Preferred - Actual learning environment "spaces" and earth science outcomes in Taiwan

Science Education

Volumn 90, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 420-433

  Chang, Chun Yen ^a   Hsiao, Chien Hua ^b   Barufaldi, James P ^c  

^a NATIONAL TAIWAN NORMAL UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b National Sihu Senior High School   (Taiwan)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646695663     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20125     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
2. Chang, C. Y. (2001). Comparing the impacts of a problem-based computer-assisted instruction and the direct-interactive teaching method on student science achievement. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(2), 147-153.
3. Chang, C. Y. (2002). Does computer-assisted instruction + problem solving = improved science outcomes? A pioneer study. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(3), 143-150.
4. Chang, C. Y., & Barufaldi, J. P. (1999). The use of a problem solving based instructional model in initiating change in students' achievement and alternative frameworks. International Journal of Science Education, 21(4), 373-388.
5. Chang, C. Y., & Mao, S. L. (1999). Comparison of Taiwan science students' outcomes with inquiry-group versus traditional instruction. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(6), 340-346.
6. Chang, C. Y., & Tsai, C.-C. (2005). The interplay between different forms of CAI and students' preferences of learning environment in the secondary science class. Science Education, 89(5), 707-724.
7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Daniel, L. G. (1998). Statistical significance testing: A historical overview of misuse and misinterpretation with implication for the editorial policies of educational journals. Research in the Schools, 5, 23-32.
9. Diamantes, T. (2002). Improving instruction in multicultural classes by using classroom learning environment. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29(4), 277-282.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Fraser, B. J., McRobbie, C. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1996). 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.
13. Fraser, B. J., & Rentoul, A. J. (1980). Person-environment fit in open classrooms. Journal of Educational Research, 73(3), 159-167.
14. Heine, S. J., & Lehman, D. R. (1997). The cultural construction of self-enhancement: An examination of group-serving biases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(6), 1268-1283.
15. Hung, T. P. (2004). Pioneering interrelationships among students' personal epistemologies and preferences of teacher's role and learning environments. National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei.
16. Hunt, D. E. (1975). Person-environment interaction: A challenge found wanting before it was tried. Review of Educational Research, 45(2), 209-230.
17. Kim, H., & Markus, H. R. (1999). Deviance or uniqueness, harmony or conformity? A cultural analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(4), 785-800.
18. Kim, H. B., Fisher, D. L., & Fraser, B. J. (1999). Assessment and investigation of constructivist science learning environments in Korea. Research in Science & Technological Education, 17, 239-249.
19. Kinchin, I. M. (2004), Investigating students' beliefs about their preferred role as learners. Educational Research, 46(3), 301-312.
20. Lee, M. S., & Chang, C. Y. (2004). Development and exploration of the earth science classroom learning environment instrument (in Chinese). Chinese Journal of Science Education, 12(4), 421-443.
21. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self-implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224-253.
22. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzalez, E. J., & Chrostowski, S. J. (2004). TIMSS 2003 international science report. Boston, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.
23. McLean, J. E., & Ernest, J. M. (1998). The role of statistical significance testing in educational research. Research in the Schools, 5, 15-22.
24. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
25. Orion, N., Hofstein, A., Tamir, P., & Giddings, G. J. (1997). Development and validation of an instrument for assessing the learning environment of outdoor science activities. Science Education, 81(2), 161-171.
26. Rennie, L. J. (1998). Improving the interpretation and reporting of quantitative research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(3), 237-248.
27. Slaats, A., Lodewijks, H., & van der Sanden, J. (1999). Learning styles in secondary vocational education: Disciplinary differences. Learning and Instruction, 9(5), 475-492.
28. Taylor, P. C., Dawson, V., & Fraser, B. J. (1995). Classroom learning environments under transformation: A constructivist perspective. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
29. 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, The Abbey, Fontane, WI (pp. 1-19).
30. Thompson, B. (1996). AERA editorial policies regarding statistical significance testing: Three suggested reforms. Educational Researcher, 25(2), 26-30.
31. van Driel, J. H., Bulte, A. M. W., & Verloop, N. (2005). The conceptions of chemistry teachers about teaching and learning in the context of a curriculum innovation. International Journal of Science Education, 27(3), 303-322.
32. Vermetten, Y. J., Lodewijks, H. G., & Vermunt, J. D. (1999). Consistency and variability of learning strategies in different university courses. Higher Education, 37, 1-21.
33. Wierstra, R. F. A., Kanselaar, G., van der Linden, J. L., Lodewijks, H. G. L. C., & Vermunt, J. A. D. (2003). The impact of the university context on European students' learning approaches and learning environment preferences. Higher Education, 45, 503-523.
34. Wong, A. F. L., Young, D. J., & Fraser, B. J. (1997). A multilevel analysis of learning environments and student attitudes. Educational Psychology, 17(4), 449-471.