📄 social_science

Project-Based Teaching of Albanian Language in Primary Education

This quantitative study demonstrates that project-based teaching significantly enhances primary students' Albanian language skills and collaborative abilities, with technology and AI playing a supportive but secondary role in these educational outcomes.

Original authors: Joana Lapa, Irena Cani

Published 2026-07-15

📖 6 min read🧠 Deep dive

CC BY 4.0

Original authors: Joana Lapa, Irena Cani

Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). ✨ This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer

Imagine the classroom as a giant, bustling construction site. For a long time, learning Albanian was like handing students a stack of blueprints (grammar rules) and a box of bricks (vocabulary) and asking them to sit quietly and memorize the instructions. But Joana Lapa and Irena Cani, the architects behind this study, wanted to see what happens if we hand the students the hard hats and let them actually build something together.

They investigated a method called Project-Based Teaching. Think of this not as a lesson, but as a massive, collaborative scavenger hunt where the treasure is a finished product—a play, a report, or a presentation. The researchers wanted to know: Does building these projects help kids speak better, use the "standard" version of Albanian correctly, and learn to work as a team? And, crucially, does bringing in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and high-tech gadgets act as a super-power that makes the whole thing explode with success?

Here is what they found when they surveyed the crew: the teachers, the parents, the school principals, and the students themselves.

The Big Build: What Actually Works

The study gathered data from 169 student responses (grouped together), 149 teachers, 66 parents, and 18 school principals. When they crunched the numbers, the results were as clear as a sunny day in Albania.

The main finding is that Project-Based Teaching is the star of the show. It is strongly linked to students getting better at oral communication (speaking up), using standard language (the "proper" way to speak), and cooperation (working together).

The Teachers' View: Teachers rated the "cooperation" aspect of these projects the highest, with an average score of 4.403 out of 5. They see that when kids work on a project, they are forced to talk, negotiate, and explain things to each other.
The Parents' View: Parents were even more enthusiastic, giving project-based teaching a mean score of 4.545. They noticed that when their kids were busy with projects, the kids' language skills and social growth were skyrocketing.
The Numbers: The connection between doing projects and speaking well was incredibly strong. In the math of the study, the link between project-based teaching and oral communication was 0.800 (a very high number), and the link to using standard language was 0.785.

The researchers ran regression models (which are like trying to figure out which ingredient makes a cake rise the most) and confirmed that project-based teaching is the main ingredient. It predicts language success better than almost anything else.

The Tech Twist: The Sidekick, Not the Hero

Now, let's talk about the robots and the AI. A lot of people think that if you just add Artificial Intelligence to a classroom, the learning magic will happen automatically. This study, however, puts a gentle but firm stop to that idea.

The researchers found that technology and AI do have a positive effect. They are like a really helpful assistant who brings you the tools you need. Teachers rated technology/AI at 3.942, and parents at 3.924. It's good, but it's not the main reason students are learning.

Here is the crucial part: The paper indicates that the data does not support the hypothesis that AI is a "game-changer" that supercharges the teaching method.

When they tested if AI made the projects work even better (a statistical test called moderation), the answer was no. The interaction wasn't significant.
The study suggests that AI is a supporting factor, not a moderator. It doesn't change the strength of the relationship between the project and the learning. It's like having a really cool hammer; it helps you build, but it doesn't teach you how to design the house. The design (the project) and the teamwork (the students) are what actually build the house.

The Secret Sauce: Talking to Each Other

One of the most interesting discoveries is how the projects work. The study found that cooperation acts as a bridge.

Imagine the project is a train, and the destination is "Great Speaking Skills." The study suggests that the train doesn't go straight there. Instead, the project first gets the students to cooperate and communicate with each other. This teamwork is the engine that then drives them to the destination of better language skills.

The math shows that cooperation partially mediates (explains part of) the relationship.
However, AI does not act as this bridge. The path from AI to better speaking skills wasn't stable in the data.

The Two Types of Teachers

The researchers also looked at the teachers themselves and found two distinct groups, like two different types of construction foremen:

The "Solid" Group: These teachers had positive but moderate views on projects and tech.
The "Super-Enthusiastic" Group: These teachers rated everything (projects, tech, teamwork) very highly.

This suggests that not all teachers are ready to jump in with both feet. Some might need more training on how to design these projects or how to manage the chaos of group work.

The Bottom Line

So, what is the verdict?
The study concludes that Project-Based Teaching is a fantastic way to teach Albanian in primary schools. It creates a real-world playground where kids have to use the language to solve problems and build things together.

What is proven/measured? The strong link between projects and better speaking/standard language is supported by the data from 149 teachers and 66 parents.
What is suggested? The idea that cooperation is the mechanism that makes it work is suggested by the mediation analysis.
What is not supported? The claim that AI is the secret weapon that makes projects work better than they already do is not supported by the data. The findings do not support the hypothesis that AI strengthens the effect of the teaching method.

The authors are careful to note that this is based on what people said in surveys, not a direct observation of every single classroom moment. But the message is clear: If you want kids to speak Albanian well, don't just hand them a tablet. Hand them a project, put them in a group, and let them build something together. The technology is just the toolbox; the teamwork is the builder.

Technical Summary: Project-Based Teaching of Albanian Language in Primary Education

Problem Statement
The study addresses the challenge of developing functional language competence in primary Albanian language education. Traditional instructional methods often focus on the mechanical transmission of grammatical and lexical knowledge, which may not sufficiently foster active oral communication, the use of standard language forms, or collaborative skills. The authors posit that there is a need for learner-centered approaches that connect language learning with problem-solving and authentic social interaction. Furthermore, while technology and artificial intelligence (AI) are increasingly present in classrooms, their specific pedagogical role—whether as a primary driver of learning or a supporting factor—within the context of language acquisition requires empirical clarification.

Methodology
The research employed a quantitative research design utilizing a multi-perspective approach. Data were collected via questionnaires from four distinct educational stakeholder groups:

Students: Approximately 169 valid aggregated responses (individual-level data was unavailable for inferential analysis).
Teachers: 149 individual respondents.
Parents: 66 individual respondents.
School Principals: 18 individual respondents.

The instruments measured dimensions including project-based teaching (PBT), oral communication, standard language use, cooperation/communication, technology/AI integration, and perceived effectiveness. All items utilized a five-point Likert scale.

Data analysis was comprehensive, employing:

Descriptive Statistics: To evaluate mean perceptions across groups.
Reliability Analysis: Cronbach's Alpha was used to assess internal consistency, with specific attention to the nature of the constructs rather than rigid thresholds.
Factor Analysis: Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) using KMO and Bartlett's tests to examine construct structure.
Correlation and Regression: Pearson/Spearman correlations and linear regression models to identify predictive relationships.
Advanced Modeling: Mediation analysis (using bootstrap resampling) to test if cooperation/communication explains the link between PBT and language outcomes; moderation analysis to test if AI strengthens the effect of PBT; and cluster analysis to identify teacher profiles.
Non-parametric Tests: Chi-square tests and Cramer's V to examine associations between categorical variables.

Key Results

Perceptions: All stakeholder groups evaluated project-based teaching positively. Teachers reported a mean score of 4.165 for PBT, with the highest rating for cooperation/communication (4.403). Parents and principals also showed high positive evaluations, with parents associating PBT strongly with social cooperation.
Correlations: Among teachers, PBT showed strong positive correlations with oral communication ( $r = 0.800$ ), standard language use ( $r = 0.785$ ), and cooperation/communication ( $r = 0.726$ ). The correlation with technology/AI was positive but moderate ( $r = 0.541$ ).
Predictive Power: Regression analysis identified PBT as the main predictor of language-related outcomes (oral communication, standard language use, and cooperation). Technology/AI had a positive but secondary effect. For oral communication, the model explained 65.2% of the variance, driven primarily by PBT.
Mediation: Analysis confirmed that cooperation/communication partially mediates the relationship between PBT and students' oral communication. This suggests that PBT improves language skills partly by increasing student interaction. However, AI did not function as a stable mediation mechanism.
Moderation: Moderation analysis revealed that technology/AI does not significantly strengthen (moderate) the relationship between PBT and learning outcomes. AI functions as a supportive factor rather than a transformative moderator.
Teacher Profiles: Cluster analysis identified two distinct teacher profiles: one with moderate evaluations across all dimensions and another with very high evaluations, suggesting varying levels of readiness and confidence in implementing PBT.

Key Contributions

Empirical Validation in Albanian Context: The study provides quantitative evidence supporting the efficacy of PBT specifically within primary Albanian language education, linking it directly to standard language use and oral communication.
Clarification of AI's Role: The research distinguishes between the pedagogical core of PBT and the role of technology. It demonstrates that while AI supports the process, it does not replace the instructional design or the cooperative mechanisms that drive language development.
Mechanism Identification: By identifying cooperation/communication as a partial mediator, the study elucidates how PBT leads to better language outcomes (through increased social interaction and meaningful language use) rather than just establishing that it does.
Stakeholder Triangulation: The inclusion of students, teachers, parents, and principals offers a holistic view of PBT implementation, highlighting the alignment between teacher practices and perceived student/parent outcomes.

Significance and Claims
The authors conclude that project-based teaching creates meaningful communicative contexts essential for primary Albanian language education. The study asserts that PBT should be understood not merely as an alternative technique but as a structured pedagogical approach that promotes language development through active participation and social interaction.

The findings suggest that the primary driver of functional linguistic competence is the quality of the project-based teaching itself—specifically task design, student cooperation, and teacher guidance—rather than the mere presence of technology. Consequently, the authors argue that educational strategies should focus on strengthening the pedagogical implementation of PBT to foster oral expression and standard language use, viewing technology and AI as supportive tools that enrich, but do not substitute, the core instructional process. The study emphasizes that successful implementation requires differentiated professional development to support teachers with varying levels of readiness.