Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Do Junior High School Students Perceive Their Learning Environment as Constructivist?

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the manner in which the features of a constructivist learning environment, and the mechanisms at its base, are expressed in junior high school students’ conceptions. Our research is based on an integration of quantitative and qualitative approaches, deigned to provide a wider ranging and deeper understanding. Eight hundred and forty eighth- and ninth-grade students from over 15 schools participated in the study. Of the 840 students who completed the questionnaire, the explanations of 200 well-written questionnaires were further analyzed qualitatively. The findings of the study are presented in terms of the four scales employed in the CLES, namely the autonomy scale, the prior knowledge scale, the negotiation scale, and the student-centeredness scale. The quantitative results achieved here concur with parallel studies conducted around the world. The findings indicate that a considerable portion of the students perceive their learning environment as a constructivist one and report positive attitudes toward the way they are being taught. In terms of the qualitative results, however, it appears that in some cases, the students’ explanations reveal that in fact, and contrary to the bare quantitative results, some students do not perceive their learning environment as being constructivist. This raises the question of whether the fact that students recognize the factors associated with constructivist teaching is indeed an indication that such teaching exists in practice. This finding emphasizes the importance of combining qualitative and quantitative methods for arriving at a balanced view of classroom occurrences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldrich J (1995) Correlations Genuine and Spurious in Pearson and Yule. Stat Sci 10:364–376

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel DP (1968) Educational psychology: a cognitive view. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Zvi Assaraf O, Orpaz I (2009) The development of junior high school students’ understanding of earth systems and the human role as a learning outcome of the “life at the poles” study unit. Res Sci Educ 40(4):525–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boddy N, Watson K, Aubusson P (2003) A trial of the five Es: a referent model for constructivist teaching and learning. Res Sci Educ 33(1):27–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin J, Strauss A (1990) Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qual Sociol 13(1):3–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW, Tashakkori A ( 2007) Editorial: differing perspective on mixed methods research. J Mixed Method Res 1:303–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach LJ, Shavelson RJ (2004) My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures. Educ Psychol Measur 64:391–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy TM, Jonassen DH (1992) Constructivism and the technology of instruction: a conversation. Erlbaum, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Eshach H, Dor-Ziderman Y, Arbel Y (2011) Scaffolding the “scaffolding” metaphor: from inspiration to a practical tool for kindergarten teachers. J Sci Educ Technol. doi:10.1007/s10956-011-9323-2

  • Fraser BJ (1998) Classroom environment instruments: development, validity and applications. Learning Environ Res 1:7–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gijbels D, van de Watering G, Dochy F, van den Bossche P (2006) New learning environments and constructivism: the students’ perspective. Instr Sci 34(3):213–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gijbels D, Segers M, Struyf E (2008) Constructivist learning environments and the (im) possibility to change students’ perceptions of assessment demands and approaches to learning. Instr Sci 36(5–6):431–443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glynn SM, Taasoobshirazi G, Brickman P (2009) Science motivation questionnaire: construct validation with nonscience majors. J Res Sci Teaching 46(2):127–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno JG, Collins AM, Resnick LB (1996) Cognition and learning. In: Berliner DC, Calfee RC (eds) Handbook of educational psychology. Simon & Schuster Macmillan, New York, pp 15–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris KR, Alexander PA (1998) Integrated, constructivist education: challenge and reality. Educ Psychol Rev 10:115–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hathaway RS (1995) Assumptions underlying quantitative and qualitative research: implications for institutional research. Res High Educ 36(5):535–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong Zuway-R, Lin Huann-shyang (2011) An investigation of students’ personality traits and attitudes toward science. Int J Sci Educ 33(7):1001–1028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirch SA, Siry CA (2012) “Maybe the algae was from the filter”: maybe and similar modifiers as mediational tools and indicators of uncertainty and possibility in children’s science talk. J Res Sci Educ 42(2):261–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Loyens SMM, Gijbels D (2008) Understanding the effects of constructivist learning environments: introducing a multi-directional approach. Instr Sci 36:351–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mantzicopoulos P, Patrick H, Samarapungavan A (2008) Young children’s motivational beliefs about learning science. Early Childh Res Q 23:378–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mortimer E, Scott P (2003) Meaning making in the secondary classroom. Open University Press, Maidenhead

    Google Scholar 

  • Nix RK, Fraser BJ, Ledbetter CE (2005) Evaluating an integrated science learning environment using the Constructivist Learning Environment Survey. Learn Environ Res Int J 8:109–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novak JD (2002) Meaningful learning: the essential factor for conceptual change in limited or appropriate propositional hierarchies (liphs) leading to empowerment of learners. Sci Educ 86:548–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins D (1992) Smart schools. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins D (1999) The many faces of constructivism. Educ Leader 57(3):6–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Philips DC (1995) The good, the bad and the ugly: the many faces of constructivism. Educ Res 24(7):5–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget J (1954) The construction of reality in the child. Basic Books, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rani G (2003) Growth in students’ attitudes about the utility of science over the junior high and high school years: evidence from the longitudinal study of American youth. J Sci Educ Technol 12:439–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon G (1998) Novel constructivist learning environments and novel technologies: some issues to be concerned with. Res Dial Learn Instruct 1:3–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder CM, Scott TP, Tolson H, Huang T-Y, Lee Y-H (2007) A meta-analysis of national research: effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States. J Res Sci Teaching 44:1436–1460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shkedi A (2005) Multiple case narrative: a qualitative approach to studying multiple populations. John Benjamins, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Taber KS (2006) Beyond constructivism: the progressive research programme into learning science. Stud Sci Educ 42(1):125–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor PC, Fraser BJ (1991) CLES: an instrument for assessing constructivist learning environment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the national association for research in science teaching. Lake Geneva, Wisconsin

  • Taylor PC, Fraser BJ, Fisher DL (1997) Monitoring constructivist classroom learning environments. Int J Educ Res 27:293–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenenbaum G, Naidu S, Jegede O, Austin J (2001) Constructivist pedagogy in conventional on-campus and distance learning practice: an exploratory investigation. Learn Instruct 11:87–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobin K, Tippins D (1993) Constructivism as a referent for teaching and learning. In Tobin K (ed) The practice of constructivism in science education. AAAS Press, Washington, DC

  • Topping KJ, Thurston A, Tolmie A, Christie D, Murray P, Karagiannidou E (2011) Cooperative learning in science: intervention in the secondary school. Res Sci Technol Educ 29:91–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai CC (2000) Relationships between student scientific epistemological beliefs and perceptions of constructivist learning environments. Educational Research 42(2):193–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuan H, Chin C, Shich S (2005) The development of a questionnaire to measure students’ motivation towards science learning. Int J Sci Educ 27:639–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Zee E, Minstrell J (1997) Using questioning to guide student thinking. J Learn Sci 6(2):227–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Glaserfeld E (1993) Questions and answers about radical constructivism. In: Tobin K (ed) The practice of constructivism in science education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ

  • Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson B (1996) Constructivist learning environments: case studies in instructional design. Educational Technology Publications, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright JM (2008) The comparative effects of constructivist versus traditional teaching methods on the environmental literacy of postsecondary nonscience majors. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Nevada, Reno. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society

  • Zohar A (1996) Transfer and retention of reasoning skills taught in biological contexts. Research in Science and Technological Education 14(205–219):78

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohar A (2004) Higher order thinking in science classroom: students’ learning and teachers’ professional development. Science & technology educational library, vol 22. Kluwer, Dorchrecht

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Science and Technology Education Department, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, P.O.B. 653, 84105, Be’er Sheva, Israel

    Asely Moustafa, Orit Ben-Zvi-Assaraf & Haim Eshach

Authors
  1. Asely Moustafa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Orit Ben-Zvi-Assaraf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Haim Eshach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Orit Ben-Zvi-Assaraf.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moustafa, A., Ben-Zvi-Assaraf, O. & Eshach, H. Do Junior High School Students Perceive Their Learning Environment as Constructivist?. J Sci Educ Technol 22, 418–431 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9403-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9403-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation