Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A cross-national mixed-method study of reality pedagogy

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

Abstract

This mixed-methods cross-national study investigated the effectiveness of reality pedagogy (an approach in which teachers become part of students’ activities, practices and rituals) in terms of changes in student perceptions of their learning environment and attitudes towards science. A questionnaire was administered to 142 students in grades 8–10 in the Bronx, New York City and Dresden, Germany. The questionnaire combines learning environment scales from the Constructivist Learning Environment Survey and the What Is Happening In this Class? Questionnaire with attitude scales from the Test of Science-Related Attitudes. Student interviews were used to support questionnaire findings. Quantitative data analyses revealed that reality pedagogy had a greater impact on students in the Bronx than in Dresden, with qualitative data clarifying differences in how reality pedagogy was enacted in each geographic area. Overall, our findings add to the body of evidence concerning the effectiveness of reality pedagogy as an approach to teaching and learning science across a variety of contexts.

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

  • Adamski, A., Fraser, B. J., & Peiro, M. M. (2013). Parental involvement in schooling, classroom environment and student outcomes. Learning Environment Research, 16, 315–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Afari, E., Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., & Khine, M. S. (2013). Students’ perceptions of the learning environment and attitudes in game-based mathematics classrooms. Learning Environments Research, 16, 151–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldridge, J. M., Dorman, J. P., & Fraser, B. J. (2004a). Use of multitrait–multimethod modeling to validate actual and preferred forms of the Technology-Rich Outcomes-Focused Learning Inventory (TROFLEI). Australian Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 4, 110–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. (2008). Outcomes-focused learning environments: Determinants and effects (Advances in Learning Environments Research Series). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., & Sebela, M. P. (2004b). Using teacher action research to promote constructivist learning environments in South Africa. South African Journal of Education, 24, 245–253.

    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., 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 

  • Anderson, G. (1998). Fundamentals of educational research (2nd ed.). Bristol, PA: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appiah, K. A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a world of strangers. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldi, S., Jin, Y., Skemer, M., Green, P. J., & Herget, D. (2007). Highlights from PISA 2006: Performance of U.S. 15-year-old students in science and mathematics literacy in an international context (NCES 2008-016). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

  • Barton, A. C., & Yang, K. (2000). The culture of power and science education: Learning from Miguel. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 871–889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, J., Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (2000). An exploratory study of teachers’ beliefs regarding the implementation of constructivism in their classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11, 323–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beers, J., & LaVan, S. K. (2005). The role of cogenerative dialogue in learning to teach and transforming learning environments. In K. Tobin, R. Elmesky, & G. Seiler (Eds.), Improving urban science education: New roles for teachers, students, & researchers (pp. 147–163). Lanham, MD: Littlefield Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chionh, Y. H., & Fraser, B. J. (2009). Classroom environment, achievement, attitudes and self-esteem in geography and mathematics in Singapore. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 18, 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobern, W. W. (1996). Worldview theory and conceptual change in science education. Science Education, 80, 579–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 98–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cresswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J., & Plano Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed method research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2008). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emdin, C. (2007). Exploring the contexts of urban science classrooms: Part 1—Investigating corporate and communal practice. Journal for Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2, 319–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emdin, C. (2010). Urban science education for the hip-hop generation. Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emdin, C. (2011). Moving beyond the boat without a paddle: Reality pedagogy, black youth, and urban science education. The Journal of Negro Education, 80, 284–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, F. (2012). Qualitative research methods for science education. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1451–1469). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J. (1978). Development of a test of science-related attitudes. Science Education, 62, 509–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J. (1981). Test of science-related attitudes. Melbourne: The Australian Council for Education Research.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J. (2012). Classroom learning environments: Retrospect, context and prospect. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1191–1239). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J. (2014). Classroom learning environments: Historical and contemporary perspectives. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 104–119). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J., Aldridge, J. M., & Adolphe, F. S. G. (2010). A cross-national study of secondary science classroom environments in Australia and Indonesia. Research in Science Education, 40, 551–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1982). Predicting students’ outcomes from their perceptions of classroom psychosocial environment. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 498–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J., & Raaflaub, C. (2013). Subject and sex differences in the learning environment—Perceptions and attitudes of Canadian mathematics and science students using laptop computers. Curriculum and Teaching, 28(1), 57–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giallousi, M., Gialamas, V., Spyrellis, N., & Pavlatou, E. (2010). Development, validation, and use of a Greek-language questionnaire for assessing learning environments in grade 10 chemistry classes. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 761–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. C., & Caracelli, V. J. (Eds.). (1997). Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (New Directions for Evaluation, No. 74). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • Helding, K. A., & Fraser, B. J. (2013). Effectiveness of National Board Certified (NBC) teachers in terms of classroom environment, attitudes and achievement among secondary science students. Learning Environments Research, 16, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B. A., & Farenga, S. J. (2000). Young girls in science: Academic ability, perceptions and future participation in science. Roeper Review, 22, 261–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. B., Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (2000). Classroom environment and teacher interpersonal behaviour in secondary school classes in Korea. Evaluation and Research in Education, 14, 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koh, N. K., & Fraser, B. J. (2014). Learning environment associated with use of mixed mode delivery model among secondary business studies students in Singapore. Learning Environments Research, 17, 157–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koul, R. B., & Fisher, D. L. (2005). Cultural background and students’ perceptions of science classroom learning environment and teacher interpersonal behaviour in Jammu, India. Learning Environments Research, 8, 195–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2011). Qualitative communication research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, L., & Fraser, B. J. (2013). Development and validation of an English classroom learning environment inventory and its application in China. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Application of structural equation modeling in educational research and practice (pp. 75–89). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lott, K. H. (2003). Evaluation of a statewide science inservice and outreach program: Teacher and student outcomes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12, 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luan, W. S., Bakar, A. R., Mee, L. Y., & Ayub, A. F. M. (2010). CLES-ICT: A scale to measure ICT constructivist learning environments in Malaysia. Procedia Social and Behavioral Science, 2, 295–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95–144). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. C., & Warren, L. K. (2011). Comparative indicators of education in the United States and other G-8 countries: 2011 (NCES 2012-007). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

  • Morgan, D. L. (1997). Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Portland, OR: Portland State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in personality. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2012). PISA 2012 results: Science literacy: Proficiency levels. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2012/pisa2012highlights_4.asp.

  • 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 

  • OECD. (2011). Education at a glance 2011: OECD indicators. OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/eag-2011-en.

  • OECD. (2013). PISA 2012 results: Excellence through equity: Giving every student the chance to succeed (Vol. II). OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264201132-en.

  • Ogbuehi, P. I., & Fraser, B. J. (2007). Learning environment, attitudes and conceptual development associated with innovative strategies in middle-school mathematics. Learning Environments Research, 10, 101–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh, P. S., & Yager, R. E. (2004). Development of constructivist science classrooms and changes in student attitudes toward science learning. Science Education Journal, 15, 105–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oser, R., & Fraser, B. J. (2015). Effectiveness of virtual laboratories in terms of learning environment, attitudes and achievement among high-school genetics students. Curriculum and Teaching, 30(2), 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozkal, K., Tekkaya, C., Cakiroglu, J., & Sungur, S. (2009). A conceptual model of relationships among constructivist learning environment perceptions, epistemological beliefs, and learning approaches. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 71–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation method (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhiller, N. (1996). Co-teaching: New variations on a not so new practice. Teaching Education and Special Education, 19, 34–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, E., & Fraser, B. J. (2013). Kindergarten students’ and parents’ perceptions of science classroom environments: Achievement and attitudes. Learning Environments Research, 16, 151–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M., Lawless, D. V., & Tobin, K. (2000). {Coteaching/cogenerative dialoguing} as praxis of dialectic method. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1, Article 37.

  • Seiler, G. (2001). Reversing the “standard” direction: Science emerging from the lives of African American students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 1000–1014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seiler, G., & Elmesky, R. (2007). The role of communal practices in the generation of capital and emotional energy among African American students in science classrooms. Teachers College Record, 109, 391–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spinner, H., & Fraser, B. J. (2005). Evaluation of an innovative mathematics program in terms of classroom environment, student attitudes, and conceptual development. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3, 267–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B. A., & Fraser, B. J. (2013). Relationships between learning environment and anxiety. Learning Environments Research, 16, 297–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thurstone, L. L. (1928). Attitudes can be measured. American Journal of Sociology, 33, 529–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K. (2006). Learning to teach through coteaching and cogenerative dialogue. Teaching Education, 17, 133–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K., Elmesky, R., & Seiler, G. (2005). Improving urban science education: New roles for teachers, students, & researchers. Lanham, MD: Littlefield Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K., & Fraser, B. J. (1998). Qualitative and quantitative landscapes of classroom learning environments. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), The international handbook of science education (pp. 623–640). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K., & Roth, W.-M. (2005). Implementing coteaching and cogenerative dialoguing in urban science education. School Science and Mathematics, 105, 313–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, S. L. (2006). Development and validation of the Test of Geography-Related Attitudes (ToGRA). The Journal of Geography, 105, 175–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, A. F. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1996). Environment–attitude associations in the chemistry laboratory classroom. Research in Science and Technological Education, 14, 91–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zandvliet, D. B., & Fraser, B. J. (2004). Learning environments in information and communications technology classrooms. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 13, 97–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Beekey Education Center, Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, PO Box 730, Kutztown, PA, 19530, USA

    George Sirrakos Jr.

  2. Science and Mathematics Education Centre, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia

    Barry J. Fraser

Authors
  1. George Sirrakos Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barry J. Fraser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barry J. Fraser.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 3.

Table 3 Factor loadings, percentages of variance, eigenvalues and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha coefficient) for the pretest and posttest for the QuALESA
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sirrakos, G., Fraser, B.J. A cross-national mixed-method study of reality pedagogy. Learning Environ Res 20, 153–174 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-016-9220-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-016-9220-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation