Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Development of an instrument for assessing senior high school students’ preferred and perceived laboratory classroom environment

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Learning Environments Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aimed to develop an instrument, named the inquiry-based laboratory classroom environment instrument (ILEI), for assessing senior high-school science students’ preferred and perceived laboratory environment. A total of 262 second-year students, from a senior-high school in Taiwan, were recruited for this study. Four stages were included in the development of the ILEI: (1) item formulation, (2) content validation, (3) construct validation and (4) reliability calculation. The study revealed that the ILEI was valid and reliable. Most students showed a preference for a student-directed and teacher-guided hybrid learning environment. The development of the ILEI is likely to help researchers and teachers to more effectively understand student views of the laboratory classroom environment. Our profound hope is to utilise ILEI to improve teachers’ assessment and students’ learning in inquiry-based laboratory classroom environments.

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

  • Abrams, E., Southerland, S. A., & Evans, C. A. (2007). Inquiry in the science classroom: Realities and opportunities. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1–12.

  • Berg, C. A. R., Bergendahl, V. C. B., Lundberg, B. K. S., & Tibell, L. A. E. (2003). Benefiting from an open-ended experiment? A comparison of attitudes to, and outcomes of, an expository versus an open-inquiry version of the same experiment. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 351–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C. Y., & Cheng, W. Y. (2008). Science achievement and students’ self-confidence and interest in science: A Taiwanese representative sample study. International Journal of Science Education, 30(9), 1183–1200.

  • Colburn, A. (2000). An inquiry primer. Science Scope, 23(6), 42–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 916–937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1983a). Student achievement as a function of person-environment fit: A regression surface analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 53, 89–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1983b). Use of actual and preferred classroom environment scales in person-environment fit research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 303–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furtak, E. M. (2006). The problem with answers: An exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching. Science Education, 90, 453–467. doi:10.1002/sce.20130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaddis, B. A., & Schoffstall, A. M. (2007). Incorporating guided-inquiry learning into the organic chemistry laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education, 84, 848–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Germann, P. J., Haskins, S., & Auls, S. (1996). Analysis of nine high school biology laboratory manuals: Promoting scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 475–499. doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-2736(199605)33:5<475:aid-tea2>3.0.co;2-o.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, D. A., & McCurdy, D. W. (1990). A comparison of a biological sciences curriculum study (BSCS) laboratory and a traditional laboratory on student achievement at two private liberal arts colleges. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 625–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A., Levy Nahum, T., & Shore, R. (2001). Assessment of the learning environment of inquiry-type laboratories in high school chemistry. Learning Environments Research, 4, 193–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. B., Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1999). Assessment and investigation of constructivist science learning environments in Korea. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17, 239–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science, 15, 661–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konings, K. D., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2005). Towards more powerful learning environments through combining the perspectives of designers, teachers, and students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 645–660. doi:10.1348/000709905x43616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, W. H. (1983). An experimental study of a BSCS-style laboratory approach for university general biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 807–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lizzio, A., Wilson, K., & Simons, R. (2002). University students’ perceptions of the learning environment and academic outcomes: Implications for theory and practice. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 28–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moos, R. H. (1987). Person-environment congruence in work, school, and health care settings. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31, 231–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reigosa, C., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Scaffolded problem-solving in the physics and chemistry laboratory: Difficulties hindering students’ assumption of responsibility. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 307–329. doi:10.1080/09500690600702454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riding, R., & Rayner, S. (2000). International perspectives on individual differences, Volume 1: Cognitive styles. Stamford, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudd, J. A., Greenbowe, T. J., Hand, B. M., & Legg, M. J. (2001). Using the science writing heuristic to move toward an inquiry-based laboratory curriculum: An example from physical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 78, 1680–1686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russian, C. (2005). Preferred learning styles for respiratory care students at Texas State University-San Marcos. The Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice, 3(4), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadeh, I., & Zion, M. (2009). The development of dynamic inquiry performances within an open inquiry setting: A comparison to guided inquiry setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 1137–1160. doi:10.1002/tea.20310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, J. J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. J. Schwab & P. F. Brandwein (Eds.), The teaching of science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, J., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J., & Chambers, J. C. (2000). Constructing extended inquiry projects: Curriculum materials for science education reform. Educational Psychologist, 35, 165–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. C., & Fraser, B. J. (1991). CLES: An instrument for assessing constructivist learning environments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake Geneva, WI.

  • Taylor, P. C., Dawson, V., & Fraser, B. J. (1995). Classroom learning environments under transformation: Aconstructivist perspective. Paper presented at annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, SanFrancisco.

  • Vermetten, Y. J., Vermunt, J. D., & Lodewijks, H. G. (2002). Powerful learning environments? How university students differ in their response to instructional measures. Learning and Instruction, 12, 263–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vernon, D. T. A., & Blake, R. L. (1993). Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine, 68, 550–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wierstra, R. F. A., Kanselaar, G., Van der Linden, J. L., Lodewijks, H., & Vermunt, J. D. (2003). The impact of the university context on European students’ learning approaches and learning environment preferences. Higher Education, 45(4), 503–523.

  • Wong, A. F. L., Young, D. J. & Fraser, B. J. (1997). A multilevel analysis of learning environments and student attitudes. Educational Psychology, 17, 449–468.

  • Yeh, T. K., Chang, C. Y., Hu, C. Y., Yeh, T. G., & Lin, M. Y. (2009). Association of catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) polymorphism and academic achievement in a Chinese cohort. Brain and Cognition, 71, 300–305.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Earth Sciences, and Science Education Center, Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University, 88, Section 4, Ting-Chou Road, Taipei, 11677, Taiwan

    Chung-Yen Chang

  2. Science Education Center, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Terrence William Wong, Hsieh-Hai Fu, Ting-Kuang Yeh & Chung-Yen Chang

  3. Graduate Institute of Network Learning Technology, National Central University, Jhongli, Taiwan

    Ying-Tien Wu

  4. Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Chung-Yen Chang

  5. Department of Earth Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Chien-Hua Hsiao, Chung-Yen Lin, Hsieh-Hai Fu, Ting-Kuang Yeh & Chung-Yen Chang

  6. Institute of Marine Environmental Science and Technology, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Ting-Kuang Yeh

Authors
  1. Chien-Hua Hsiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ying-Tien Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chung-Yen Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Terrence William Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Hsieh-Hai Fu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ting-Kuang Yeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Chung-Yen Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ting-Kuang Yeh or Chung-Yen Chang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hsiao, CH., Wu, YT., Lin, CY. et al. Development of an instrument for assessing senior high school students’ preferred and perceived laboratory classroom environment. Learning Environ Res 17, 389–399 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-014-9165-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-014-9165-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation