Recent pedagogical discourse focuses on appropriate learning settings for a deep understanding of curricular contents. Researchers analyse situated learning, self-determined learning and action-oriented learning settings, but empirical data about project learning, a learning setting that contains all of the mentioned aspects, stay rare (Ehrie, 2009; Wegner et al., 2007).

This study was designed to compare the learning effects of the project method with the one in a teacher centred setting. Cognitive psychology provided the theoretical framework of learning processes in projects. This study assumes four dimensions as essential for project learning processes: action orientation, motivational orientation, self-determination, collaborative learning (Bastian et al. 2004; Dewey, 1938). So, a project-learning setting differs completely from a teacher-centred where students’ activities are instructed by the teacher (Krajcik et al., 1998). A successfully performed action leads to the next learning action. Many of those build up the main learning process in projects. Most of these actions are composed by scientific methods like observing, experimentation or comparing. In this sense project learning differs completely from instructional learning. In project learning settings cumulative learning predominates while in instructional settings the focus lies more on additive learning. Project learning is supposed to produce deeply anchored knowledge that lasts for long (Wasmann-Frahm, 2008). The positive development of motivation corresponds to former findings about project learning (Hedewig, 1994; Wasmann-Frahm, 2008). Project researchers tell unanimously about the high motivation in project-based learning.

This study assumes that the action-oriented learning processes in projects develop domain specific and cross-curricular competences as well as in teacher centred. Due to the many actions performed as scientific methods the learning progress in methodical competences should be higher than in the teacher centred settings. Empirical studies on knowledge development in project learning are rare (Ehrie, 2009; Wasmann-Frahm, 2009). Findings about the effects of project learning show that project learning fosters a cognitive learning progress, networked thinking, social abilities and action competences (Krajcik & Blumenfield, 2006; Bieberbach, 2001; Wasmann-Frahm, 2008). But a comparison with instructional teaching is not systematically investigated.  Too many different variables such as teacher role, openness of teaching, social variables, self-regulation variables, action orientated variables, situated learning, motivational aspects make an evaluation difficult to control.  

The scientific question of this paper focuses on learning effects in domain specific and cross curricular competences of project learning. Therefore the development of domain specific competences, networked thinking, experimental abilities and problem-solving competences is statistically analysed. In addition to that the long term memory is to be compared, too.

The data reveal that project learning does not foster the learning outcome in domain specific knowledge better than instructional teaching. The learning curves, however, differ clearly. While students of the project learning improve factual knowledge after the intervention the learning outcomes of the control group are significantly higher in the post-test but fall back until the follow-up-test. Students of project based learning achieve more networked knowledge than the control group. These differences are not significant. An improvement in action oriented competences was also found for both groups, with slightly better results for the project group. The empirical findings don’t confirm the assumption of this study that project learning leads to more competences in applied actions. This may be explained by the fact that in the control lessons the experiment demonstrated by the teacher was similar to the testing task. In addition, the teacher-factor was obviously preponderant to explain the little differences between the two groups. This result goes conform with the empirical findings of (Bieberbach, 2001). Traub (2012) may be right when she remarks that many co-called projects are not theory-based projects and neglect the aspects of self-determination and self-regulation. All in all one can’t state whether project learning settings are better to improve knowledge or instructional settings as differences are high. Further research is necessary to assess more comparative study in diverse classrooms with different subjects. The positive development of motivation corresponds to former findings about project learning (Hedewig, 1994; Wasmann-Frahm, 2008). Project researchers tell unanimously about the high motivation in project-based learning. The decrease in motivation for the control is explained by the fact that these students usually learn in a more self-determined setting.