You are on page 1of 12

Comparing Student-Centered and Teacher-Centered

Instruction in College Biology Labs
Tom Lord, Holly Travis, Brandi Magill, & Lori King
Department of Biology
Weyandt Hall
Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Indiana, PA
Pone! "#$%& '(#)$%*%
+mail! trlord,i-p.ed-
Abstract
/onstr-0tivist tea0ing te0ni1-es ave 2een so3n to 3or4 3ell in a variety of
instr-0tional settings, 2-t many tea0ers remain s4epti0al 2e0a-se tere is a la04 of
1-antitative data s-pporting tis model. Tis st-dy 0ompared an -ndergrad-ate non)
ma5ors 2iology la2 se0tion ta-gt in a traditional tea0er)0entered style 3it a similar
se0tion ta-gt as a 0onstr-0tivist 0lass. Wee4ly la2 1-i6 s0ores, attendan0e, a s0ien0e
attit-de test and analysis of videotapes 3ere -sed to determine 3eter st-dent interest
and performan0e 3ere affe0ted 2y te tea0ing style -sed in te 0lassroom. 7tatisti0al
tests so3ed many signifi0ant differen0es 2et3een te gro-ps and demonstrated tat te
0onstr-0tivist 0lass ad iger 1-i6 s0ores, more appre0iation of s0ien0e, 2etter
attendan0e and in0reased parti0ipation in te la2 a0tivities tan te traditional gro-p.
Introduction
Most st-dents in introd-0tory s0ien0e 0o-rses find te s-25e0t 2oring, diffi0-lt and
generally -nne0essary for non)s0ien0e)oriented 0areers. Many resear0ers feel tat tis
diffi0-lty stems from te passive role te st-dents play in a traditional 0lass
"8oller,$999&. If tis is te 0ase, ten 3e m-st 0learly modify te 3ay 3e tea0 in order
to develop st-dents 3o are ent-sed a2o-t s0ien0e and 3o really -nderstand te
material "Lord, :;;*&. +ven st-dents eaded for non)s0ien0e)oriented 0areers need to
ave an -nderstanding and appre0iation of te role s0ien0e plays in teir lives. After all,
o3 many people tin4 a2o-t te importan0e of te s-n and potosyntesis as tey eat
teir l-n0< Ho3 many artists 0onsider te ligt)refle0tive properties tat prod-0e te
0olors tey -se to 0reate masterpie0es<
=ften, non)ma5or 2iology la2s are ta-gt in a traditional tea0er)0entered style.
Te traditional 0lassroom 0an sometimes resem2le a one)person so3 3it a 0aptive 2-t
largely -ninvolved a-dien0e. /lasses are -s-ally dominated 2y le0t-re or dire0t
instr-0tion. Te idea is tat tere is a fi>ed 2ody of 4no3ledge tat te st-dent m-st
0ome to 4no3. 7t-dents are e>pe0ted to 2lindly a00ept te information tey are given
3ito-t 1-estioning te instr-0tor "7tofflett, :;;*&. Te tea0er see4s to transfer
to-gts and meanings to te passive st-dent leaving little room for st-dent)initiated
1-estions, independent to-gt or intera0tion 2et3een st-dents "?A7T, :;;*&. +ven te
la2 a0tivities, alto-g done in a gro-p, do not en0o-rage dis0-ssion or e>ploration of te
0on0epts involved. Tis tends to overloo4 te 0riti0al tin4ing and -nifying 0on0epts
essential to tr-e s0ien0e litera0y and appre0iation "@ore, $99:&. Tis tea0er)0entered
metod of tea0ing also ass-mes tat all st-dents ave te same level of 2a04gro-nd
4no3ledge in te s-25e0t matter and are a2le to a2sor2 te material at te same pa0e
"Lord, :;;;&.
In 0ontrast, 0onstr-0tivist or st-dent)0entered learning poses a 1-estion to te
st-dents, 3o ten 3or4 togeter in small gro-ps to dis0over one or more sol-tions
"@ager, :;;:&. 7t-dents play an a0tive role in 0arrying o-t e>periments and rea0ing
teir o3n 0on0l-sions. Tea0ers assist te st-dents in developing ne3 insigts and
0onne0ting tem 3it previo-s 4no3ledge, 2-t leave te dis0overy and dis0-ssion to te
st-dent gro-ps "?A7T, :;;*&. A-estions are posed to te 0lass and st-dent teams 3or4
togeter to dis0-ss and rea0 agreement on teir ans3ers, 3i0 are ten sared 3it te
entire 0lass. 7t-dents are a2le to develop teir o3n -nderstanding of te s-25e0t matter
2ased on previo-s 4no3ledge, and 0an 0orre0t any mis0on0eptions tey ave.
Wile 2ot tea0ing styles 0an lead to s-00essf-l learning, it as 2een so3n tat
st-dents in te 0onstr-0tivist la2 se0tions in +nvironmental 70ien0e and Beneral Biology
demonstrated more ent-siasm and interest in te s-25e0t matter, as indi0ated 2y st-dent
0o-rse eval-ations "Lord, :;;#&. Test and 1-i6 s0ores also indi0ated 2etter -nderstanding
of te s-25e0t matter 2y st-dents in te 0onstr-0tivist se0tions. In fa0t, repeated resear0
as fo-nd tat tea0er)0entered lessons 0an 2e nonprod-0tive, and in some 0ases,
detrimental to te st-dentsC learning pro0ess "8oller, $999&.
Many tea0ers are esitant to try te 0onstr-0tivist model, 2e0a-se it re1-ires
additional planning and a rela>ation of te traditional r-les of te 0lassroom "70e-rman,
:;;*&. Tea0ers often feel as to-g tey arenCt doing teir 5o2 if te st-dents are
3or4ing togeter and a0tively dis0-ssing te material instead of 2-sily ta4ing notes
"7prag-e and Dede, :;;;&. 7in0e any ne3 idea is li4ely to 2e re5e0ted -nless tea0ers
e>amine teir o3n teoreti0al frame3or4 and develop teir o3n 5-stifi0ation for te
0ange, it 3as s-ggested tat additional 1-antitative eviden0e in s-pport of
0onstr-0tivism migt en0o-rage more tea0ers to em2ra0e tis tea0ing style
"7ymans4y, :;;$&. D-mero-s st-dies ave 2een 0ompleted to 0ompare st-dentsC
learning in traditional and 0onstr-0tivist 0lassrooms. Tese st-dies generally 2ased teir
0on0l-sions on test or 1-i6 s0ores and st-dent 0omments or eval-ations "Lord, :;;#E
Lord, :;;;&. Te -se of a 1-antitative analysis 2ased on videotapes of te la2s, 3i0
ta4es into a00o-nt te a0tions of 2ot st-dents and tea0er, so-ld provide a ne3 o-tloo4
on tese tea0ing styles, as 3ell as offering anoter means of o25e0tively 0omparing te
res-lts.
It 3as te aim of tis st-dy to 0ompare t3o se0tions of a non)ma5or 2iology
0o-rse -sing not only te 3ee4ly 1-i6 s0ores and attendan0e, 2-t a 1-antitative analysis
instr-ment, as 3ell. Tis 3as 2ased in part on a test developed 2y Ded Flanders ":;#9&,
2-t 3as modified to 0over more information on st-dent parti0ipation and intera0tion.
7ome points from te 7e0ondary Tea0er Analysis Matri> "7TAM& ) 70ien0e ?ersion
"Ballager and Par4er, :;;(& 3ere in0orporated, as 3ell. ?ideotapes of te la2 se0tions
3ere analy6ed 3it tis systemati0 eval-ation form. A 70ien0e Attit-de Inventory
developed 2y Gi0ard Moore of Miami University ":;;H& 3as also administered. It 3as
2elieved tat tis 3o-ld provide anoter val-a2le eval-ation of different tea0ing styles
in similar 2iology la2 se0tions.
Methods
In order to assess te effe0t of tese different tea0ing styles on st-dent
parti0ipation and test s0ores, t3o Beneral Biology for Don)Ma5ors la2 se0tions 2eing
ta-gt 2y Dr. Tomas Lord in te Fall $999 semester at Indiana University of
Pennsylvania 3ere sele0ted for 0omparison. Tese t3o se0tions 3it te same la2
instr-0tor 3ere -sed in an effort to red-0e te varia2les 2et3een gro-ps. +a0 la2 se0tion
0onsisted of $' st-dents and met from '!'9 to (!'9pm on teir respe0tive days. La2
se0tions 3ere e1-ivalent 3it regard to 7AT s0ores and s0ien0e 2a04gro-nd of te
st-dents. Te Monday afternoon la2 3as -sed as te 0ontrol pop-lation and 3as ta-gt
in te traditional style, 3it information presented in a le0t-re format and 0on0epts
e>plained 2y te instr-0tor prior to la2 or field 3or4. Te Wednesday afternoon la2 3as
te e>perimental pop-lation, and 3as ta-gt as a 0onstr-0tivist 0lass. Tis gro-p 3as
as4ed to ma4e o2servations and dis0-ss relationsips and 0on0epts 3it team mem2ers.
Tey ten presented teir dis0overies to te 0lass 2efore la2 or field 3or4 2egan. Bot
0lasses did te same 0apters and la2 a0tivities from te same 2oo4 ea0 3ee4. Tey
too4 te same 1-i6, as 3ell, 3i0 3as 2ased on material 0overed te previo-s 3ee4. It
so-ld 2e noted tat te Wednesday gro-p a0t-ally did te la2 a0tivities and too4 te 1-i6
2efore te Monday gro-p, d-e to te 3ay te a0ademi0 0alendar 3as set -p.
Wee4ly 1-i6 s0ores, 3i0 are averaged for ea0 0lass, 3ere 0ompared to
determine 3eter tere 3as a differen0e 2et3een te gro-ps. Wee4ly attendan0e for
2ot la2 se0tions 3as also 0ompared. Bot la2 se0tions 3ere given te 70ien0e Attit-de
Inventory "7AI& developed 2y Dr. Gi0ard Moore in :;#9 and revised in :;;(, in an
effort to determine 3eter te tea0ing style -sed ad any effe0t on te st-dentsC interest
in s0ien0e "=pal4a, :;;*&. Be0a-se te tea0er for tese la2 se0tions 3as also involved
in te resear0, a 7ystemati0 =2servation Geport form "Appendi> I& 3as -sed to analy6e
videotapes of 2ot la2 se0tions. As dis0-ssed previo-sly, tis form 3as 2ased in part on
a test developed 2y Ded Flanders, 2-t 3as modified and e>panded to 0over more
information on st-dent parti0ipation and intera0tion. It also in0l-ded some points from
te 7e0ondary Tea0er Analysis Matri> "7TAM& ) 70ien0e ?ersion, 3i0 3as
developed to eval-ate and develop te -se of 0onstr-0tivism in te 0lassroom "Adams
and Kro04over, :;;;&. Tis elped to avoid 2ias on te part of te instr-0tor from aving
an effe0t on te res-lts of tis st-dy and provided val-a2le information on st-dent
parti0ipation and intera0tion.
Results
Wee4ly 1-i6 s0ores 3ere 0ompared -sing a t)test for 0omparison of means.
Average 1-i6 s0ores from all st-dents in ea0 0lass 3ere 0ompared for ea0 3ee4 of la2.
Te res-lts of tis test so3ed a signifi0ant differen0e 2et3een te 0onstr-0tivist 0lass
and te traditional 0lass, 3it te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p displaying iger s0ores "Fig-re :&.
Te 1-i6 s0ores for te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p 3ere iger tan tose for te traditional
gro-p not 5-st most of te time, 2-t every 3ee4 for te entire semester.
Weekly Quiz Scores
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Week
A
v
e
r
a
g
e

Q
u
i
z

S
c
o
r
e
Consrucivis
!ra"iional
Figure 1 Average 3ee4ly 1-i6 s0ores in te t3o la2 se0tions.

Ges-lts of te 70ien0e Attit-de Inventory 3ere also 0ompared. Tere 3as an
emotional 0omponent and an intelle0t-al 0omponent to tis test. Te intelle0t-al
0omponent meas-red te st-dentsC -nderstanding of s0ien0e and its importan0e, 3ile te
emotional 0omponent loo4ed at teir appre0iation and en5oyment of s0ien0e. Te t3o
gro-ps ad virt-ally identi0al s0ores on te intelle0t-al 0omponent, 3i0 s-pports te
similarity in previo-s s0ien0e 2a04gro-nd. Te emotional s0ore 3as iger in te
0onstr-0tivist gro-p, o3ever, indi0ating tat tey ad a greater appre0iation for te
val-e of s0ien0e tan te traditional gro-p. Tis 3as s-pported 2y o2servations in te
0lassroom d-ring la2 a0tivities. Te st-dents in te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p 3ere more
ent-siasti0 and as4ed more 1-estions a2o-t te a0tivities.
Wee4ly attendan0e for ea0 la2 se0tion 3as analy6ed to determine 3eter te
tea0ing style -sed in te la2s ad an effe0t on te st-dentsC interest and terefore teir
parti0ipation in te la2 "Fig-re $&. Data 3as analy6ed -sing a t)test for 0omparison of
means, 3i0 demonstrated tat tere 3as a signifi0ant differen0e 2et3een te t3o
gro-ps. Tis 3as also in line 3it o2servations made in te la2 se0tions. Attendan0e 3as
iger among tose st-dents in te 0onstr-0tivist 0lass tan in te traditional gro-p over
te entire semester.
Weekly #a$ Aen"ance
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Week
%
u
&
$
e
r

o
'

S

u
"
e
n

s

A

e
n
"
i
n
g

#
a
$
Consrucivis Class
!ra"iional Class
Figure ! Wee4ly attendan0e in te t3o la2 se0tions.
Finally, videotapes of te la2 se0tions 3ere analy6ed -sing a 7ystemati0
=2servation Geport 2ased on a form developed 2y Ded Flanders ":;#9&. Tis data 3as
analy6ed -sing a t3o)3ay analysis of varian0e, after te data 3as transformed -sing te
ar0sine form-la. Te analysis of varian0e so3ed a signifi0ant differen0e 2et3een te
t3o la2s in many 0ategories, in0l-ding amo-nt of time spent le0t-ring, amo-nt of st-dent
intera0tion, st-dent parti0ipation "as4ing or ans3ering 1-estions& and silen0e or time
3en no dis0-ssion or a0tivity is ta4ing pla0e. =ter 0ategories tat 3ere analy6ed
in0l-ded time spent 2y te instr-0tor giving dire0tions, time te instr-0tor spent
1-estioning te st-dents, praise and en0o-ragement given, ands)on la2 or field 3or4 and
time spent off)tas4 2y st-dents. Do signifi0ant differen0e 3as fo-nd in tis latter gro-p
of 0ategories, indi0ating tat te t3o la2 se0tions spent appro>imately te same
proportion of teir 0lass time engaged in tese a0tivities.
"iscussion
7everal statisti0ally signifi0ant differen0es 3ere fo-nd 2et3een te t3o la2
se0tions. Te 3ee4ly 1-i6 s0ores 2et3een te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p and te traditional
gro-p so3ed a 0lear trend. As a 0lass, te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p s0ored signifi0antly
iger over te 0o-rse of te semester tan teir traditional 0o-nterparts every 3ee4,
even to-g 2ot gro-ps 0overed te same material, did te same a0tivities and too4 te
same 1-i6. As noted earlier, te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p too4 te 1-i66es 2efore te
traditional gro-p and 0onse1-ently did not ave an opport-nity to dis0-ss test 1-estions
prior to te 1-i6. Te st-dents in te 0onstr-0tivist la2 spent time 3or4ing tro-g
0allenges and dis0-ssing vario-s alternatives in small gro-ps, rater tan simply
listening to te material presented 2y te instr-0tor and ta4ing notes. For e>ample,
definitions of terms 3ere not simply givenE instead te st-dents ad to 0reate teir o3n
definitions as a team and ten e>plain tese to te 0lass. Be0a-se te st-dents in te
e>perimental gro-p 3ere more a0tively involved in teir learning e>perien0e, tey
retained more information and 3ere a2le to re0all and apply tis information 2etter tan
te 0ontrol gro-p.
Te res-lts of te 70ien0e Attit-de Inventory also demonstrated tat te st-dents
in te 0onstr-0tivist la2 ad a 2etter attit-de a2o-t s0ien0e tan tose in te traditional
la2. Tis 3as s-pported 2y st-dent 0omments at te end of te semester. 7t-dents in te
Wednesday 0lass 0ommented repeatedly tat tey really en5oyed tis s0ien0e 0lass, and
stated tat tey learned more in te la2s tan tey ad in teir le0t-re se0tions. Teir
ent-siasm d-ring la2 a0tivities 0o-ld 2e 0learly o2served, as 3ell. Many st-dents in te
e>perimental pop-lation also as4ed 3eter Dr. Lord 3o-ld 2e tea0ing d-ring te
se0ond semester, 2e0a-se tey 3anted to get into is la2 se0tions. Tis 3as ig praise
indeed, sin0e tese st-dents 3ere non)ma5ors and often didnCt need to ta4e any more
s0ien0e 0o-rses.
Analysis of te attendan0e data for te t3o la2 se0tions yielded interesting res-lts
tat 0oin0ided 3it 0lassroom o2servations. As determined 2y te t)test, tere 3as a
signifi0ant differen0e in st-dent attendan0e 2et3een te 0onstr-0tivist la2 and te
traditional la2. Attendan0e 3as 0learly iger in te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p. Tis 3o-ld
seem to indi0ate tat interest 3as iger in te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p, sin0e tey made a
greater effort to 2e in 0lass tan st-dents in te traditional gro-p. It appeared tat
mem2ers of te traditional la2 se0tion 3ere not as interested in te 0lass and didnCt 0are if
tey made it to la2. 7t-dents in te traditional 0lass 3ere less motivated, sin0e tey did
not 2elong to a IteamJ 3o 0o-nted on teir parti0ipation, and terefore so3ed a
de0rease in overall attendan0e.
7t-dents in te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p did, in fa0t, say tat tey en5oyed 0oming to
la2 2e0a-se tey 3ere a2le to intera0t 3it oter mem2ers of te team, ma4ing la2 more
interesting. /omments from te st-dent eval-ations at te end of te 0o-rse in0l-ded
Ima4es -s tin4, not 5-st loo4 in te 2oo4J and II li4ed te intera0tionJ. =ter val-a2le
feat-res of te 0o-rse noted 3ere te ands)on 3or4 3it oter st-dents and te open
dis0-ssion of te la2 material. 7t-dents in te traditional la2 se0tion eiter didnCt
0omment on te 0lass at all, or 0omplained tat te la2s 3ere 2oring. /onse1-ently, it
seems tat 0onstr-0tivist tea0ing did elp alleviate te 2oredom often asso0iated 3it
non)ma5ors s0ien0e 0lasses and instilled more appre0iation for te material tat 3as
0overed.
Te video analysis so3ed some very 0lear differen0es 2et3een te traditional
0lass and te 0onstr-0tivist 0lass. Ten different a0tivities 3ere monitored d-ring te
analysis and te statisti0al tests r-n on tese so3ed many differen0es 2et3een te t3o
gro-ps. 7ome a0tivities, o3ever, did not ave statisti0ally signifi0ant differen0es. Tis
indi0ated tat 0ertain a0tivities 3ere 0arried o-t at similar levels in 2ot gro-ps,
demonstrating tat tere 3as not favoritism or spe0ial assistan0e given to one gro-p or
te oter 2y te instr-0tor. =f te five tea0er 0ategories analy6ed, only one so3ed a
signifi0ant differen0e 2et3een te t3o gro-ps "Ta2le :&. Tis 0ategory 3as te amo-nt
of time spent le0t-ring, 3i0 3o-ld 2e e>pe0ted to 2e different, sin0e tat is one of te
primary fa0tors separating 0onstr-0tivist tea0ing from te traditional 0lassroom. =ter
tea0er 0ategories analy6ed 3ere giving dire0tions, 1-estioning st-dents, giving praise or
en0o-ragement and la2 or ands)on a0tivities. Te la04 of a signifi0ant differen0e in
tese 0ategories demonstrates tat 2ot gro-ps ad similar opport-nities in te t3o
0lasses. Do more en0o-ragement or dire0tion 3as given to te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p, in
oter 3ords, to improve teir performan0e, and te la2 a0tivities played a similar part in
2ot 0lasses.
Table 1 Per0entage of 0lass time spent on tea0er 2eaviors in te la2 se0tions.
Teacher Beha#iors $%ideo Analysis&
Teaching
Method
'i#ing
"irections
Lecturing( )uestioning
Students
*raise or
+ncouragement
Lab or
,ands
-n
Constructi#ist :*.( :%.% ::.* $.( $9.:
Traditional :(.$ $H.* :$.H '.' $(.H
K 7tatisti0ally signifi0ant differen0e
Fo-r st-dent 2eaviors 3ere analy6ed in te videos "Ta2le $&. =f tese, tree
so3ed a signifi0ant differen0e 2et3een te traditional 0lass and te 0onstr-0tivist 0lass.
Tese 0ategories in0l-ded st-dent 1-estions or 0omments initiated 2y te tea0er,
1-estions or 0omments initiated 2y te st-dents and st-dent)st-dent intera0tion. Te
res-lts of te statisti0al analysis indi0ated tat te st-dents in te 0onstr-0tivist la2
se0tion 3ere more li4ely to ans3er 1-estions 3en prompted 2y te professor, and 3ere
more li4ely to as4 1-estions or parti0ipate in 0lass dis0-ssions on teir o3n. Tey also
spent more time 3or4ing 3it teir teammates dis0-ssing 0on0epts and rea0ing
0on0l-sions. Te only st-dent a0tivity tat did not so3 a signifi0ant differen0e 2et3een
te t3o gro-ps 3as te amo-nt of time spent off)tas4 or Ifooling aro-ndJ. Tis n-m2er
3as a0t-ally very lo3 in 2ot gro-ps. Tis does indi0ate tat, alto-g te st-dents in
te 0onstr-0tivist gro-ps spent a large part of teir time intera0ting 3it ea0 oter, te
generally remained fo0-sed on te a0tivities in 0lass and did not display te 2eavior
pro2lems often 0ited as a pro2lem asso0iated 3it 0onstr-0tivist learning sit-ations.
Table ! Per0entage of 0lass time spent on st-dent and general 2eaviors in te
la2 se0tions.
Student and 'eneral Beha#iors $%ideo Analysis&
Teaching
Method
)uestions
$Teacher
Initiated&(
)uestions
$Student
Initiated&(
Student.Student
Interaction(
-// Tas0 Silence(
Constructi#ist *.: '.$ $9.( 9.' 9.(
Traditional '.' :.' (.# 9.: H.$
K7tatisti0ally signifi0ant differen0e
Te final item analy6ed on te videotapes 3as te amo-nt of time spent in
silen0e, 3en no dis0-ssion or a0tivity 3as ta4ing pla0e "Ta2le $&. Tis item did so3 a
signifi0ant differen0e 2et3een te t3o gro-ps. It 3as iger for te traditional gro-p
tan for te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p, 2e0a-se te traditional gro-p 3as rel-0tant to ans3er
1-estions posed 2y te instr-0tor. Tey parti0ipated less in 0lassroom dis0-ssions, and
did not intera0t as m-0 3it oter st-dents at teir la2 ta2les, even 3en 3or4ing on
gro-p la2 a0tivities. Tis 3as one item noted 2y st-dents in te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p
3en as4ed to des0ri2e 3at tey li4ed most a2o-t te 0lass. Many st-dents 0ommented
tat 2eing a2le to 3or4 togeter and dis0-ss tings 3it oter mem2ers of teir team
made te a0tivities more f-n. /onse1-ently, tey spent less time doing individ-al 3or4,
and more time dis0-ssing te a0tivities in 3i0 tey 3ere involved. Tis so0ial aspe0t is
a primary strengt of te 0onstr-0tivist learning model.
Conclusions
Te res-lts of tis st-dy did s-pport te val-e of 0onstr-0tivist or st-dent)0entered
learning. It 3as anti0ipated tat te 0onstr-0tivist 0lass 3o-ld ave a iger average on
te 3ee4ly 1-i6 grades, and tis 3as s-pported 2y statisti0al analysis. We sa3 2etter
s0ores not only on o00asion, 2-t every single 3ee4 in te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p. Ges-lts of
te 70ien0e Attit-de Inventory also demonstrated tat te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p ad a
2etter o-tloo4 on s0ien0e at te end of te semester tan te st-dents in te traditional
gro-p. Attendan0e demonstrated a signifi0ant differen0e 2et3een te gro-ps 3en
0ompared -sing a statisti0al analysis, as 3ell. Tis indi0ated tat more st-dents in te
0onstr-0tivist 0lass made an effort to attend la2 on a reg-lar 2asis.
Analysis of te videos made of ea0 0lass so3ed tat te traditional 0lass
e>i2ited less st-dent parti0ipation and intera0tion tan te 0onstr-0tivist 0lass, 3ile
losing none of te ands)on a0tivities or instr-0tor s-pport. Tey did ave more le0t-re
time, 2-t tis is a defining fa0tor for a traditional 0lassroom. 7t-dent 0omments from
mem2ers of te 0onstr-0tivist gro-p indi0ated a ig level of satisfa0tion, and in0reased
st-dent parti0ipation 3as evident to any o2server. 7t-dents 3ere more 3illing to
vol-nteer ans3ers and as4 1-estions of te instr-0tor in order to 0larify material, and
team dis0-ssions res-lted in many ne3 points 2eing introd-0ed. Te data 3e 0olle0ted
from tis st-dy 0ertainly s-pported te 2enefits generally attri2-ted to 0onstr-0tivist
tea0ing.
Appendi1 I
Systematic -bser#ation Report
/lassLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
DateLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
TimeLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Instr-0torLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Category Tallies Total *ercent
Teacher
Biving Dire0tions
Le0t-ring
A-estions 7t-dents
PraiseM+n0o-ragement
La2MHands =n
Student
A-estionM/omment
"Tea0er)Initiated&
A-estionM/omment
"7t-dent)Initiated&
7t-dentM7t-dent
Intera0tion
=ff Tas4
'eneral
7ilen0e
Total
Literature Cited
Adams, Pa-l +. and Berald H. Kro04over. :;;;. Stimulating Constructivist Teaching
Styles Through the Use of an Observation Rubric. No-rnal of Gesear0 in 70ien0e
Tea0ing. ?ol. 'H, Do. *!;(();#:.
Flanders, Ded A. :;#9. Analy6ing Tea0ing Beavior. Addison)Wesley P-2lising /o,
In0, Pilippines.
Ballager, N. and N. Par4er. :;;(. 7e0ondary Tea0er Analysis Matri> ) 70ien0e
?ersion.
Lord, Tomas G. :;;%. Using Constructivism to Enhance Student Learning in College
Biology. No-rnal of /ollege 70ien0e Tea0ing. ?ol. $', Do. H!'%H)'%*.
Lord, Tomas G. :;;#. A Comarison Bet!een Traditional and Constructivist
Teaching in College Biology. Innovative Higer +d-0ation. ?ol. $:, Do. '!:;#)$:H.
Lord, Tomas G. :;;*. Cooerative Learning That Really "or#s in Biology Teaching.
Te Ameri0an Biology Tea0er, ?ol. H9, Do. *!(*9)(**.
Lord, Tomas G. :;;;. A Comarison Bet!een Traditional and Constructivist
Teaching in Environmental Science. No-rnal of +nvironmental +d-0ation. ?ol. '9, Do.
'!$$)$*.
=pal4a, N-lianne. :;;*. The Effects of Constructivist Teaching $ethods on %igh School
Science Students OM70 TesisP. A0ademi0 Li2rary, Indiana University of Pennsylvania,
Indiana, PA.
70e-rman, Beoffrey. :;;*. &rom Behaviorist to Constructivist Teaching. 70ien0e
+d-0ation. ?ol. H$, Do. :!H);.

7ymans4y, Names A. :;;$. Using Constructivist 'deas to Teach Science Teachers
About Constructivist 'deas( or Teachers Are Students( Too) No-rnal of 70ien0e Tea0er
+d-0ation. ?ol. ', Do. $!(')(#.
7prag-e, De2ra and /ristoper Dede. :;;;. Constructivism in the Classroom* 'f '
Teach This "ay( Am ' +oing $y ,ob- Learning and Leading 3it Te0nology. ?ol. $#,
Do. :!H)$:.
7tofflett, Gene T. :;;*. .utting Constructivist Teaching into .ractice in Undergraduate
'ntroductory Science. +le0troni0 No-rnal of 70ien0e +d-0ation, ?ol. ', Do. $. Getrieved
De0em2er ':, $99: from ttp!MM-nr.ed-MomepageM50annonMe5seMstofflett.tml.
?irginia Asso0iation of 70ien0e Tea0ers, :;;*. "hat is constructivism and !hat does it
mean for science educators- /-rrent Topi0s in 70ien0e +d-0ation. Getrieved Nan-ary $,
$99$ from ttp!MM333.pen.4:$.va.-sMAntologyMPavM?aLAsso0L70iM0onstr-0t$.tml.
@ager, Go2ert +. :;;:. The Constructivist Learning $odel. Te 70ien0e Tea0er. ?ol.
(*, Do. H!(')(#.
@ore, Larry D. $99:. "hat is $eant by Constructivist Science Teaching and "ill the
Science Education Community Stay the Course for $eaningful Reform- +le0troni0
No-rnal of 70ien0e +d-0ation, ?ol. (, Do. %. Getrieved Nan-ary $, $99$ from
ttp!MM-nr.ed-MomepageM0ro3terMe5seMyore.tml.
8oller, Uri. $999. Teaching Tomorro!/s College Science Courses0Are "e 1etting 't
Right- No-rnal of /ollege 70ien0e Tea0ing, ?ol. $;, Do. H!%9;)%:%.