Learning Environments Research

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 159–172 | Cite as

Assessing elementary school support for inquiry

  • Penny Van Deur


Increasingly in elementary schools, there has been a focus on the influence of school-level factors on students’ learning. The way in which the learning environment is organised in schools and classrooms is likely to influence students’ opportunities to carry out inquiry. Most studies have focused on the effects of the amount of schooling, rather than effects attributable to support for inquiry in the school context. This study clarifies aspects of school contexts that support inquiry at the school level and describes the development of an inventory to assess school contexts. The Primary School Characteristics Inventory has three components named Motivation for Student Inquiry, Organisational Structures to Support Inquiry and Structures to Support Inquiry Strategies in School. The instrument was effective for identifying schools with varying levels of support for inquiry, suggesting that some schools might need to modify the school context if students are to carry out inquiry in a self-directed way.


Assessment Inquiry School context Self-directed learning 


  1. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P., & Zeidner, M. (2000). Introduction. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 1–9). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  3. Department of Education, Training & Employment (DETE). (2001). South Australian Curriculum Standards and Accountability Frameworks (SACSA). Seacombe Gardens, Australia: Curriculum Resources Unit.Google Scholar
  4. Eccles, J. S. (2005). Commentary: Studying the development of learning and task motivation. Learning and Instruction, 15, 161–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1994, April). Assessing researching the classroom environment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  6. Fraser, B. J., McRobbie, C. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1996, November). Personal and class forms of a new classroom environment questionnaire. Paper presented at the conference of the Educational Research Association, Singapore and the Australian Association of Research in Education, Singapore.Google Scholar
  7. Grady, N. B., & Fisher, D. L. (1993, November). Teachers’ images of their schools, as revealed by metaphor, and students’ perceptions of their classroom environment. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Perth, Australia.Google Scholar
  8. Hinkle, D. E., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. G. (1994). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Co.Google Scholar
  9. Keeves, J. P., & Alagumalai, S. (1999). New approaches to measurement. In G. N. Masters & J. P. Keeves (Eds.), Advances in measurement in educational research and assessment (pp. 23–42). New York: Pergamon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Chicago: Association Press and Follett Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  11. Perry, K. E., & Weinstein, R. S. (1998). The social context of early schooling and children’s school adjustment. Educational Psychologist, 33, 177–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Pintrich, P., & DeGroot, E. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rhine, S. (1998). The role of research and teachers’ knowledge base in professional development. Educational Researcher, 27(5), 27–31.Google Scholar
  15. Rutter, M., & Maughan, B. (2002). School effectiveness findings 1979–2002. Journal of School Psychology, 40, 451–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sheridan, B., Andrich, D., & Luo, G. (1996). RUMM Rasch Unidimensional Measurement Models. Perth, Australia: Murdoch University.Google Scholar
  17. SPSS. (2001). SPSS for Windows, Version 11.0. Chicago: SPSS Inc.Google Scholar
  18. Sternberg, R. J. (2000). Making school reform work: A mineralogical theory of school modifiability. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.Google Scholar
  19. Treffinger, D. J. (1993). Fostering effective independent learning through individualized programming. In J. S. Renzulli (Ed.), Systems and models for developing programs for the gifted and talented (pp. 429–460). Cheltenham, Australia: Hawker Brownlow.Google Scholar
  20. Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., & Rodriguez, D. (1998). The development of children’s motivation in school contexts. In D. P. Pearson & A. Iran-Nejad (Eds.), Review of research in education (pp. 73–118). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Flinders UniversityAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.LongwoodAustralia

Personalised recommendations