The results of the research in the first cycle obtained an average score of 1.80, including the criterion of "lacking" critical reasoning. Further details can be seen in the following table.

Observations are carried out simultaneously with the implementation of the teaching and learning process. At the end of the process, students are given a test to find out their level of success in learning by applying the PjBL model that has been implemented. The data of the results of the research on actions in class IV can be seen in the table below.

In Table 3.Table 2 above, it can be seen that the application of the PjBL learning model in cycle I resulted in an average Post-Test score of 56.11 students with a learning completion rate of 44.44%. Of these, 10 students managed to achieve a score above the KKM, so their Post-Test was considered complete. However, these results show that overall, in Cycle I, students have not reached the classically complete category, because only 44.44% of students obtained a score of ≥ 65, while the expected percentage of completion is 80%.

The researcher carried out a follow-up on the assessment results at the end after the implementation of learning to analyze the evaluation program to improve the results. In this activity, students experienced a little difficulty in understanding the material with the PjBL learning model because it was still new and they were not used to it, so it took time to adapt. Nevertheless, the classroom conditions remained orderly, smooth, and conducive.

In this 2nd cycle, the application of the PjBL model obtained an average score of 2.63 with the criterion of "Good" with critical reasoning. Further details can be seen in the following table.

Observations are carried out simultaneously with the implementation of the teaching and learning process. At the end of the process, students are given a test to find out their level of success in learning by applying the PjBL model that has been implemented. The data of the results of the research on actions in class IV can be seen in the table below.

In Table 3.Table 4 above, it can be seen that applying the PjBL learning model in cycle II resulted in an average post-test score of 68.33 students, with a learning completion rate of 72.22%. Of these, 13 students managed to achieve a score above the KKM, so that their Post-Test was considered complete. However, these results show that overall, in Cycle II, students have not achieved classical learning completeness because only 72.22% of students obtained a score ≥ 65, while the target of completeness should be 80%.

The researcher conducts a follow-up analysis after the implementation of learning to evaluate and improve the program. In this analysis, it was found that students had little difficulty in understanding the material with the PjBL learning model because it was the first time it was applied and they were not used to it. This indicates the need for further adaptation time for students. Nevertheless, the classroom conditions are well-maintained and conducive.

In this third cycle, an average score of 3.41 was included in the "Very Good" criterion for critical reasoning. Further details can be seen in the following table.

The increase in the results of students' critical reasoning observation in cycles I, II, and III can be seen from the increase in the average results of cycles I, II, and III, which are 1.80 in the poor criterion, 2.63 in the good criterion and 3.41 in the Very good criterion. Furthermore, the improvement of students' critical reasoning from cycles 1, 2, and 3 can be seen in the graph below.

Observation is carried out simultaneously with the teaching and learning process. At the end of the learning session, students were given a test to evaluate their level of success in learning using the PjBL Model.

Based on the data shown in Table 6, the application of the PjBL learning model in cycle III shows positive results. The average score of students for the Pre-Test was 61.11, while the average score for the Post-Test increased to 80.56. In addition, the level of learning completeness also increased, with the completion of the Pre-Test by 44.44% and the completion of the Post-Test increased to 88.88%. This means that out of 18 students, 10 have achieved completeness in the Pre-Test, and 16 students have completed the Post-Test, with a score above the KKM.

These results show that in this cycle, the majority of students have reached the expected level of completeness. The percentage of students who obtained a score of ≥ 65 reached 88.88%, exceeding the set completion target of 80%. The final assessment is carried out after the learning process to analyze the results and improve the evaluation program if necessary. During this action, students showed progress in understanding the material through the PjBL model, with orderly, smooth, and conducive classroom conditions. Students appear serious and attentive in various learning activities, such as formulating problems, formulating hypotheses, analyzing data, and providing conclusions.

From the results of the Post-Test, it can be seen that the increase in the learning achievement score of students from cycles 1, 2, and 3 is as shown in the graph below.

A very important first step in this PjBL research is to ensure that the two classes to be compared, namely the PjBL/PTK class and the control class, have equal initial abilities. This is done to eliminate other variables that can affect the results of the research so that the comparisons made become more valid and reliable. To ensure this equality, initial measurements were made using the Pre-Test test in both classes. The average results of the Pre-Test score showed that the experimental class had an average score of 53.89, while the control class had an average score of 51.67. This difference is quite small, so it can be concluded that the initial abilities of both classes are relatively the same.

The data from the research results from the Post-Test scores of students in the experimental class can be seen in the following table:

It can also be seen in the graph below.

In this experimental class, before the teacher carried out the learning action, the teacher first gave a Pre-Test to 18 students. The results showed that only 5 students reached completion, while the other 13 people had not completed it. This completeness is measured based on the KKM that has been set.

After the learning process takes place using the PjBL approach, the teacher provides a Post-Test to re-measure students' understanding of the material that has been taught. The results of the Post-Test showed a significant increase: out of 18 students, 16 people obtained a score above 65, while only 2 people still received a score below 65.

The average learning achievement of students in the Pre-Test was 53.89. After the learning intervention, classical learning completeness increased significantly to reach 88.88% with an average score of 80.56. This figure shows that the majority of students in the experimental class managed to achieve the minimum expected standard, with many of them getting a score above the KKM set by the teacher, which is 65. This also shows the effectiveness of the PjBL approach in improving students' understanding and learning achievement compared to the results of the Pre-Test before the learning action is carried out.

This increase in learning achievement can be attributed to the PjBL approach applied in the experimental class. PjBL encourages learners to be more active in the learning process, increasing their engagement through projects relevant to the subject matter. This process not only makes learning more interesting and meaningful but also helps students to understand the concepts taught more deeply. Learners not only memorize information but also apply their knowledge in real-world contexts, which in turn improves critical reasoning and problem-solving skills.

Based on the analysis of student learning achievements, the results show that some students still do not reach the expected standards. The Post-Test scores obtained are still some students who have not met the KKM set by the teacher, which is ≥ 65. Details of the Post-Test scores of students in the control class can be seen in the following table:

It can also be seen in the graph below.

In the control class, before starting the learning action, the teacher gave a Pre-Test to 18 students. The results of the Pre-Test showed that only 4 students achieved completeness, while 14 others had not reached the standards set based on the KKM.

After the learning process takes place using a conventional approach, the teacher provides a Post-test to re-measure students' understanding of the material that has been taught. The results of the Post-Test showed a significant improvement: out of 18 students, 13 people obtained a score above 65, while the other 5 people still received a score below 65.

The average learning achievement of students in the Pre-Test was 51.67. After the learning intervention, the classical learning completeness increased to 72.22% with an average Post-Test score of 70.56. This shows an increase in understanding and learning achievement compared to the results of the Pre-Test before learning is carried out.

However, when compared to the experimental class that achieved a classical completeness of 88.88% using PjBL learning, the results of the control class were still less effective. The experimental class showed better results in improving students' learning achievement.

Pre-Test and Post-Test Cycle I T-Test

To analyze whether the results of the study have experienced a significant improvement, the t-test test is used. In analyzing this t-test test, the researcher utilizes data from the results of the Pre-Test of students in cycle I and Post-Test cycle I. Using the SPSS program, the interpretation of the data can be seen in the following table.

Based on table 4.1, the tcal>ttable (6,710 > 1,740) with P value (0.000 < 0.05), so the hypothesis was accepted, which means that there was a significant difference in students' learning achievement after the application of the PjBL approach model in the first cycle in the PTK class.

The results of the t-test above prove that there is a significant difference in learning achievement after the application of the PjBL learning model in cycle I in the PTK class.

Pre-Test and Post-Test Cycle II t-test

To analyze whether the results of the study have experienced a significant improvement, the t-test test is used. In analyzing this t-test, the researcher used data from the results of the Pre-Test of students in cycle II and Post-Test cycle II. With the help of the SPSS program, the interpretation of t-test data for Pre-Test and Post-Test scores of cycles II can be seen in the table.

Based on table 4.2, the calculation > t-table (7.714 > 1.740) with P value (0.000 < 0.05), so that the hypothesis is accepted. This shows that there is a significant difference between student learning achievement and the application of the PjBL model in PAI and BP subjects in cycle II in the PTK class.

Thus, the application of the PjBL model in cycle II in PTK classes shows that students' Pre-Test and Post-Test scores increase in PAI and BP subjects in Class IV of SDN Masaran 5.

Post-Test Cycle I and Cycle II t-Score Test

To analyze the results of the study whether there is a significant increase or not, the t-test test is used. In analyzing this t-test, the researcher used data obtained from the results of Post-Test Cycle I and Post-Test Cycle ll. By using the SPSS program, the interpretation of t-test data for Post-Test scores in cycle I and cycle II is obtained. The data can be seen in the table.

Based on table 4.3, calculate > ttable (4.267 > 1.740) with P value (0.001 < 0.05), then the hypothesis is accepted. Based on Table 4.3, the tcal value (4.267) is greater than the t-table (1.740), and the P value (0.001) is smaller than 0.05. This shows that the research hypothesis is accepted, which means that there is a significant difference in the learning achievement of students after the application of the PjBL model in PAI and BP subjects in cycle II in the PTK class.

The results of this t-test prove that there is a difference in student learning achievement between the application of the PjBL model in cycle I and cycle II in PTK classes, especially in PAI and BP subjects for Class IV at SDN Masaran 5. In other words, the PjBL method shows a significant increase in students' learning achievement from cycle I to cycle II in the subject.

Pre-Test and Post-Test Cycle III t-test

To analyze whether the results of the study have experienced a significant improvement, the t-test test is used. In analyzing this t-test, the researcher used data from the results of the Pre-Test of students in cycle III and Post-Test cycle III. With the help of the SPSS program, the interpretation of t-test data for Pre-Test and Post-Test scores of cycle III can be seen in the table.

Based on table 4.4, the calculation > t-table (15.297 > 1.740) with P value (0.000 < 0.05), so the hypothesis is accepted. This shows that there is a significant difference between student learning achievement and the application of the PjBL model in PAI and BP subjects in cycle III in the PTK class.

Thus, the application of the PjBL model in cycle III in PTK classes shows that students' Pre-Test and Post-Test scores increase in PAI and BP subjects in Class IV of SDN Masaran 5.

Post-Test Cycle II and Cycle III t-Score Test

To analyze the results of the study whether there is a significant increase or not, the t-test test is used. In analyzing this t-test test, the researcher used data obtained from the results of the Post-Test Cycle II and Cycle III. By using the SPSS program, the interpretation of t-test data for Post-Test scores of cycle II and cycle III is obtained. The data can be seen in the table.

Based on Table 4.5, tcal> t-table (5,500 > 1,740) with a P value (0.000 < 0.05) then the hypothesis is accepted. This means that there is a significant difference between student learning achievement and the application of the PjBL model in PAI and BP cycle III subjects in the PTK class.

The results of the t-test above prove that there is a difference in students' learning achievement with the application of the PjBL model in Cycle II and Cycle III in PTK class, in PAI and BP Class IV subjects in SDN Masaran 5.

Test t Score Pre-Test Experimental Class and Control Class

To analyze the results of the study whether there is a difference in learning achievement or a significant increase in learning achievement in the experimental and control classes, the t-test test is used. In analyzing this t-test, the researcher used data obtained from the results of the pre-test of students in the experimental class and the control class.

From the results of the calculation of the t-test test of 95% significance level of the degree of freedom (db) = n1 + n2 = 18 + 18 = 36-2 = 34 seen in the table, which is 1.691, a calculation of 0.462 was obtained. Since the t-count < t-table, the null hypothesis (H0) is accepted and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. This means that there is no difference in student learning achievement between students in the experimental class and the control class. The results of the Pre-Test of the PjBL model class and the control class were then tested using SPSS. Based on the calculation results, the significance result was 0.647. If the value of Sig. (2-tailed) < 0.05 The value obtained is 0.647 < 0.05, then it can be concluded that there is no difference between the learning achievement of students in the experimental class and the control class before the application of the PjBL model.

Test t Score Post-Test Experimental Class and Control Class

To analyze the results of the study whether there is a difference in learning achievement or a significant increase in learning achievement in the experimental and control classes, the t-test test is used. In analyzing this t-test, the researcher used data obtained from the results of the Post-Test of students in the experimental class and the control class.

From the results of the calculation of the t-test of the significance level of 95% of the degree of freedom (db) = n1 + n2 = 18 + 18 = 36 - 2 = 34 seen in the t-table, which is 1.691, it is obtained t-count = 2.168. Because the t-count > t-table, the null hypothesis (H0) was rejected and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) was accepted.

This means that there is a difference in students' learning achievement with the application of the PjBL learning model in improving critical reasoning and students' learning achievement in PAI and BP subjects in the experimental and control classes.

The results of the Post-Test of the experimental class and the control class were then tested using SPSS. Based on the calculation results, the significance result was 0.037. If the value of Sig. (2-tailed) < 0.05 The value obtained is 0.037 < 0.05, then it can be concluded that there is a difference between the learning achievement in the experimental class and the control class.

The results of the t-test above prove that there is a difference in learning achievement with the application of the PjBL model in PAI and BP subjects in the experimental class, namely class IV, and the application of conventional learning in the control class of PAI and BP subjects in grade IV of SDN Masaran 5.

So, it can be concluded that the application of the PjBL model is more effective in improving critical reasoning and students' learning achievement in PAI and BP subjects.

Based on the results of the study, the application of the PjBL model showed a significant increase in students' critical reasoning attitudes from the first cycle to the third cycle. In the first cycle, students' critical reasoning skills were still less than optimal with an average class score of 1.80, which was included in the less critical category. This is due to the implementation of PjBL which has not been maximized because teachers are still in the adaptation stage to this model. However, in the second cycle, the average class score increased to 2.63, indicating that students began to be more actively involved in learning, asking questions, and developing their analytical skills. In the third cycle, the average class score reached 3.41, which is in the very good category, where students can identify problems, formulate hypotheses, and conclude results better.

In addition to improving critical reasoning skills, the application of the PjBL model also has a positive impact on students' responsibilities. This model encourages students to experience the learning process independently, find solutions, and learn from their own experiences. Learners learn to manage time, work together in groups, and take responsibility for the outcomes of their projects. Classroom activities became more dynamic and conducive, with students being more enthusiastic and active in listening to the material, observing problems, and expressing ideas in the form of projects.

The measurement of PjBL effectiveness was carried out through Pre-Test and Post-Test in each cycle, which showed a significant increase in student scores. In the third cycle, most of the students managed to achieve a score above the KKM, with learning completeness reaching 88.88%, far above the set target of 80%. In conclusion, the PjBL model significantly improves students' critical reasoning attitudes and responsibilities, making it an effective model for improving the quality of education, especially in PAI and BP subjects.

Based on the results of observation of the application of the PjBL model in PAI and BP learning, it can be seen that teachers have followed the learning plan contained in the teaching module well. Although in the first meeting, there were shortcomings in teacher guidance, especially in helping students observe and reflect on their experiences, in the second and third meetings, all stages of PjBL were well implemented. This has a positive impact on the activities of the learners observed during the learning process, where their engagement increases significantly.

The observation procedure carried out every five to seven minutes shows that at the first meeting, students are still less actively involved, and learning tends to be dominated by teachers. However, in the second and third meetings, students began to be more actively involved, reducing the dominance of teachers, and their participation was within the ideal period. The student's response to the application of the PjBL model was also very positive, with high enthusiasm for listening to the material, observing problems, and expressing ideas through projects formulated with their group.

The application of the PjBL model not only improves students' understanding of the material, but also develops other important skills such as teamwork, communication skills, and critical reasoning. Students can apply new concepts in their projects, which is proven by excellent results in pre-test and post-test. In addition to supporting academic achievement, PjBL also prepares students with important life skills, making it an effective learning strategy to be applied in PAI and BP learning.

Based on data from cycles 1, 2, and 3 as well as learning achievement tests, the PjBL model has proven to be effective in improving students' critical reasoning skills and learning achievement. PjBL encourages learners to be active in the learning process through real projects that are relevant to the subject matter, so that they can identify problems, find solutions, and communicate the results of their work, ultimately honing their critical reasoning skills. In addition, PjBL also has a positive impact on student learning achievement. In contrast to conventional teacher-centred learning, PjBL puts students at the centre of learning, allowing them to apply knowledge in real contexts. This helps students understand the subject matter more deeply and not only memorize the information but also be able to apply it.

Active involvement in PjBL increases learners' motivation to learn, as projects that are relevant to real life make them more enthusiastic about learning. This motivation contributes to an increase in academic achievement, as students are more motivated to achieve good results and show the best performance. Overall, PjBL offers a more interactive and effective learning approach compared to conventional models, preparing learners with strong critical skills and superior academic achievement.

The implementation of the Project-Based Learning (PjBL) model in Islamic education provides a transformative approach to enhance students' critical reasoning and academic achievement. Unlike traditional learning methods that often emphasize memorization and passive reception of knowledge, PjBL places students at the center of the learning process through active exploration, collaboration, and problem-solving. This student-centred approach aligns well with the goals of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly in fostering quality education, peace, and strong institutions.

The analysis of PjBL's application in the context of Islamic education reveals a significant improvement in students' ability to think critically. By engaging with realworld problems and connecting them to Islamic teachings, students are challenged to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information from both religious and contemporary perspectives. This cultivates higher-order thinking skills, which are essential in developing a generation that can navigate complex social and moral issues with an Islamic worldview.

Moreover, the discussion shows that PjBL contributes positively to learning achievement. Students become more motivated and responsible for their learning, leading to a deeper understanding of the subject matter and improved academic performance. When projects are designed to reflect the values and objectives of Islam in addressing global challenges outlined in the SDGs-such as environmental care, social justice, and poverty alleviation-learning becomes more meaningful and relevant to students' lives.

In conclusion, the integration of PjBL in Islamic education enhances both cognitive and affective learning outcomes. It not only strengthens students' academic abilities but also supports the development of character and global awareness, thereby aligning Islamic education with the broader mission of the SDGs.