Assessing the contribution of a constructivist learning environment to academic self-efficacy in higher education

Abstract

Self-efficacy for learning, which refers to students’ beliefs in their capabilities to regulate their own learning, could determine students’ motivation and academic achievement and, therefore, is significant in the learning process. This study examined how educational efforts based on constructivist theory were associated with the self-efficacy beliefs of students within higher education settings. Perceived constructivist pedagogical principles and academic self-efficacy were measured for a sample of 167 undergraduate college students studying in a Problem-Based Learning environment (PBL) informed by constructivist theory, and in a traditional lecture-based environment which used conventional instruction. The main aims were to compare the different learning environments and to identify which perceived constructivist dimensions in the PBL environment were more contributive to academic self-efficacy beliefs. Multivariate analysis of covariance, path analysis and regression analysis showed that students in the PBL course perceived the learning environment as more constructivists and having high academic self-efficacy relative to the lecture-based environment. The construct ‘motivation towards reflections and concept investigation’ (the extent to which high-order meta-cognitive learning functions towards knowledge are stimulated) was the most dominant positive predictor of academic self-efficacy. Implications of these findings are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Alexander, P. A. (2003, August). Expertise and academic development: A new perspective on a classic theme. Paper presented at the 10th biennial conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Padua, Italy.

  2. Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (1998). Profiling the differences in students’ knowledge, interest and strategic processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 435–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bandura, A. (1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4, 359–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28, 117–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Development, 72, 187–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond. In L. Wilkerson & W. H. Gijselaers (Eds.), Bringing problem-based learning to higher education: Theory and practice (New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Vol. 68, pp. 3–13). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc. Publishers.

  9. Bentler, P. M. (2006). EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bong, M. (2001). Role of self-efficacy and task-value in predicting college students’ course performance and future enrollment intentions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 553–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15, 1–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Carroll, A., Houghton, S., Wood, R., Unsworth, K. L., Hattie, J., Gordon, L., & Bower, J. (2009). Self-efficacy and academic achievement in Australian high school students: The mediating effects of academic aspirations and delinquency. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 797–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Christianson, R. G., & Fisher, K. M. (1999). Comparison of student learning about diffusion and osmosis in constructivist and traditional classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 687–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Como, L., & Snow, E. R. (1986). Adapting teaching to individual differences among learners. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 605–629). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  16. De Kock, A., Sleegers, P., & Voeten, M. J. M. (2004). Learning and classification of learning environments in secondary education. Review of Educational Research, 74, 141–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. DeBacker, T. K., & Nelson, R. M. (2000). Motivation to learn science: Differences related to gender, class type, and ability. Journal of Educational Research, 93, 245–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. den Brok, P., Fisher, D., Rickards, T., & Bull, E. (2006). Californian science students’ perceptions of their classroom learning environments. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12, 3–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Touchstone.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dorman, J. P. (2001). Associations between classroom environment and academic efficacy. Learning Environments Research, 4, 243–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dorman, J. P., & Adams, J. (2004). Associations between students’ perceptions of classroom environment and academic efficacy in Australian and British secondary schools. Westminster Studies in Education, 27, 69–85.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dorman, J. P., Fisher, D., & Waldrip, B. (2006). Classroom environment and students` perceptions of assessment, academic efficacy and attitude to science: A LISREL analysis. In D. L. Fisher & M. S. Khine (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to research on learning environments: World views (pp. 1–28). Singapore: World Scientific.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Fisher, D. L., Fraser, B. J., & Rickards, T. (1997, April). Gender and cultural differences in teacher-student interpersonal behavior. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

  25. Fisher, D., & Taylor, P. (1997). A questionnaire for monitoring social constructivist reform in university teaching. In R. Pospisil & L. Willcoxson (Eds.), Learning through teaching (pp. 100–105). Retrieved from http://otl.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf1997/fisher.html

  26. Fraser, B. J., Fisher, D. L., & McRobbie, C. J. (1996, April). Development, validation, and use of personal and class forms of a new classroom environment instrument. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

  27. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gijbels, D., van de Watering, G., Dochy, F., & van den Bossche, P. (2006). New learning environments and constructivism: The students’ perspective. Instructional Science, 34, 213–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gurvitch, R., & Metzler, M. W. (2009). The effects of laboratory-based and field-based practicum experience on pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy. Training and Teacher Education, 25, 437–443.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hackett, G., Betz, N. E., Casas, J. M., & Rocha-Singh, I. A. (1992). Gender, ethnicity, and social cognitive factors predicting the academic achievement of students in engineering. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39, 527–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hay, K. E., & Barab, S. A. (2001). Constructivism in practice: A comparison and contrast between apprenticeship and constructionist learning environments. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10, 281–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim, J. S. (2005). The effects of constructivist teaching approach on student academic achievement, self concept, and learning strategies. Asia Pacific Education Review, 6, 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. King, T. (2002, July). Development of student skills in reflective writing. Paper presented at the 4th World Conference of the International Consortium for Educational Development in Higher Education, Perth, Australia.

  34. 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 

  35. Koul, R. B., & Fisher, D. (2002, December). Science classroom learning environments in India. Paper presented at the International Educational Research Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE), Brisbane, Australia.

  36. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  37. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1987). Comparison of three theoretically derived variables in predicting career and academic behavior: Self-efficacy, interest congruence, and consequence thinking. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34, 293–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School Psychology Review, 31, 313–327.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Loyens, S. M. M., & Gijbels, D. (2008). Understanding the effects of constructivist learning environments: Introducing a multi-directional approach. Instructional Science, 36, 351–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Loyens, S. M. M., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Schmidt, H. G. (2008). Relationships between students’ conceptions of constructivist learning and their regulation and processing strategies. Instructional Science, 36, 445–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Mandl, H., Gruber, H., & Renkl, A. (1996). Communities of practice toward expertise: Social foundation of university instruction. In P. B. Baltes & U. Staudinger (Eds.), Interactive minds: Life-span perspectives on the social foundation of cognition (pp. 394–411). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Margianti, E. S., Fraser, B. J., & Aldridge, J. M. (2001, December). Investigating the learning environment and students’ outcomes at the university level in Indonesia. Paper Presented at the annual meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE), Fremantle, Western Australia.

  43. Merrill, M. D., Drake, L., Lacy, M., Pratt, J. A., & ID2 Research Group. (1996). Instructional design. Educational Technology, 36(5), 5–7.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1991). Relation of self-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38, 30–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Myint, S. K., & Goh, S. C. (2001, December). Investigation of tertiary classroom learning environment in Singapore. Paper presented at the International Educational Research Conference, Australian Association for Educational Research (AARE), University of Notre Dame, Fremantle, Western Australia.

  46. Pajares, F., & Urdan, T. (2006). Foreword. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self efficacy beliefs of adolescents (3rd ed., pp. ix–xii). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Pintrich, P. R., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., & Mckeachie, W. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Raykov, T., & Marcoulidies, G. A. (2000). A first course in structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Schunk, D. H. (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of Educational Research, 57, 149–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modeling, goal setting and self-evaluation. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 19, 159–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Schunk, D. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Self-regulatory processes during computer skill acquisition: Goal and self-evaluative influences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 251–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Schunk, D. H., & Miller, S. D. (2002). Self-efficacy and adolescents’ motivation. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Academic motivation of adolescents (pp. 29–52). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2002). The development of academic self-efficacy. In A. Wigfield & J. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 16–31). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Steffe, L. P., & Gale, J. (1995). Constructivism in education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Tenenbaum, G., Naidu, S., Jegede, O., & Austin, J. (2001). Constructivist pedagogy in conventional on-campus and distance learning practice: An exploratory investigation. Learning and Instruction, 11, 87–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Tobin, K. E. (1993). The practice of constructivism in science education. Washington, DC: Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).

  60. Tynjälä, P. (1999). Towards expert knowledge? A comparison between a constructivist and a traditional learning environment in the university. International Journal of Educational Research, 33, 355–442.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Urdan, T., & Turner, J. C. (2005). Competence motivation in the classroom. In A. J. Elliot & C. S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 297–317). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  62. van Dinther, M., Filip, D., & Segers, M. (2011). Factors affecting students’ self-efficacy in higher education. Educational Research Review, 6, 95–108.

  63. Vosniadou, S. (2001). How children learn [Educational Practices Series 7]. Brussels: International Academy of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Vrasidas, C. (2000). Constructivism versus objectivism: Implications for interaction, course design, and evaluation in distance education. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6, 339–362.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Weinstein, C. E., & Palmer, D. R. (2002). Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI): User’s manual (2nd ed.). Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72, 131–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Wyatt, T. H., Krauskopf, P. B., Gaylord, N. M., Ward, A., Huffstutler-Hawkins, S., & Goodwin, L. (2010). Cooperative M-learning with nurse practitioner students. Nursing Education Perspectives, 31(2), 109–113.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulating academic learning and achievement: The emergence of a social cognitive perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 2, 173–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Zimmerman, B. J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An analysis of exemplary instructional models. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 1–19). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 663–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dorit Alt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Alt, D. Assessing the contribution of a constructivist learning environment to academic self-efficacy in higher education. Learning Environ Res 18, 47–67 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9174-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • Academic self-efficacy
  • Constructivism
  • Higher education
  • Learning environments
  • Teaching practices