Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9, 833-845 2025 Publisher: Learning Gate DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate History: Received: 23 July 2025; Revised: 7 August 2025; Accepted: 11 August 2025; Published: 15 September 2025 * Correspondence: sari.23002@mhs.unesa.ac.id Readiness of prospective elementary school teachers for project-based hybrid learning in social studies course Sari Dewi1*, Muhammad Turhan Yani2, Jun Surjanti3, Sukma Perdana Prasetya4 1Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia; sari.23002@mhs.unesa.ac.id (S.D.). 2,4Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia; muhammadturhan@unesa.ac.id (M.T.Y.) sukmaperdana.unesa@ac.id (J.S.). 3Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Surabaya, Indonesia; junsurjanti@unesa.ac.id (J.S.). Abstract: The effectiveness of PjBHL is measured in terms of dimensions such as motivation, prospective behavior, self-regulated learning, and ICT literacy both online and offline. The research aims to assess the preparedness of elementary teacher education students before engaging in social studies using the PjBHL model. Conducted in June 2025, this quantitative study involved 117 students (56 males and 61 females) from the Primary School Teacher Education Program at Universitas PGRI Kanjuruhan Malang. A Likert-scale questionnaire (1-4) was employed to evaluate student readiness in motivation, prospective behavior, self-regulation, and ICT proficiency. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze readiness levels, and MANOVA was applied to compare gender differences. The findings indicate that 1) students' readiness for PjBHL was relatively good, rated as B+, and 2) motivation, prospective behavior, self-regulated learning, and ICT skills did not show significant differences based on gender. The study recommends that lecturers adopt adaptive, student-centered pedagogies that facilitate gender-neutral approaches, ensuring equitable learning opportunities for all students. Keywords: ICT Skills, Motivation, Project-based Hybrid Learning (PjBHL), Prospective behavior, Self-regulated Learning. 1. Introduction Project-based Learning (PjBL) is also the most well-received active learning method of fostering student creativity. It organizes learning according to actual, real projects in which students actively engage in problem-solving and practical tasks [1, 2]. Extends far beyond the transmission of critical knowledge and basic principles; it encourages independent learning and yields concrete, real-world products [3-5]. The strategy is designed to link course material to everyday surroundings, developing organizational abilities, enhancing group work, encouraging inquiry-based learning, and enhancing critical thinking in order to solve problems [6]. PjBL is also effective in its capacity to elicit multiple modes of intelligence, rendering learning more contextualized and engaging [7]. The model serves as a vital intervening link between learning in class and learning in real-life contexts, encouraging better student interest and motivation towards learning [8, 9]. PjBL practice generates profound educational benefits: (1) enhanced motivation by real project work tasks; (2) training of inventive ability and problem-sensitizing ability; (3) co-learning through cooperative group work; and (4) transfer of scientific values like prudence, ethical behavior, reliability, and innovative thinking [10-13]. Empirical evidence illustrates that the multi-faceted gains of PjBL facilitated the promotion of creativity among students to a great extent, thereby being a tested pedagogy for creative competence development [14, 15]. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1848-8193 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4565-2582 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0305-6985 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9090-0034 834 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate Project-Based Learning is a twofold pedagogical strategy, promoting creative development while simultaneously supporting the fundamental competencies of 21st-century educational models, specifically the key 4Cs (Critical Thinking, Creativity, Collaboration, and Communication) [16, 17]. In the current interconnected digital age, PjBL prepares students with fundamental competencies –such as digital literacy, analytical thinking, and innovative ability for solving complicated real-world challenges [18]. Genuine project-based learning allows students to attain double results: content knowledge and fundamental competencies in data management, interpersonal communication, and teamwork adaptability needed in contemporary settings [19-21]. When implementing PjBL, teachers promote student agency in collaborative knowledge construction, design activity, and reflection practice competencies present in workforce planning for imaginative problem-solving and self-regulating learning skills [22, 23]. Technology integration in PjBL, through the use of online collaboration software and data analysis, significantly improves the learning quality and cultivates digital literacy. As a model for learning, PjBL nurtures theoretical wisdom, practical skill, and modern social ethics towards fashioning a generation prepared for the intricacies of the future [24]. Though it has numerous pedagogical benefits, PjBL implementation is typically limited to formal traditional face-to-face environments with unsustainably rigid strategies, which can weaken students' interest and inner motivation [25, 26]. The potency of PjBL is compromised when implemented by dull pedagogies since limited interactivity negatively impacts students' willingness to engage deeply with project activities [27, 28]. The potential of PjBL is restricted when delivered by traditional face-to-face models that are characterized by spatial constraints, weakly constructed digital components, and pedantic styles of teaching that discourage active students' participation [29, 30]. The convergence of digitalization and future learning requirements has given rise to project-based hybrid learning (PjBHL), an integrated method that leverages the strength of PjBL with the flexibility and diversity of hybrid learning. Apart from developing necessary future-proof competencies (problem- solving design, innovation, and teamwork), this model especially develops students' capacity for dealing with changing work environments [31-33]. Being an extension of traditional PjBL, project-based hybrid learning integrates physical and virtual learning modes via education technology to enable flexible synchronous and asynchronous teamwork on authentic projects [34]. The novel approach overcomes classical PjBL shortcomings by enabling spatiotemporal flexibility, promoting extended collaboration, and augmenting learning documentation and openness [35, 36]. Online tools like Google Workspace and Zoom form a PjBHL platform that encourages the kind of digital-era skills like virtual collaboration and far-away project coordination while also enabling instructor oversight of learner progress [37, 38]. Recent empirical research attests to the effectiveness of PjBHL in overcoming conventional PjBL constraints. Kurniawan, et al. [39] igned relatively high learner engagement within PjBHL environments compared to conventional deployments. Encouraging research conducted by Kataria, et al. [40] and Steffen, et al. [41] instituted statistically significant growth in intrinsic motivation as a result of blended collaboration modalities. Malyuga and Petrosyan [42] and Mielikäinen [43] also attested to these findings with proof of PjBHL's flexibility to foster critical thinking by means of practical problem-solving scenarios. Bolivar, et al. [44] emphasized the model's accessibility advantage through structured digital resource availability. Furthermore, Pohan and Maulina [45], Tong and Wei [46] and Zakiah and Fajriadi [47] long-term studies indicate that this hybrid project-based approach can improve knowledge retention. The effectiveness of PjBHL is largely influenced by how prepared students are before engaging in the learning process. This preparation involves: (1) having digital literacy skills to effectively use different hybrid learning platforms; (2) possessing self-discipline in learning to handle independent study; (3) being mentally prepared to adjust to a more adaptable learning approach; and (4) grasping the principles and goals of project-based learning [48-50]. Without adequate readiness in these aspects, 835 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate students may face difficulties in adapting to the dynamics of PjBHL, which demands independence and intensive virtual collaboration. This research seeks to assess the preparedness of elementary school teacher education students before social studies learning with the use of PjBHL. It is necessary to gain this preparedness to make it easy to implement PjBHL for avoiding foreseen obstacles. The success of PjBHL relies, inter alia, on motivation, latent behavior, self-regulated learning capabilities, and ICT competence online and offline. 2. Methods This study utilized a quantitative method with an exploratory survey-based framework. The participants consisted of 117 students (56 male and 61 female) enrolled in the Primary School Teacher Education Program (Pendidikan Guru Sekolah Dasar/PGSD) at the Faculty of Education, Universitas PGRI Kanjuruhan Malang, Indonesia. These respondents were randomly sampled from a pool of 165 fourth-semester PGSD students enrolled in the Basic Concepts of Social Studies course. This study employed a questionnaire based on Xiong, et al. [51] to measure the readiness of students toward PjBHL implementation. The questionnaire sought to assess four prominent dimensions of students' readiness, which were motivation, prospective behavior, self-regulated learning, and ICT capability. Motivation was measured through 17 items addressing interest, perception, self-efficacy, and reinforcement. Prospective behavior was measured through 15 items addressing communication, problem-solving, and self-management skills. The self-regulated learning component contained 20 items assessing self-evaluation, organization and transformation, goal setting and planning, and seeking information. ICT skills were measured through 15 items evaluating skills in ICT usage and comfort on ICT usage. Participants rated each statement on a 4-point Likert scale, with 1 indicating strongly disagree and 4 representing strongly agree. The validity of the instrument was determined via product-moment correlation, and its reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s Alpha. Table 1 reveals that all questionnaire items achieved adequate validity and reliability, supporting the tool's effectiveness in measuring the target variables. Table 1. Results of Instrument Validity and Reliability Test. Variable Indicator Rcount Rtable Cronbach’s Alpha Decision Motivation Interest 0.7685 0.294 0.968 Valid & Reliable Perception 0.7897 0.294 Valid & Reliable Self-efficacy 0.8292 0.294 Valid & Reliable Reinforcement 0.8667 0.294 Valid & Reliable Prospective Behavior Communication 0.7822 0.294 0.959 Valid & Reliable Problem-solving 0.8438 0.294 Valid & Reliable Self-management 0.7688 0.294 Valid & Reliable Self-Regulated Learning Self-evaluation 0.8252 0.294 0.978 Valid & Reliable Organization & transforming 0.844 0.294 Valid & Reliable Goal-setting & planning 0.8848 0.294 Valid & Reliable Seeking information 0.8068 0.294 Valid & Reliable ICT skills Skills in ICT usage 0.7611 0.294 0.92 Valid & Reliable Comfort on ICT usage 0.6686 0.294 Valid & Reliable The data were collected via Google Forms during June 2025, selected for its efficiency and effectiveness in streamlining the data-gathering process. The study utilized descriptive statistics to analyze the data, calculating means, standard deviations, and score ranges (minimum to maximum) for each variable. Additionally, students' levels of motivation, prospective behavior, self-regulated learning, and ICT skills were classified into categories according to their scores, as detailed in Table 2. 836 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate Table 2. Criteria for Motivation, Prospective Behavior, Self-Regulated Learning, and ICT Skills. Score Interval Alphabetical Score Numerical Score (Scale 4) Category 91 ≤ Score ≤ 100 A 4.0 Very high 84 ≤ Score < 91 A- 3.7 High 77 ≤ Score < 84 B+ 3.3 High 71 ≤ Score < 77 B 3.0 Moderate 66 ≤ Score < 71 B- 2.7 Low 61 ≤ Score < 66 C+ 2.3 Low 55 ≤ Score < 61 C 2.0 Very low 41 ≤ Score < 55 D 1.0 Very low 0 ≤ Score < 41 E 0.0 Very low Gender differences across the measured indicators were examined using Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA). Prior to conducting MANOVA, multivariate normality and equality of covariance matrices were checked for the data to meet statistical assumptions. All the statistical computations were made with IBM SPSS Statistics version 27. This research investigated possible gender variations in readiness to PjBHL of students through four major variables: motivation, prospective behavior, Self-regulated learning, and ICT competence. The examination was carried out using a hypothesis-testing approach with two rival statistical hypotheses. H0 assumed that there are no gender differences in readiness in any of the four dimensions. H1 predicted that statistically significant gender variations would be detected in one or more of the indicators. For statistical decision-making, conventional significance thresholds were applied. The analysis would retain the null hypothesis if the obtained significance value (p-value) met or exceeded 0.05, indicating insufficient evidence for gender-based differences. Statistical significance (p < 0.05) would warrant rejecting the null hypothesis, supporting the alternative hypothesis of gender variations in readiness measures. This analytical approach allowed for systematic evaluation of potential gender variations in students' preparedness for project-based hybrid learning. 3. Result and Discussion 3.1. Students’ Readiness in PjBHL The readiness scores of Primary School Teacher Education Program students in PjBHL are shown in Table 3. Table 3. Results of Descriptive Analysis on Motivation, Prospective Behavior, Self-Regulated Learning and ICT Skills Score. Variable Indicator Mean Category Motivation Interest 81.14 High Perception 80.66 High Self-efficacy 80.13 High Reinforcement 83.07 High Prospective Behavior Communication 81.20 High Problem-solving 80.85 High Self-management 80.13 High Self-regulated Learning Self-evaluation 81.20 High Organization and transforming 80.85 High Goal-setting and planning 80.13 High Seeking information 84.74 High ICT Skills Skills in ICT usage 80.49 High Comfort on ICT usage 82.37 High The analysis of student readiness indicators in PjBHL reveals several important findings (Table 3). Regarding motivation, reinforcement demonstrated the highest average score among indicators, while 837 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate self-efficacy showed the lowest, though all motivation components maintained high overall ratings. For prospective behavior, communication skills scored highest on average, contrasting with self- management which recorded the lowest scores, yet all behavioral aspects remained at high levels. In the domain of self-regulated learning, information-seeking behaviors achieved the highest mean scores, whereas goal-setting and planning showed relatively lower performance, despite all self-regulation indicators being classified as high. The ICT skills assessment indicated that students' comfort with technology surpassed their actual technical competencies, with both dimensions nevertheless falling within the high proficiency range across all measured aspects. These results collectively demonstrate that while variations exist between specific indicators within each readiness dimension, PjBHL students consistently exhibited high preparedness levels in motivation, prospective behavior, self-regulated learning, and ICT capabilities. The pattern of higher scores in practical application areas (reinforcement, communication, information-seeking, technology comfort) compared to more conceptual or planning-oriented aspects suggests particular strengths in immediate, activity-based competencies. Table 4. Results of Descriptive Analysis of Student Readiness Scores. Variable N Minimum Maximum Mean Category Motivation 117 44.12 98.53 81.18 High Prospective Behavior 117 45.00 98.33 80.73 High Self-Regulated Learning 117 53.75 98.75 81.73 High ICT Skills 117 50.00 100.00 81.50 High Table 4 presents the comprehensive readiness assessment results for Primary School Teacher Education Program students participating in PjBHL, showing their performance across all evaluated indicators. The data presented in Table 4 indicate that Primary School Teacher Education Program students demonstrate high readiness levels in all PjBHL implementation variables. As visualized in Figure 1, a comparative analysis of mean scores reveals that self-regulated learning represents the strongest dimension (81.73), followed closely by other components, with prospective behavior showing the relatively lowest (though still high) average score (80.73). The analysis reveals that Primary School Teacher Education Program students exhibit substantial readiness for PjBHL implementation. This conclusion is supported by the evaluation results, where all readiness indicators consistently achieved a B+ classification according to Universitas PGRI Kanjuruhan Malang's assessment framework. Given these findings, the PjBHL approach appears well-suited for classroom application in elementary education settings with minimal implementation challenges. 838 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate Figure 1. Average Score of Students’ Preparedness. The success of implementing project-based hybrid learning is influenced by two main aspects: active student involvement in self-directed learning and optimal integration of digital technology. This instructional approach integrates both in-person and digital components via organized projects, necessitating students' active engagement in planning and directing their own learning [34, 52]. Therefore, motivation, future behaviour, and self-regulated learning are essential factors, especially if supported by adequate information and communication technology (ICT) competencies [36, 53]. PjBHL encourages self-motivation because students are made accountable for the projects they have worked on and are actively involved in collaboration [37, 54]. The motivation arises from students' confidence that they can accomplish learning goals, and it is an elementary component of independent processes of learning [55]. Students are more likely to stay committed and resilient in accomplishing their projects when they are offered autonomy and personal interest in their learning process. In addition, PjBHL promotes students' future behavior, i.e. the ability to anticipate, forecast, and prepare for future learning needs [41, 56, 57]. When [students] are confronted with projects that are real-world problems, they learn to design approaches, evaluate probable outcomes, and develop reflective thinking all of which are essential to forward-thinking hybrid learning. A further strength of PjBHL is that it aligns with characteristics of self-directed learning. The students are guided to set goals, monitor progress, and manage time and affect during learning. These aspects in turn constitute integral components of self-directed learning, which constitute the general base of cultivating students' accountability in their own learning development [40, 44]. Based on this arrangement, the adaptive nature of blended learning allows students to select suitable learning style while encouraging a developmental approach. Competence in digital literacy is also very important for the effective implementation of PjBHL. The students must be proficient on critical technology tools like LMS systems, virtual conference software, collaboration tools for cloud computing, and computer-based content creation software [38, 58]. The digital competences facilitate smooth transitions among real-time and autonomous learning modes and increase their confidence levels in online platforms and improve their learning motivation [59]. The effectiveness of PjBHL implementation hinges critically on the interplay between technological competencies and learners' psychological preparedness –particularly their academic drive, future-focused mindset, and self-directed learning abilities. This foundation is further reinforced by institutional resources, faculty guidance, and adequate technological provisions, which collectively enhance students' 80.20 80.40 80.60 80.80 81.00 81.20 81.40 81.60 81.80 Motivation Prospective Behaviour Self-Regulated Learning Online Learning Skills 81.18 80.73 81.73 81.50 Mean 839 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate ability to navigate project-based requirements. Successful integration of physical and digital learning environments ultimately cultivates transferable competencies essential for contemporary educational and career demands [32, 60]. 3.2. Effect of Different Gender on Students’ Readiness in PjBHL The normality test outcomes for all measured variables motivation, prospective behavior, self- regulated learning, and ICT competencies are presented in Table 5. Table 5. Normality Test Result. Correlations Mahalanobis Distance Chi_square Mahalanobis Distance Pearson Correlation 1 0.796** Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 N 117 117 Chi_square Pearson Correlation 0.796** 1 Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 N 117 117 Table 5 presents the multivariate normality test results, revealing that all measured constructs (motivation, prospective behavior, self-regulated learning, and ICT skills) demonstrate normal distribution, as evidenced by Pearson correlation values 0.796 > rtable= 0.1816. Subsequently, Table 6 displays the homogeneity test outcomes for these same variables. Table 6. Homogenity Test Result. Box's Test of Equality of Covariance Matricesa Box's M 82.852 F 7.973 df1 10 df2 62161.333 Sig. 0.000 Source: Data Processed (2025). As shown in Table 6, Box's M test demonstrated statistical significance (p<0.05), suggesting the homogeneity of covariance matrices assumption was violated. The comprehensive MANOVA outcomes are documented in Table 7. Table 7. MANOVA Test Result. Dependent Variable F Sig. Decision Motivation 0.454 0.502 Insignificant Prospective Behavior 0.354 0.553 Insignificant Self-regulated Learning 0.000 0.992 Insignificant ICT Skills 0.014 0.906 Insignificant As shown in Table 7, the MANOVA analysis revealed no statistically significant gender differences in any of the four PjBHL readiness dimensions. The analysis of motivation revealed a non-significant result (p=0.502), exceeding the established α=0.05 threshold. Similarly, prospective behavior showed a p-value of 0.553, demonstrating comparable levels between genders. The self-regulated learning variable revealed an even more pronounced non-significance with p=0.992. Finally, ICT skills displayed a p-value of 0.906, again far exceeding the significance cutoff. Across all four variables –motivation, prospective behavior, self-regulated learning, and ICT competencies– the consistently high p-values 840 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate (all>0.05) provide robust evidence that male and female students in the PjBHL program demonstrate equivalent readiness levels in these key learning dimensions. The results indicate that students' readiness for project-based hybrid learning appears unaffected by gender considerations. The research results indicate no significant differences between genders in digital learning. This reflects a paradigm shift in 21st-century education. These findings not only challenge traditional assumptions about gender roles in learning but also expand our understanding of the factors determining academic success in the digital age [61-63]. Learning capacity is shaped by multiple determinants beyond biological sex differences, including cognitive processes, emotional states, sociocultural influences, and environmental conditions. This multidimensional perspective recognizes that gender represents just one potential factor among numerous interrelated elements that collectively influence educational development [64-67]. The fulfillment of core psychological need competence, autonomy, and relatedness serves as a fundamental driver of learning motivation. Recognizing individual variations, including but not limited to gender differences, allows educators to design more inclusive and effective learning experiences. These universal psychological needs transcend gender, applying equally to all learners [68, 69]. In current digital learning, recent research by Zahedi, et al. [70] and Luo, et al. [71] shows that gender- based stereotype threat (social prejudice that can affect performance) in STEM fields is decreasing, as learning methods become more collaborative and project-based. Regardless of gender, students uniformly develop critical thinking competencies through project-based hybrid learning approaches [72-74]. Research indicates that prospective behavior encompassing planning, anticipation, and strategic goal-directed actions does not vary significantly by gender. Empirical evidence suggests self- perceptions of capability and situational learning factors exert greater influence on future planning skills than innate gender differences [75]. Research by Bortes, et al. [76], Ferrar, et al. [77] and Putri and Muttaqin [78] shows that in flexible and participatory project-based hybrid learning, all students have equal opportunities to develop future planning, regardless of gender. This PjBHL model allows students to explore long-term goals, engage in self-reflection, and plan strategies through real-world challenges, thereby fostering prospective behavior through social interaction and meaningful tasks [79]. Research by Shah, et al. [80], Preece and Bullingham [81] and Richardson, et al. [82] demonstrate that self-regulated learning capacities develop primarily through educationally significant experiences and social learning processes, with biological factors like gender showing negligible influence. Digital advancements in education have created supportive learning systems that help all students optimally develop critical thinking skills. These findings support Vygotsky's theory of optimal learning, which states that social interaction and appropriate educational technology support can reduce learning gaps, including those related to gender [83-85]. The notion of "digital natives" reflects evolving insights into how social dynamics and technological engagement intersect in increasingly sophisticated ways, particularly regarding ICT competency development [86]. Equal opportunities in using digital technology have fundamentally transformed technological capabilities [86]. Equal opportunities in using digital technology have fundamentally transformed technological capabilities [87, 88]. The current digital generation is growing up in a technological environment that increasingly reduces gender bias, with digital platforms designed for everyone [89, 90]. This is supported by the ease of access to online knowledge, enabling self-directed learning without gender barriers. 4. Conclusion The study reveals two key findings regarding primary education students' preparedness for project- based hybrid learning. First, participants demonstrated substantial readiness overall, scoring consistently in the B+ range across all assessed dimensions. Second, comprehensive analysis showed no statistically significant gender-based disparities in any measured aspect –including motivational factors, 841 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate prospective behaviors, self-regulation capacities, and digital competencies. These four aspects, which are the main indicators of student learning readiness, are generally in the high category and are not influenced by gender. These findings suggest that PjBHL implementation can adopt a gender-neutral approach, as both male and female students exhibit comparable levels of preparedness across all measured dimensions of learning readiness. These results suggest that instructors should prioritize the development of adaptive, learner-centered pedagogical approaches while offering equitable support to enhance motivation and self-regulation skills irrespective of gender to optimize student success in hybrid learning contexts. Transparency: The authors confirm that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study; that no vital features of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned have been explained. This study followed all ethical practices during writing. Acknowledgement: We gratefully acknowledge the participation of Primary School Teacher Education Program students, Universitas PGRI Kanjuruhan Malang and the support of all research collaborators. Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. This open-access article is distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). References [1] M. Miranda, S.-L. Ángela, M. da Costa, and J. Castro, "Active, experiential and reflective training in civil engineering: Evaluation of a project-based learning proposal," European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 937–956, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2020.1785400 [2] T. A. Slamet, R. Watrianthos, A. Dwinggo Samala, M. Muskhir, and G. Dogara, "Project-based learning in vocational education: A bibliometric approach," International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 43–56, 2023. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijmecs.2023.04.04 [3] X. Du and Y. Chaaban, "Teachers’ readiness for a statewide change to PjBL in primary education in Qatar," Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1-15, 2020. https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28591 [4] D. V. Sigit, R. H. Ristanto, and S. N. Mufida, "Integration of project-based e-learning with STEAM: An Innovative solution to learn ecological concept," International Journal of Instruction, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 23–40, 2022. [5] L. Wijnia, G. Noordzij, L. R. Arends, R. M. J. P. Rikers, and S. M. M. Loyens, "The effects of problem-based, project- based, and case-based learning on students’ motivation: A meta-analysis," Educational Psychology Review, vol. 36, p. 29, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09864-3 [6] V. Sukackė et al., "Towards active evidence-based learning in engineering education: A systematic literature review of PBL, PjBL, and CBL," Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 21, p. 13955, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142113955 [7] E. Purwaningsih, S. P. Sari, A. M. Sari, and A. Suryadi, "The effect of STEM-PjBL and discovery learning on improving students’ problem-solving skills of impulse and momentum topic," Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, vol. 9, no. 4, 2020. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v9i4.26432 [8] J. M. Coronado, A. Moyano, V. Romero, R. Ruiz, and J. Rodríguez, "Student long-term perception of project-based learning in civil engineering education: An 18-year Ex-post assessment," Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 1949, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041949 [9] I. W. Santyasa, N. K. Rapi, and I. W. W. Sara, "Project based learning and academic procrastination of students in learning physics," International Journal of Instruction, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 489–508, 2020. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13132a [10] M. Baran, M. Baran, F. Karakoyun, and A. Maskan, "The influence of project-based STEM (PJBL-STEM) applications on the development of 21st Century skills," Journal of Turkish Science Education, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 798– 815, 2021. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.104 [11] G. Berselli, P. Bilancia, and L. Luzi, "Project-based learning of advanced CAD/CAE tools in engineering education," International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing, vol. 14, pp. 1071-1083, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-020-00687-4 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2020.1785400 https://doi.org/10.5815/ijmecs.2023.04.04 https://doi.org/10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28591 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09864-3 https://doi.org/10.3390/su142113955 https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v9i4.26432 https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041949 https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13132a https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.104 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-020-00687-4 842 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate [12] J. E. Mitchell and L. Rogers, "Staff perceptions of implementing project-based learning in engineering education," European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 349-362, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2019.1641471 [13] U. Umar et al., "Blended learning and online learning with project-based learning: Do they affect cognition and psycho-motor learning achievement in physical conditions?," Retos, vol. 50, pp. 556-565, 2023. https://doi.org/10.47197/retos.v50.99965 [14] P. Guo, N. Saab, L. Wu, and W. Admiraal, "The Community of Inquiry perspective on students' social presence, cognitive presence, and academic performance in online project‐based learning," Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 1479-1493, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12586 [15] R. Mursid, A. H. Saragih, and R. Hartono, "The effect of the blended project-based learning model and creative thinking ability on engineering students' learning outcomes," International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 218-235, 2022. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.2244 [16] N. Hujjatusnaini, A. Corebima, S. Prawiro, and A. Gofur, "The effect of blended project-based learning integrated with 21st-century skills on pre-service biology teachers' higher-order thinking skills," Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 104-118, 2022. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.27148 [17] A. Ratih, F. Festiyed, and F. Arsih, "Implementation of project-based learning in 21st century learning in science learning: A systematic literature review," presented at the International Conference on Education and Innovation (ICEI), 2024. [18] D. A. Sudjimat, A. Nyoto, and M. Romlie, "Implementation of project-based learning model and workforce character development for the 21st century in vocational high school," International Journal of Instruction, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 181– 198, 2021. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14111a [19] K. K. J. Artama, I. G. Budasi, and N. M. Ratminingsih, "Promoting the 21st century skills using project-based learning," Language Circle: Journal of Language and Literature, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 325-332, 2023. https://doi.org/10.15294/lc.v17i2.39096 [20] G. V. M. Fallas, "Project-Based Learning: Boosting 21st century skills," Revista estudios, vol. 43, pp. 340-419, 2021. https://doi.org/10.15517/re.v0i43.49335 [21] I. Nurhidayah, F. Wibowo, and I. Astra, "Project based learning (PjBL) learning model in science learning: Literature review," in Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 2019, No. 1, p. 012043). IOP Publishing, 2021. [22] A. Adriyawati, E. Utomo, Y. Rahmawati, and A. Mardiah, "Steam-project-based learning integration to improve elementary school students’ scientific literacy on alternative energy learning," Universal Journal of Educational Research, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 1863-1873, 2020. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080523 [23] P. Guo, N. Saab, L. S. Post, and W. Admiraal, "A review of project-based learning in higher education: Student outcomes and measures," International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 102, p. 101586, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101586 [24] E. Erika, "Implementation of project based learning (PjBL) models in science learning in elementary schools," presented at the Social, Humanities, and Educational Studies (SHES): Conference Series, 2020. [25] H. Darmawan, F. Hakti, R. Damayanti, M. Fikri, and H. Rafi’i, "Comparison of the effectiveness of problem based learning (PBL) and project based learning (PjBL) models in the learning process," Alifmatika: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Matematika, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 176–191, 2024. https://doi.org/10.35316/alifmatika.2024.v6i2.176-191 [26] R. Safitri, Alnedral, Gusril, A. S. Wahyuri, and Y. Ockta, "The impacts of the project-based learning and problem- based learning models with self-confidence on students’ learning outcomes," Indonesian Research Journal in Education, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 296-283, 2024. https://doi.org/10.22437/irje.v8i1.31480 [27] L. Zhang and Y. Ma, "A study of the impact of project-based learning on student learning effects: A meta-analysis study," Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 14, 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1202728 [28] T. Makkonen, K. Tirri, and J. Lavonen, "Engagement in learning physics through project-based learning: A Case study of gifted finnish upper-secondary-level students," Journal of Advanced Academics, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 501–532, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X211018644 [29] M. Belmekki, "Project-based learning implementation in higher education: Theoretical and practical issues," The Journal of Quality in Education, vol. 14, no. 24, pp. 94–104, 2024. https://doi.org/10.37870/joqie.v14i24.383 [30] N. Hidayah, A. Arum, and A. Apriyansa, Project-based learning (PJBL): Advantages, disadvantages, and solutions to vocational education (in Pandemic Era). European Alliance for Innovation, 2021. [31] T. Thamrin, S. Hutasuhut, J. Suharianto, and R. Aditia, "Project-based hybrid learning; effectiveness, quality of writing a thesis proposal, independence, and learning satisfaction," International Journal of Recent Educational Research, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 651-661, 2022. https://doi.org/10.46245/ijorer.v3i6.257 [32] F. Al-Kamzari and N. Alias, "Exploring the readiness of high school physics students for project-based hybrid learning in the Sultanate of Oman," EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 20, no. 2, p. em2404, 2024. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14241 [33] R. Festiawan et al., "The hybrid learning system with project based learning: Can it increase creative thinking skill and learning motivation in physical education learning?," Retos: nuevas tendencias en educación física, deporte y recreación, vol. 56, pp. 1009-1015, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2019.1641471 https://doi.org/10.47197/retos.v50.99965 https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12586 https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.2244 https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.27148 https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14111a https://doi.org/10.15294/lc.v17i2.39096 https://doi.org/10.15517/re.v0i43.49335 https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080523 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101586 https://doi.org/10.35316/alifmatika.2024.v6i2.176-191 https://doi.org/10.22437/irje.v8i1.31480 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1202728 https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X211018644 https://doi.org/10.37870/joqie.v14i24.383 https://doi.org/10.46245/ijorer.v3i6.257 https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14241 843 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate [34] K. Chua and M. Islam, "The hybrid Project-Based Learning–Flipped Classroom: A design project module redesigned to foster learning and engagement," International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 289- 315, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306419019838335 [35] M. A. Assiddiq and S. Sasmayunita, "Implementing project-based learning in a hybrid setting: The effectuality of the EFL students’ reading comprehension," in SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 149, p. 01058). EDP Sciences, 2022. [36] D. de Matos Magnus, L. F. B. Carbonera, L. L. Pfitscher, F. A. Farret, D. P. Bernardon, and A. A. Tavares, "An educational laboratory approach for hybrid project-based learning of synchronous machine stability and control: A case study," IEEE Transactions on Education, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 48-55, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2019.2956909 [37] E. Ceh-Varela, C. Canto-Bonilla, and D. Duni, "Application of Project-Based Learning to a Software Engineering course in a hybrid class environment," Information and Software Technology, vol. 158, p. 107189, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107189 [38] S. M. Kolova and O. V. Belkina, "Hybrid project-based learning in engineering education," in 2021 International Conference on Quality Management, Transport and Information Security, Information Technologies (IT&QM&IS) (pp. 803- 807). IEEE, 2021. [39] D. Kurniawan, S. Masitoh, B. S. Bachri, T. wahyuningsih, W. g. Mulawarman, and A. Vebibina, "Evaluation of digital project based blended learning model to improve students' critical thinking and problem solving skills," Journal of Ecohumanism, vol. 3, no. 8, pp. 1875–1895, 2024. https://doi.org/10.62754/joe.v3i8.4847 [40] D. Kataria, G. Sanchez, and S. Govindasamy, "Fundamentals of Automation Engineering: A hybrid project-based learning approach," International Journal of Electrical Engineering & Education, vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 279-293, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020720920928460 [41] T. Steffen, A. Fly, and R. Stobart, "Project-based learning for control of hybrid powertrains using a simulation model," IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 55, no. 17, pp. 25-30, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.09.220 [42] E. N. Malyuga and G. O. Petrosyan, "Effective integration of distance courses through project-based learning," Frontiers in Education, vol. 6, p. 788829, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.788829 [43] M. Mielikäinen, "Towards blended learning: Stakeholders’ perspectives on a project-based integrated curriculum in ICT engineering education," Industry and Higher Education, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 74-85, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950422221994471 [44] R. Bolivar, N. R. Triviño Jaimes, and E. A. Gonzalez, "Implementation and benefits of hybrid methodology: Flipped classroom and project-based learning in mechanical engineering courses," International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 102-124, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1177/03064190231209989 [45] L. Pohan and J. Maulina, "Blended learning integrated with project-based learning: Its effect on learning outcomes, perception, and self-regulated learning," Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia Indonesia, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 97-106, 2022. https://doi.org/10.23887/jpki.v6i2.48213 [46] Y. K. Tong and X. Wei, "Teaching design and practice of a project-based blended learning model," International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 33-50, 2020. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2020010103 [47] N. Zakiah and D. Fajriadi, "Hybrid-PjBL: Creative thinking skills and self-regulated learning of pre-service teachers," in Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1521, No. 3, p. 032072). IOP Publishing, 2020. [48] S. Ealangov and K. A. Jamaludin, "Readiness to implement project-based learning: The influence of knowledge and attitude among community college lecturers," Journal of Technical Education and Training, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 84-98, 2024. [49] A. J. Rohm, M. Stefl, and N. Ward, "Future proof and real-world ready: The role of live project-based learning in students’ skill development," Journal of Marketing Education, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 204-215, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/02734753211001409 [50] B. Sudarsono et al., "Development of Integrated Project-based (PjBL-T) model to improve work readiness of vocational high school students," Jurnal Pendidikan Vokasi, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 222-235, 2022. https://doi.org/10.21831/jpv.v12i3.53158 [51] Y. Xiong, H.-J. So, and Y. Toh, "Assessing learners’ perceived readiness for computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL): A study on initial development and validation," Journal of Computing in Higher Education, vol. 27, pp. 215-239, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-015-9102-9 [52] L. Lubna, S. Suhirman, and S. Prayogi, "Hybrid information technology learning based on project work to enhance students’ design thinking in creating digital innovations," International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 447-67, 2024. [53] R. Sánchez-Muñoz, M. Carrió, G. Rodríguez, N. Pérez, and E. Moyano, "A hybrid strategy to develop real-life competences combining flipped classroom, jigsaw method and project-based learning," Journal of Biological Education, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 540-551, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2020.1858928 [54] M. S. Ramadhan, N. Jalinus, N. Refdinal, and M. Amin, "Development of hybrid project-based learning model for multimedia technology and animation," International Journal of Information and Education Technology, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 690-699, 2024. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2024.14.5.2094 https://doi.org/10.1177/0306419019838335 https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2019.2956909 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107189 https://doi.org/10.62754/joe.v3i8.4847 https://doi.org/10.1177/0020720920928460 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2022.09.220 https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.788829 https://doi.org/10.1177/0950422221994471 https://doi.org/10.1177/03064190231209989 https://doi.org/10.23887/jpki.v6i2.48213 https://doi.org/10.4018/IJMBL.2020010103 https://doi.org/10.1177/02734753211001409 https://doi.org/10.21831/jpv.v12i3.53158 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-015-9102-9 https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2020.1858928 https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2024.14.5.2094 844 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate [55] C. Maino, A. Mastropietro, L. Sorrentino, E. Busto, D. Misul, and E. Spessa, "Project and development of a reinforcement learning based control algorithm for hybrid electric vehicles," Applied Sciences, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 812, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12020812 [56] A. MacKenzie, Redesigning a project-based learning course for successful hybrid online delivery. 2024 Yearbook Emerging Technologies in Learning. Cham: Springer, 2025. [57] C. Martín, I. Moreno Segarra, M. A. Ibáñez, S. Mira, C. Fajardo, and M. E. González-Benito, "Effectiveness of a hybrid project-based learning (H-PBL) approach for students’ knowledge gain and satisfaction in a plant tissue culture course," Education Sciences, vol. 11, no. 7, p. 335, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070335 [58] J. Anselmo Fortoul-Diaz, F. Cortes-Santacruz, D. Perez-Rojas, E. Torres-Rios, and L. Antonio Carrillo-Martinez, "Project-based learning using internet of things as an educational tool in COVID–19 era with a hybrid context for engineering students," in Proceedings of the 2021 4th International Conference on Education Technology Management, 2021. [59] D. Chen, A hybrid approach to teaching Chinese through digital humanities, CALL, and project-based learning. London: Routledge, 2024. [60] S. E. Delabrida, "Hybrid Project-Based Learning course approach from face-to-face and remote experiences," IxD&A, vol. 52, pp. 44-60, 2022. [61] A. Elena-Bucea, F. Cruz-Jesus, T. Oliveira, and P. S. Coelho, "Assessing the role of age, education, gender and income on the digital divide: Evidence for the European Union," Information Systems Frontiers, vol. 23, pp. 1007-1021, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-020-10012-9 [62] J. V. Lazarus et al., "Hesitant or not? The association of age, gender, and education with potential acceptance of a COVID-19 vaccine: a country-level analysis," Journal of Health Communication, vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 799-807, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2020.1868630 [63] P. Moen, J. H. Pedtke, and S. Flood, "Disparate disruptions: Intersectional COVID-19 employment effects by age, gender, education, and race/ethnicity," Work, Aging and Retirement, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 207-228, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waaa013 [64] K. Bhopal and H. Henderson, "Competing inequalities: Gender versus race in higher education institutions in the UK," Educational Review, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 153-169, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1642305 [65] X. Du, M. Nomikos, K. Ali, A. Lundberg, and M. Abu‐Hijleh, "Health educators' professional agency in negotiating their problem‐based learning (PBL) facilitator roles: Q study," Medical Education, vol. 56, no. 8, pp. 847-857, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14792 [66] V. Ramadani, M. M. Rahman, A. Salamzadeh, M. S. Rahaman, and H. Abazi-Alili, "Entrepreneurship education and graduates' entrepreneurial intentions: Does gender matter? A multi-group analysis using AMOS," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 180, p. 121693, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121693 [67] A. Strzelecki and S. ElArabawy, "Investigation of the moderation effect of gender and study level on the acceptance and use of generative AI by higher education students: Comparative evidence from Poland and Egypt," British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 1209-1230, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13425 [68] C. Barone and G. Assirelli, "Gender segregation in higher education: An empirical test of seven explanations," Higher Education, vol. 79, pp. 55-78, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00396-2 [69] Z. A. Paray and S. Kumar, "Does entrepreneurship education influence entrepreneurial intention among students in HEI’s? The role of age, gender and degree background," Journal of International Education in Business, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 55-72, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIEB-02-2019-0009 [70] L. Zahedi et al., "Gamification in education: A mixed-methods study of gender on computer science students’ academic performance and identity development," Journal of Computing in Higher Education, vol. 33, pp. 441-474, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-021-09271-5 [71] F. Luo, L. Guo, A. Thapa, and B. Yu, "Social isolation and depression onset among middle-aged and older adults in China: Moderating effects of education and gender differences," Journal of Affective Disorders, vol. 283, pp. 71-76, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.01.022 [72] S. Asongu, M. Amari, A. Jarboui, and K. Mouakhar, "ICT dynamics for gender inclusive intermediary education: Minimum poverty and inequality thresholds in developing countries," Telecommunications Policy, vol. 45, no. 5, p. 102125, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2021.102125 [73] R. Rosa and S. Clavero, "Gender equality in higher education and research," Journal of Gender Studies, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 1-7, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2022.2007446 [74] V. Tandrayen-Ragoobur and D. Gokulsing, "Gender gap in STEM education and career choices: What matters?," Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 1021-1040, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE- 09-2019-0235 [75] I. Ajzen, "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational behavior and human decision processes, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 179- 211, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T [76] C. Bortes, E. Landstedt, and M. Strandh, "Psychotropic medication use and academic performance in adolescence: A cross-lagged path analysis," Journal of Adolescence, vol. 91, pp. 25-34, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2021.07.003 https://doi.org/10.3390/app12020812 https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070335 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-020-10012-9 https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2020.1868630 https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waaa013 https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1642305 https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14792 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121693 https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13425 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00396-2 https://doi.org/10.1108/JIEB-02-2019-0009 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-021-09271-5 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.01.022 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2021.102125 https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2022.2007446 https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-09-2019-0235 https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-09-2019-0235 https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2021.07.003 845 Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology ISSN: 2576-8484 Vol. 9, No. 9: 833-845, 2025 DOI: 10.55214/2576-8484.v9i9.9998 © 2025 by the authors; licensee Learning Gate [77] S. J. Ferrar, D. M. Stack, D. J. Dickson, and L. A. Serbin, "Conflict resolution and emotional expression in mother- preadolescent dyads: Longitudinal associations with children’s socioemotional development," Journal of Youth and Adolescence, vol. 49, pp. 2388-2406, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01312-z [78] F. E. Putri and D. Muttaqin, "The role of basic psychological need satisfaction as a mediator between friendship quality and life satisfaction," Psikohumaniora: Jurnal Penelitian Psikologi, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 15-26, 2022. https://doi.org/10.21580/pjpp.v7i1.10394 [79] K. Michos, A. Cantieni, R. Schmid, L. Müller, and D. Petko, "Examining the relationship between internship experiences, teaching enthusiasm, and teacher self-efficacy when using a mobile portfolio app," Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 109, p. 103570, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103570 [80] K. N. Shah et al., "Orthopaedic surgery faculty: An evaluation of gender and racial diversity compared with other specialties," JBJS Open Access, vol. 5, no. 3, p. e20, 2020. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.20.00009 [81] S. Preece and R. Bullingham, "Gender stereotypes: The impact upon perceived roles and practice of in-service teachers in physical education," Sport, Education and Society, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 259-271, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2020.1848813 [82] J. T. Richardson, J. Mittelmeier, and B. Rienties, "The role of gender, social class and ethnicity in participation and academic attainment in UK higher education: an update," Oxford Review of Education, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 346-362, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2019.1702012 [83] D. K. Evans, M. Akmal, and P. Jakiela, "Gender gaps in education: The long view," IZA Journal of Development and Migration, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–27, 2021. [84] G. Stoet and D. C. Geary, "Gender differences in the pathways to higher education," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117, no. 25, pp. 14073-14076, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2002861117 [85] C. Stöhr, A. W. Ou, and H. Malmström, "Perceptions and usage of AI chatbots among students in higher education across genders, academic levels and fields of study," Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, vol. 7, p. 100259, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100259 [86] L. Herrera, M. Al-Lal, and L. Mohamed, "Academic achievement, self-concept, personality and emotional intelligence in primary education. Analysis by gender and cultural group," Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 10, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03075 [87] J. Sánchez Prieto, J. M. Trujillo Torres, M. Gómez García, and G. Gómez García, "Gender and digital teaching competence in dual vocational education and training," Education Sciences, vol. 10, no. 3, p. 84, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10030084 [88] C. Kuśnierz, A. M. Rogowska, and I. Pavlova, "Examining gender differences, personality traits, academic performance, and motivation in Ukrainian and Polish students of physical education: A cross-cultural study," International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 17, no. 16, p. 5729, 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165729 [89] F. Fischetti, F. Latino, S. Cataldi, and G. Greco, "Gender differences in body image dissatisfaction: The role of physical education and sport," Journal of Human Sport and Exercise, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 241-250, 2020. https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2020.152.01 [90] S. R. Haasler, "The German system of vocational education and training: Challenges of gender, academisation and the integration of low-achieving youth," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 57-71, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258919898115 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01312-z https://doi.org/10.21580/pjpp.v7i1.10394 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103570 https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.20.00009 https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2020.1848813 https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2019.1702012 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2002861117 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100259 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03075 https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10030084 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165729 https://doi.org/10.14198/jhse.2020.152.01 https://doi.org/10.1177/1024258919898115