1	Course Title:	PROJECT-BASED LEARNING
2	Course Code:	BIL5106
3	Type of Course:	Optional
4	Level of Course:	Second Cycle
5	Year of Study:	1
6	Semester:	2
7	ECTS Credits Allocated:	4
8	Theoretical (hour/week):	2
9	Practice (hour/week) :	0
10	Laboratory (hour/week) :	0
11	Prerequisites:	None
12	Recommended optional programme components:	None
13	Language:	Turkish
14	Mode of Delivery:	Face to face
15	Course Coordinator:	Yrd.Doç.Dr. NURAY PARLAK YILMAZ
16	Course Lecturers:
17	Contactinformation of the Course Coordinator:	e-posta: npyilmaz@gmail.com Tel: 29 42232 Adres: Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fak. Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Eğitimi Bölümü A Blok, Kat:4 Oda No: 410 Görükle Yerleşkesi 16059 Görükle/ BURSA
18	Website:
19	Objective of the Course:	The aim of this course is to develop the candidates’ skill to design computer based learning processes by cooperating with different sections of teaching
20	Contribution of the Course to Professional Development

21

Learning Outcomes:

1 Able to explain what the project based learning is ; 2 Able to explain the theoretical basis of project based learning ; 3 Able to explain the contend of each step of computer based learning; 4 Able to design computer based learning processes in cooperation;

22	Course Content:

Week	Theoretical	Practical
1	Informing the students about the content, method and resources of the course The instructor consists on the question “Why project based learning?”
2	Discussion on what the computer based learning is and on its scope via the given materials.
3	Discussion on the theoretical basis of computer based learning via the given materials
4	Examination of the procedure of computer based learning via some samples applied before
5	The students do some practices how apply the method of computer based learning. The procedure is carried out step by step in each week. Starting the application works: 1.Determination of targets 2.Determination of the problems or the work which will be done
6	3.Composing of the teams and the distribution of duty 4.Determination of characteristics of result report and of presentation procedure
7	5.Forming of working calendar
8	6.Planning of the works of teams
9	7.Gathering of information
10	8.Gathering of information
11	9.Evaluation of the information gathered
12	10.Preparing the reports and presentation
13	11.Presentation of the project
14	12.Evaluation of the project

23	Textbooks, References and/or Other Materials:	Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV). (1992). The Jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40, 65- 80 Drake, K. N. & Long, D. (2009). Rebecca's in the dark: A comparative study of problem-based learning and direct instruction/experiential learning in two fourth-grade classrooms (Abstract). Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(1),1- 16. Halvorsen, A., Duke, N. K., Brugar, K. A., Block, M. K., Strachan, S. L., Berka, M. B., & Brown, J. M. (2012). Narrowing the achievement gap in second-grade social studies and content area literacy: The promise of a project-based approach . Theory and Research in Social Education, 40, 198- 229. Hernandez-Ramos, P., & De La Paz, S. (2009). Learning history in middle school by designing multimedia in a project-based learning experience (Abstract). Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 151-173. Hung, W. (2008). The 9-step problem design process for problem-based learning: Application of the 3C3R model. Educational Research Review, 4(2) 118- 141. Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., Puntambekar, S., & Ryan, M. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting Learning by Design into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495- 547. Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R.W., & Soloway, E. (1994). A collaborative model for helping middle grade science teachers learn project-based instruction .The Elementary School Journal 94(5): 483- 497. Moore, A., Sherwood, R., Bateman, H., Bransford, J. D., & Goldman, S. R. (1996). Using problem-based learning to prepare for project-based learning. In J. D. Bransford (Chair), Enhancing project-based learning: Lessons from research and development. Symposium conducted at the 1996 Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York City. Petrosino, A. J. (1995). Mission to mars: An integrated curriculum. Nashville,TN: The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt University. Ravitz, J. (2008). Introduction: Summarizing Findings and Looking Ahead to a New Generation of PBL Research. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 3(1), 4- 11. Available at: http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/ijpbl/vol3/iss1/2/ Resnick, L. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16(9), 13- 20. Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, G. M. (1995). Knowing and interacting: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a Grade 8 open-inquiry science classroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 73- 128. http://college.cengage.com/education/pbl/background.Html http://www.edutopia.org/project-based-learning http://www.bie.org/
24	Assesment

TERM LEARNING ACTIVITIES	NUMBER	PERCENT
Midterm Exam	0	0
Quiz	0	0
Homeworks, Performances	1	70
Final Exam	1	30
Total	2	100
Contribution of Term (Year) Learning Activities to Success Grade		70
Contribution of Final Exam to Success Grade		30
Total		100
Measurement and Evaluation Techniques Used in the Course
Information

25

ECTS / WORK LOAD TABLE

Activites	NUMBER	TIME [Hour]	Total WorkLoad [Hour]
Theoretical	14	2	28
Practicals/Labs	0	0	0
Self Study and Preparation	0	0	0
Homeworks, Performances	1	0	0
Projects	1	80	80
Field Studies	0	0	0
Midtermexams	0	0	0
Others	0	0	0
Final Exams	1	12	12
Total WorkLoad			120
Total workload/ 30 hr			4
ECTS Credit of the Course			4

26	CONTRIBUTION OF LEARNING OUTCOMES TO PROGRAMME QUALIFICATIONS
PQ1 PQ2 PQ3 PQ4 PQ5 PQ6 PQ7 LO1 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 LO2 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 LO3 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 LO4 0 3 5 5 4 0 3

LO: Learning Objectives

PQ: Program Qualifications

Contribution Level:

1 Very Low

2 Low

3 Medium

4 High

5 Very High