Editorial
The landscape of education and…
Eunice Tang, Jurong Primary School (eu*********@mo*.sg)
Interdisciplinary Project Work is a learning experience that provides primary and secondary school students with the opportunity to synthesise knowledge from various areas of learning and apply it to real-life situations. Students collaborate with their peers and communicate their ideas effectively to achieve a common objective. (Ministry of Education, 2022)
Based on the description of what Interdisciplinary Project Work (IPW) is, it is potentially one of the best platforms for developing the Emerging 21st Century Competencies (E21CC) in our students . As students work together on their projects, they build their communication and collaborative skills. Additionally, the process of analysing and solving problems allows for the observation of critical, adaptive and inventive thinking n the students.
Since the ‘I’ in IPW distinguishes itself from regular project work, it requires that teachers from different departments collaborate (so our teachers also role model the E21CC!). Often, this interdisciplinary collaboration stems from the school’s signature programmes such as the ALP (Applied Learning Programme), which would provide a certain direction with which the IPW could be carried out. For example, at Jurong Primary School, the Applied Learning Programme. PLAY@JPS. Play-based pedagogy underpins the IPW carried out by the students.. An example is the Tiny Float Explorer, an ALP task that requires to students to design and build a model boat out of recycled materials and ensure that it would be able to float. In this example, the Math, Science, Social Studies and Art departments teachers developed a lesson package collaboratively to guide students through the IPW project.
Since there is representation of different subjects in IPW, the whole process involves a series of tasks designed to reach the final outcome. Applying Tan’s (2013) AfL framework, if each triangle represents a specific task within the curriculum, in a typical subject, it might look like Figure 1 below. Each of the triangles represents a task where students receive feedback that brings them to the next task , helping them to reach the standards of the curriculum for a specific subject.
However, IPW is not a typical subject since it is a collaboration between different subjects. Often, each subject would have their own task within the IPW leading up to the final product and can be represented as in Figure 2, where each subject has its own AfL triangle as the standards for each subject are separate and the feedback given would be for each subject-specific task. This is likened to patchwork assessment, which is a “series of patches [that] requires students to accumulate knowledge, adding new knowledge or perspective in each patch…towards an integrated and comprehensive understanding of a topic” (Trevelyan and Wilson, 2011). This sort of patchwork assessment would require that the task design is carefully thought out, with the parts really contributing to the end task. After all, one of the objectives of patchwork assessment is for students to get an integrated understanding of a topic. An IPW with a well-designed series of tasks would help students to see the interconnectedness of the different parts for deeper learning.
Table 1 below shows the subjects involved in Jurong Primary School’s Tiny Float Explorer task and specific learning outcomes for each subject:
Lessons are set aside within the subjects for students to work on their projects in groups, starting with Social Studies to set the real-world context and then going on to Science and Mathematics as they work on the choice of materials and calculations of cost of the materials respectively, before trying out their models. As students work towards building a physical boat that can float, their understanding is deepened as they become more aware of why upcycling is important, the choice of the materials used, and the costs involved.
After trying out their boats, they each must reflect individually with questions as seen in a snippet of the handout that students are given (Figure 3). Students then must draw and label an improved version of their group’s tiny float explorer.
Even with strong connections between the different subjects and interdisciplinarity at its finest, an issue remains. While the different components are meant to be separate and coming together like a patchwork, it does not address the fact that the intent of IPW was not just to achieve content-specific learning objectives, but equally importantly, to develop learning dispositions, closely linked to the E21CC. In Figure 3, the reflection that the student does here is in relation to the subject-specific outcome, thinking how the outcome could have been enhanced.
Often, as departments provide their little pieces of the puzzle, they guard their subject-specific pieces and make sure their pieces fit into the puzzle, forgetting to admire the bigger picture, which is that of the learning dispositions. For the purpose of this discussion, the task design, assessment mode, and feedback of the individual subjects will not be the focus. Rather, the bigger picture of the learning dispositions and how to bring this to the forefront would be discussed further.
When there is an overseer of the IPW, a gatekeeper who tries to ensure the bigger picture is not lost, learning dispositions are sometimes assessed. For example, there are platforms for students to help them to sieve out their learning from the process, whether they felt they had been adaptive thinkers, or evidence of how they displayed good communication skills working with their group mates. In the case of the Tiny Float Explorer, aside from the reflection handouts that students complete, students reflect on the process and assess themselves based on whether they agree or disagree with certain statements. Examples of such statements include those in Table 2.
Looking into the origins of patchwork assessment as part of a reflective writing course, Tan (2007) suggests that reflection in patchwork assessment lands itself naturally as part of its assessment design. However, it was also highlighted that the reflection is often focused on “reflection on action” and “reflection in action” (Tan, 2007, citing Schon, 1987), whereas it is important for reflection that would help the student to move forward. The reflections in IPW are often done at the end, in hindsight, reflecting on what has passed, getting students to make meaning of the process of the IPW, such as in the questions in Table 2. This is especially so since it takes place over a period of time and students need to be given time to intentionally look back on the process and reflect on their learning. While it is a good start, guidelines on the assessment of Emerging 21st Century Competencies (Ministry of Education, 2025) remind us that it is important for students to be assessed on their E21CC development as it allows us to “provide feedback to students so that they can strengthen their E21CC”. Reflecting based on questions such as those in Table 2 might help raise students’ awareness about how they have behaved in the context of their group projects, but it might not help them in the development of their learning dispositions.
There are three potential issues regarding reflection as assessment in the case of IPW.
- The reflections are merely taken as insights the students might have on the process, but teachers do not see that there can be meaningful feedback offered to help students to strengthen their E21CC. Teachers might still be more focused on subject-specific learning.
- Students themselves do not realise the importance of the E21CC as they might also be more focused on the outcome of their project. They might experience reflection-fatigue without seeing the significance of reflections in helping them to grow.
- Since the reflection usually takes place at the end of the IPW process, there is no chance for students to make use of the feedback to feed forward and help them to strengthen their E21CC.
Thus, bearing these in mind, it is important to ensure that this form of assessment is more discovery-based, with emergent criteria. There has to be intentionality in providing specific feedback that would help the students grow. It is imperative that the significance of the assessment of learning dispositions is communicated to both teachers and students. When that is done, here are a few recommendations that might make for a more meaningful approach towards the assessment of IPW type of task and that of E21CC:
1) Include other points of reflection that would help tease out students’ awareness of their learning disposition rather than merely leaving it to the end. These points of reflection (as indicated by the coloured triangles) would allow for the feeding forward of feedback received so they can develop their E21CC throughout the course of the project work as seen in Figure 3. Ultimately, the smaller coloured triangles would lead toward the development of students’ learning dispositions (represented by the larger dotted triangle).
2) According to the self-determination theory, autonomy is one aspect to consider for students to be more motivated, so that they can “experience their behaviour as an expression of the self” (Deci and Ryan, 2002, p. 8). Thus, one recommendation is to increase student agency in the reflection process to prevent reflection-fatigue (e.g. before the process starts, to get students to highlight a specific area they would like to work on).
3) Could we perhaps even rename ‘reflections’ to prevent reflection fatigue? ‘Reflection’ tends to give students the idea they are merely looking back to recount what happened in the process. Since we want the focus to be on their growth and learning, some possibilities could include, ‘Growth Journal’ or ‘Progress Portfolio’.
Noted that these recommendations could be time-consuming and require more conversations with the students, if this is an important area we want to build our students up in, we must consider how we can channel resources into this worthwhile cause. Tapping on the use of GenAI could help as it can be used to sort information and analyse it prior to conversations with the students, making the conversations more productive and meaningful.
References
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3–33). University of Rochester Press.
Ministry of Education Singapore. (2022, February 18). Project Work. https://www.moe.gov.sg/education-in-sg/our-programmes/project-work
Ministry of Education. (2025). Internal Guidelines on the Assessment of Emerging 21st Century Competencies (E21CC). Singapore: 21st Century Competency Office and Curriculum Policy Office (Assessment Policy & Practice Section).
Tan, K. (2007). Patchwork assessment. In K. Tan (Ed.), Alternative assessment in schools: A qualitative approach. Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Tan, K. (2013). A framework for assessment for learning: Implications for feedback practices within and beyond the gap. ISRN Education, 2013, Article ID 640609. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/640609
Trevelyan, R., & Wilson, A. (2012). Using patchwork texts in assessment: Clarifying and categorising choices in their use. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(4), 487–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2010.547928