Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Development and Validation of an Instrument to Monitor the Implementation of Social Constructivist Learning Environments in Grade 9 Science Classrooms in South Africa

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article describes the development and validation of an instrument that can be used to assess students’ perceptions of their learning environment as a means of monitoring and guiding changes toward social constructivist learning environments. The study used a mixed-method approach with priority given to the quantitative data collection. During the quantitative data collection phase, a new instrument—the Social Constructivist Learning Environment Survey (SCLES)—was developed and used to collect data from 1,955 grade 9 science students from 52 classes in 50 schools in the Western Cape province, South Africa. The data were analysed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the new instrument, which assessed six dimensions of the classroom learning environment, namely, Working with Ideas, Personal Relevance, Collaboration, Critical Voice, Uncertainty in Science and Respect for Difference. Two dimensions were developed specifically for the present study in order to contextualise the questionnaire to the requirements of the new South African curriculum (namely, Metacognition and Respect for Difference). In the qualitative data collection phase, two case studies were used to investigate whether profiles of class mean scores on the new instrument could provide an accurate and “trustworthy” description of the learning environment of individual science classes. The study makes significant contributions to the field of learning environments in that it is one of the first major studies of its kind in South Africa with a focus on social constructivism and because the instrument developed captures important aspects of the learning environment associated with social constructivism.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, W. E. (1996). Science laboratory classroom environment in a South African college of education. South African Journal of Education, 16, 123–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, W. E. (1997). Science laboratory environment in a South African college of education: the effect of class membership. South African Journal of Education, 17, 49–52.

  • Aldridge, J. M., & Fraser, B. J. (2000). A cross-cultural study of classroom learning environments in Australia and Taiwan. Learning Environments Research, 3, 101–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., Taylor, P. C., & Chen, C. C. (2000). Constructivist learning environments in a cross-national study in Taiwan and Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 37–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., & Huang, I. T. C. (1999). Investigating classroom environments in Taiwan and Australia. Journal of Educational Research, 93, 48–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., & Sebela, M. P. (2004). Using teacher action research to promote constructivist learning environments in South Africa. South African Journal of Education, 93, 245–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldridge, J. M., Laugksch, R. C., Seopa, M. A., & Fraser, B. J. (2006). Development and validation of an instrument to monitor the implementation of outcomes-based learning environments in science classrooms in South Africa. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 45–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnott, A., Kubeka, Z., Rice, M., & Hall, G. (1997). Mathematics and science teachers: utilisation, supply and training in South Africa. Edusource Report. Craighall, South Africa: Edusource.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1989). Educational research: an introduction (5th ed.). New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1, 185–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, M. G., & Brooks, J. G. (1999). The courage to be constructivist. Educational Leadership, 57, 18–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Confrey, J. (1990). What constructivism implies for teaching. In R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, & N. Noddings (Eds.), Constructivist views on teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 107–122). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design, qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). London: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Critien, C. (2009). The implementation of Outcomes-Based Education (OBE) in grade 8 natural science classrooms in the Western Cape. Unpublished MEd Thesis, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.

  • Department of Education. [DoE]. (1997). Curriculum 2005: South African education for the 21st century. Pretoria, South Africa: Author.

  • Department of Education. [DoE]. (2002). Revised national curriculum statement grades R—9 (schools). Pretoria, South Africa: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Basic Education. [DBE] (2011). Curriculum assessment policy statements. Pretoria, South Africa: Author.

  • Dryden, M. & Fraser, B. J. (1998). The impact of systemic reform efforts in promoting constructivist approaches in high school science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

  • Duit, R., Treagust, D. F., & Widodo, A. (2008). Teaching science for conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 629–646). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap, J. C. (1999). Rich environments for active learning on the web: guidelines and examples. Proceedings of WebNet 99 – world conference on www and internet. Charlottesville, VA: AACE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erikson, F. (1998). Qualitative research methods for science education. In B. J. Fraser & J. G. Tobin (Eds.), International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 1155–1173). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Field, A. P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (and sex and drugs and rock 'n roll). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1981). Validity and use of the My Class Inventory. Science Education, 65, 145–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1983). A comparison of actual and preferred classroom environments perceived by science teachers and students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 229–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, D. L., & Waldrip, B. G. (1997). Assessing culturally sensitive factors in learning environments of science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 27, 41–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, E. B., & Ladd, H. F. (2004). Elusive equity: education reform in post-apartheid South Africa. Washington, D. C.: Brookings Institution Press; Cape Town: HSRC Press.

  • Fraser, B. J. (1980). Criterion validity of an individualised classroom environment questionnaire. Macquarie University: Report to the Education Research and Development Committee.

  • Fraser, B. J. (1990). Individualised classroom environment questionnaire. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

  • Fraser, B. J. (1994). Research on classroom and school climate. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 493–564). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J. (1998a). Classroom environment instruments: development, validity and applications. Learning Environments Research: An International Journal, 1, 7–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J. (1998b). Science learning environments: assessment, effects and determinants. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), The international handbook of science education (pp. 527–564). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J. (2007). Classroom learning environments. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Ledermann (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 103–124). Malwal, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J., & McRobbie, C. J. (1995). Science laboratory classroom environment at schools and universities: a cross-national study. Educational Research and Evaluation, 1, 289–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, D. G., & Reid, K. (2000, January). Learning environments in senior secondary science classes. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Science, Mathematics and Technology Education. Taipei, Taiwan.

  • Johnson, B., & McClure, R. (2004). Validity and reliability of a revised version of the Constructivist Learning Environment Survey (CLES). Learning Environments Research: An International Journal, 7, 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1999). Assessment and investigation of constructivist science learning environments in Korea. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17, 239–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kourous, C., & Abrami, P. (2003). The impact of student attitudes toward small group learning on behaviours and academic achievement: a look inside actual classroom settings. Paper presented at AERA conference in Chicago, IL.

  • Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebow, D. (1993). Constructivist values for systems design: five principles toward a new mindset. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41, 4–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margianti, E. S., Fraser, B. J., & Aldridge, J. M. (2002). Learning environment, attitudes and achievement: assessing the perceptions of Indonesian university students. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

  • Mayer, R. E. (1998). Cognitive theory for education—what teachers should know. In N. M. Lambert & B. L. McCombs (Eds.), How students learn reforming schools through learner-centred education (pp. 353–379). Washington D.C: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Moos, R. H. (1974). Family Environment Scale preliminary manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

  • Moos, R. H. (1979). Evaluating educational environments. London: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nix, R. K., Fraser, B. J., & Ledbetter, C. E. (2005). Evaluating an integrated science learning environment using the constructivist learning environment survey. Learning Environments Research, 8, 109–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noddings, N. (1990). Constructivism in mathematics education. In R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, & N. Noddings (Eds.), Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 7–18). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, D. (2010). Teachers and teacher quality: a critical issue in school mathematics and science. In D. Grayson (Ed.), Proceedings of an Academy of Science of South Africa forum: critical issues in school Mathematics and Science: pathways to progress (pp. 47–59). Pretoria, South Africa: ASSAf.

  • Phurutse, M. C. (2005). Factors affecting teaching and learning in South African public schools. Cape Town: HSRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plüddermann, P. (1997). “Additive” and “subtractive”: challenges in education for multilingualism. Per Linguam, 13, 17–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puacharearn, P., & Fisher, D. L. (2004, June). The effectiveness of co-operative learning integrated with constructivist teaching on improving learning environments in Thai secondary school science classrooms. Paper presented at the International Association for the Study of Co-operation in Education Conference, Singapore.

  • Rawnsley, D. G., & Fisher, D. L. (1998, December). Learning environments in mathematics classrooms and their associations with students’ attitudes and learning. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Adelaide, Australia.

  • Reeves, C. (1999). Are teachers likely to achieve the natural science outcomes for Curriculum 2005? Journal of Education, 24, 44–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, K. J. (2002). Talking to understand science. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Social constructivist teaching: affordances and constraints (pp. 197–262). Boston, MA: JAI.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (2001). Problem based learning: an instructional model and its constructivist framework. CRLT Technical Report No. 16-01. Bloomington, IN: Centre for research on learning and technology, Indiana University.

  • Stears, M., & Malcolm, C. (2005). Learners and teachers as co-designers of relevant science curricula. Perspectives in Education, 23, 21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. C., Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. (1997). Monitoring constructivist learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 27, 293–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. C., & Maor, D. (2000). Assessing the efficacy of online teaching with the constructivist online learning environment survey. Paper presented at the 9th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia.

  • Thompson, B. (1998). Review of ‘what if there were no significance tests?’. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 334–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, B. (2002). What future quantitative social science research could look like: confidence intervals and effect sizes. Educational Researcher, 31, 24–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Berg, S. (2007). Apartheid’s enduring legacy: inequalities in education. Journal of African Economies, 16, 849–880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Berg, S., & Burger, R. (2003). Education and socio-economic differentials: a study of school performance in the Western Cape. Development Policy Research Unit Working Paper 03/07. Cape Town, South Africa: University of Cape Town.

  • Walberg, H. J. (1979). Educational environments and effects: evaluation, policy and productivity. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wubbels, T., Brekelmans, M., & Hoomayers, H. (1991). Interpersonal teacher behaviour in the classroom. In B. J. Fraser & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Educational environments: evaluation, antecedents and consequences (pp. 141–160). London: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wubbels, T., & Levy, J. (1991). A comparison of interpersonal behavior of Dutch and American teachers. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 15, 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This material is based upon the work supported by the Spencer Foundation and the A.W. Mellon Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of these two organisations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of Cape Town, Private Bag Rondebosch, 7700, Cape Town, South Africa

    Melanie B. Luckay & Rudiger C. Laugksch

Authors
  1. Melanie B. Luckay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rudiger C. Laugksch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melanie B. Luckay.

Appendix: Original English version of SCLES

Appendix: Original English version of SCLES

Investigation/Metacognition

  1. 9.

    I am asked to think about the supporting facts for statements.

  2. 10.

    I carry out investigations to answer questions coming from discussions.

  3. 11.

    I explain the meaning of statements, diagrams and graphs.

  4. 12.

    I carry out investigations to answer the teacher’s questions.

  5. 13.

    I find out answers to questions by doing investigations.

  6. 14.

    I solve problems by using information obtained from my own investigations.

  7. 21.

    I think about my ideas in science.

  8. 22.

    I write down my ideas in science.

  9. 23.

    I check my ideas in science with my teacher.

  10. 24.

    I check my ideas in science by reading.

Respect for difference

  1. 16.

    I am aware that my classmates have different opinions about science.

  2. 17.

    I listen to my classmates’ opinions about science.

  3. 18.

    Before I agree or disagree with my classmates’ opinions about science, I first think about what they said.

  4. 19.

    I try to understand my classmates’ opinions about science.

  5. 20.

    I respect my classmates’ opinions about science.

Personal Relevance

  1. 30.

    I learn about the world outside of school.

  2. 31.

    My new learning starts with problems about the world outside of school.

  3. 32.

    I get better understanding of the world outside of school.

  4. 33.

    I learn interesting things about the world outside of school.

  5. 36.

    What I learn I can link to what I already know.

Collaboration

  1. 37.

    I like working in groups.

  2. 38.

    I feel that it is important for the class to work together as a team.

  3. 39.

    I would rather decide what to do as a group than to make a decision by myself.

  4. 40.

    It is important for me to be involved in class discussions.

  5. 41.

    I like to work with other students.

Critical Voice

  1. 42.

    It’s okay for me to ask the teacher “Why do I have to learn this?”

  2. 45.

    It’s okay for me to complain about anything that prevents me from learning.

  3. 46.

    It’s okay for me to express my opinion.

  4. 47.

    It’s okay for me to speak up for my rights.

Uncertainty of Science

  1. 49.

    I learn that science has changed over time.

  2. 50.

    I learn that science is influenced by peoples’ values and opinions.

  3. 51.

    I learn about the different sciences used by people in other cultures.

  4. 52.

    I learn that modern science is different from the science of long ago.

  5. 53.

    I learned that science is about creating theories.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luckay, M.B., Laugksch, R.C. The Development and Validation of an Instrument to Monitor the Implementation of Social Constructivist Learning Environments in Grade 9 Science Classrooms in South Africa. Res Sci Educ 45, 1–22 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9410-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9410-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation