Project Based Learning

Last registered on April 06, 2026
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Project Based Learning
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0018266
Initial registration date
April 01, 2026

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
April 06, 2026, 8:05 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Country
India
Region
Bihar

Primary Investigator

Name
Samreen Malik
Affiliation
New York University (AD)
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Nitin Bharti
PI Affiliation
University of Western Australia
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2024-09-01
End date
2026-05-31
Keywords
Education
Additional Keywords
Human Capital, Pedagogy, Critical Thinking, Curiosity, Creativity, India
JEL code(s)
C93, D83, I21, I24, O15
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Large-scale pedagogical reforms often underperform because policy adoption does not automatically translate into classroom implementation. This paper studies whether scalable implementation supports can improve the adoption of activity-based science pedagogy in government schools. We examine a statewide Project-Based Learning (PBL) reform in Bihar and embed a stratified cluster randomized controlled trial across 926 schools in Vaishali district. Schools were assigned to one of three groups: control, monitoring only, or monitoring plus mentoring. Relative to the control, the monitoring arm includes regular follow-up on project completion, whereas the mentoring arm includes monitoring and recurring hands-on teacher training through a cascade model. We estimate the effects of these supports on teacher implementation of PBL, instructional practices, and downstream student outcomes. The design allows us to identify both the effect of monitoring relative to the common rollout and the additional effect of mentoring beyond monitoring.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Bharti, Nitin and Samreen Malik. 2026. "Project Based Learning." AEA RCT Registry. April 06. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.18266-1.0
Sponsors & Partners

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
The study experimentally varies two implementation supports: (i) T1: monitoring of project completion and (ii) T2: mentoring teachers through regular and structured teacher training.
Intervention Start Date
2024-10-01
Intervention End Date
2025-01-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Teacher Level: PBL implementation, Time spent in experiments, General Pedagogical Index, Science-based Pedagogical Index, Confidence
Student Level: Personal-level factors (curiosity, importance of science index, aspiration, barriers to education, confidence); Engagement Outcomes (Science Interest Index, Affective Engagement, Engagement Index)
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Teacher Level: Quality of PBL sessions, Teaching Philosophy, Homework Assignment, Teacher's Network, Teacher's Personal Satisfaction
Student Level: Cognitive Ability (Test Scores), Raven Matrices, Creativity, Other personal and engagement factors
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This study employs a cluster randomized controlled trial with the school as the unit of randomization. The study is implemented in the Vaishali district (in Bihar state), which had 960 government middle schools in administrative records. Before randomization, we selected 34 Master Trainers (MTs) to support the teacher-training cascade model. These MTs's schools were kept out of the randomization sample, leaving 926 schools for random assignment.

Randomization was stratified by administrative blocks. There are a total of 16 blocks, with different number of schools. Within each block, all schools were randomly assigned to three groups, Treatment 1 (T1), Treatment 2 (T2), or Control (C). The distribution of schools is done to ensure similar proportion across T1, T2, and C arms within each block. This resulted into yielding a total of 308 schools in T1, 308 schools in T2, and 310 schools in Control.


Treatment arm 1 (T1) – Monitoring: Schools in this group receive regular monitoring of PBL project completion.

Treatment arm 2 (T2) – Monitoring and Mentoring: Schools in this group receive the same monthly monitoring as T1, and science teachers additionally receive structured, hands-on PBL training.

Control group (C) – Schools in this group continued under business-as-usual implementation of the state-wide PBL rollout (including receipt of the PBL handbook and annual PBL training) and do not receive additional mentoring support or regular monitoring as part of the study.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization was stratified by administrative blocks. There are a total of 16 blocks, with different number of schools. Within each block, all schools were randomly assigned to three groups, Treatment 1 (T1), Treatment 2 (T2), or Control (C). The distribution of schools is done to ensure similar proportion across T1, T2, and C arms within each block. This resulted into yielding a total of 308 schools in T1, 308 schools in T2, and 310 schools in Control.
This was done in Stata in office.
Randomization Unit
School
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
16 clusters/blocks
Sample size: planned number of observations
The total number of teachers is roughly 900. In-person surveys administered to roughly 151 teachers, and telephonic surveys for the remaining teachers. In person surveys in randomly selected 151 schools comprising roughly 10000-12000 students
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
The distribution of schools is done to ensure similar proportion across T1, T2, and C arms within each block. This resulted into yielding a total of 308 schools in T1, 308 schools in T2, and 310 schools in Control.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
New York University Abu Dhabi
IRB Approval Date
2024-08-26
IRB Approval Number
HRPP-2024-112
Analysis Plan

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information