs in international schools: a study for an international school in southeast Asia

PDF

Teachers assumptions on the importance of executive function: a gap analysis evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Munden, Kristoffer Elias David (author)

Core Title Integrating project-based learning and work-based learning into a coherent program: is the sum worth more than its parts?

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2022-05

Publication Date 05/02/2022

Defense Date 04/06/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag 21st century skills,cultural-historical activity theory,High School,interdisciplinary,internships,OAI-PMH Harvest,project-based learning,Secondary,work-based learning

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence (committee chair), Kimball, Chip (committee member), Robles, Darline (committee member)

Creator Email kristoffer.munden@gmail.com,munden@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111160319

Unique identifier UC111160319

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Munden, Kristoffer Elias David

Type texts

Source 20220502-usctheses-batch-936 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu