THE EFFECT OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SIZE ON CONSTRUCTIVISM IN THAILAND
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
บทคัดย่อ
This study investigated the relationship between elementary school size in Thailand and the use of constructivist teaching methods. An explanatory sequential mixed-methods approach was employed, combining quantitative data from the Constructivist Learning Environment Survey (CLES) and qualitative data from teacher interviews. The research revealed that school size and student-teacher ratios significantly impact the learning environment. Larger and medium-sized schools with high national test score expectations demonstrated lower levels of constructivist learning. Conversely, smaller schools without such pressures exhibited higher levels of constructivist approaches. However, the study identified that teacher-student relationships and a supportive classroom atmosphere were crucial in promoting science education aligned with constructivist principles. Teachers who fostered camaraderie and encouraged open expression of opinions were more likely to facilitate active, collaborative learning experiences. The findings suggest that school size and national test performance expectations may influence teaching approaches and student learning experiences. In larger schools, teachers may adopt more traditional methods emphasizing memorization and rote learning, while smaller schools may have more flexibility to implement constructivist techniques. This research highlights the complex interplay of factors shaping the educational environment in Thai elementary schools. It underscores the need for further investigation to better understand these dynamics and inform effective teaching practices that balance constructivist principles with educational goals and constraints.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
การอนุญาตลิขสิทธิ์
การอนุญาตให้ใช้ข้อความ เนื้อหา รูปภาพ หรือสิ่งอื่นใดของสิ่งพิมพ์ ผู้ใช้รายใดมีความต้องการที่จะอ่าน ดาวน์โหลด คัดลอก แจกจ่าย พิมพ์ ค้นหา หรือเชื่อมโยงไปยังข้อความทั้งหมดของบทความ รวบรวมข้อมูลสำหรับการจัดทำดัชนี ส่งต่อเป็นข้อมูลไปยังซอฟต์แวร์ หรือใช้เพื่อวัตถุประสงค์ทางกฎหมายอื่นใดเป็นสิ่งที่สามารถกระทำได้ แต่ห้ามนำไปใช้ในเชิงพาณิชย์หรือมีเจตนาเอื้อประโยชน์ทางธุรกิจ บทความทุกฉบับที่ถูกเผยแพร่ในวารสารวิจัยและนวัตกรรมเพื่อความยั่งยืนจะเผยแพร่ภายใต้สัญญาอนุญาตครีเอทีฟคอมมอนส์แบบแสดงที่มา-ไม่ใช้เพื่อการค้า (Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
References
Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: what research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1–12.
Bada, S. O., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: a paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66–70.
Barnett, R. R., Glass, J. C., Snowdon, R. I., & Stringer, K. S. (2002). Size, performance and effectiveness: cost-constrained measures of best-practice performance and secondary-school size. Education Economics, 10(3), 291–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645290210127516
Black, A., & Ammon, P. (1992). A developmental-constructivist approach to teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 43(5), 323–335.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 369–398.
Bodner, G., Klobuchar, M., & Geelan, D. (2001). The many forms of constructivism. ACS Publications.
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Ascd.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. 1989, 18(1), 32–42.
Bruner, J. (1974). Toward a theory of instruction. Harvard university press.
Cobb, P. (2013). Supporting the improvement of learning and teaching in social and institutional context. In Cognition and instruction (pp. 455–478). Psychology Press.
Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: new roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916–937. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200011)37:9<916::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-2
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. Macmillan Company.
Dorman, J., & Adams, J. (2004). Associations between students’ perceptions of classroom environment and academic efficacy in Australian and British secondary schools. Westminster Studies in Education, 27(1), 69–85.
Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A Constructivist Approach to Curriculum Development in Science. Studies in Science Education, 13(1), 105–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057268608559933
Durmuş, Y. T. (2016). Effective learning environment characteristics as a requirement of constructivist curricula: teachers’ needs and school principals’ views. International Journal of Instruction, 9(2), 184–198. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2016.9213a
Farrelly, F., Wilson, S., Meehan, K., Hyndman, J., & Cowan, P. (2024). Constructivism in tertiary education: student learning to promote engagement, collaboration and active learning. ICERI2024 Proceedings, 2653–2661.
Fosnot, C. T. (2013). Constructivism: theory, perspectives, and practice. Teachers College Press.
Gershenson, S., & Langbein, L. (2015). The effect of primary school size on academic achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(1_suppl), 135S-155S. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373715576075
Greenier, V. (2017). Preparing teachers for the challenges of constructivist teaching. In Faces of English Education (pp. 260–274). Routledge.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? In Educational Psychology Review (Vol. 16, Issue 3).
Hyslop-Margison, E. J., & Strobel, J. (2007). Constructivism and education: misunderstandings and pedagogical implications. The Teacher Educator, 43(1), 72–86.
Piaget, J. (1952). Origins of intelligence in children. International University Press.
Jensen, J. W. (2001). Constructivism and supporting environments: Exploring instructional salience in preservice teacher education. The University of Utah.
John-Steiner, V., & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework. Educational Psychologist, 31(3–4), 191–206.
Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39, 5–14.
Kim, H., Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1999). Assessment and investigation of constructivist science learning environments in Korea. Research in Science & Technological Education, 17(2), 239–249.
Kim, J. S. (2005). The effects of a constructivist teaching approach on student academic achievement, self-concept, and learning strategies. Asia Pacific Education Review, 6, 7–19.
Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: a review of the literature. Improving Schools, 19(3), 267–277.
Leś, T., & Moroz, J. (2021). More critical thinking in critical thinking concepts (?) a constructivist point of view. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies (JCEPS), 19(1).
Martínez, S., Guíñez, F., Zamora, R., Bustos, S., & Rodríguez, B. (2020). On the instructional model of a blended learning program for developing mathematical knowledge for teaching. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 52(5), 877–891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01152-y
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59(1), 14.
Ministry of Education Thailand. (2022). Education in Thailand 2022 edition. Ministry of Education Publishing. www.onec.go.th
OECD (2022), Education at a Glance 2022: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/3197152b-en.
ONESOA. (2013). Manual for Basic Educational Institutions: The Third-Round of External Quality Assessment (2011-2015). (3rd ed.). The Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (Public Organization). www.zenopublishing.co.th
Palincsar, A. S. (1998). SOCIAL Constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. In Annu. Rev. Psychol (Vol. 49). https://www.annualreviews.org/
Phillips, D. C. (1995). The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: The Many Faces of Constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24(7), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X024007005
Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 1623–1640.
Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31–38.
Taylor, P. C. & Fraser, B. J. (1991). Development of an instrument for assessingconstructivist learning environments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Taylor, P. C. (1994). CLES: An instrument for monitoring the development of constructivist learning environments. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Associations, New Orleans, LA, 1994.
Taylor, P. C., Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1997). Monitoring constructivist classroom learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 27(4), 293–302.
Taylor, P. C., White, L. R., & Fraser, B. J. (1994). The revised CLES: A questionnaire for educators interested in the constructivist reform of school science and mathematics. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA) 1994.
Thompson, H. R., Madsen, K. A., Zamek, M., McKenzie, T. L., & Dzewaltowski, D. A. (2023). Implementation of elementary school physical education quantity and quality law through school district audit, feedback, and coaching. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 20(1), 77.
Tupsai, J., Yuenyong, C., & Taylor, P. C. (2015). Initial implementation of constructivist physics teaching in Thailand: A case of bass pre-service teacher. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 506–513.
Von Glaserfeld, E., & Johsua, S. (1996). Radical constructivism. A way of knowing and learning. Didaskalia, 8(1), 192–195.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (Vol. 86). Harvard university press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Harvard UP.
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(2), 131–175. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543072002131
World Bank. (2021). Thailand Learning Poverty Brief. World Bank. https://shorturl.at/d7ZYw
Yildirim, N. T., Batdi, V., & Efendioğlu, A. (2024). A mixed-meta method on the efficacy and impact of constructivist applications on permanent learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2381189