Laila Grutas
Bulua National High School
Bulua, Cagyan de Oro City, Philippines
Over the past 35 years, the study of classroom environment has received
attention by researchers, teachers, and school administrators of school systems. Vivid
descriptions and images of schools through powerful movies (for example, To Sir With
Love, Up the Down Staircase, Dead Poet’s Society) and less powerful dramatizations
(Glenview High, Class of 75, Beverly Hills 90210, Boston Public) all attest to the
centrality of environment to the defining character of schools and classrooms. The
concept of environment, as applied to educational settings, refers to the atmosphere,
ambience, tone, or climate that pervades the particular setting. It is noteworthy from the
outset to recognize that classroom environments are human environments (Boy & Pine
1988).
Since the 1960’s, an important number of studies have attempted to analyze the
social climate of the classroom, considered to be an environment for academic,
personal, and social development, in which the behavior of the teacher, teacher-
student interaction, and the student-student interaction form a part.
Studies carried out on the social environment of the classroom have been used
to find correlations between the environment and the academic results of students.
Furthermore, environmental dimensions have been used as criterial variables, including
his evaluation of educational innovations and studies on the differences between the
perceptions of students and teachers in the same classroom, and investigations of
whether students obtained better results in their preferred environments (Fraser, 1991,
1994).
Over 30 years ago, Getzels and Thelen (1960) proposed a conceptual framework
for the classroom as a social system. The main elements include three dimensions: (a)
sociological dimension of action, (b) personal dispositions, and (c) balance between
institution and individual. The sociological dimension of action includes the institution,
role, and expectations, where roles are defined as established institutional expectations.
The personal dimension pertains to unique features of people and includes the
individual, personality, and dispositions. The balance between the institution and the
individual includes the class, climate, intentions, and behavior. The dimension pertains
to the interaction between institutional expectations and the individual personality
needs.
Sample
A representative sample of over 300 students from the two high schools of
Region X: the Iligan City National High School of Iligan City and Bulua National High
School of Cagayan de Oro City has participated in this study.
Data were collected by the researchers from all regular fourth year students who
currently taking up physics subject. To examine students in their personal perception of
the relevance of the subject, their shared control on the design and planning about their
physics class, the student-student interaction, the critical voice, attitude towards the
subject and the physics uncertainty. The respondents from two different schools were
given the PCLES (Physics Classroom Learning Environment Survey) to explore and
test its adaptability of the items from the said test.
Instrument Development
The Physics Classroom Learning Environment Survey questionnaire used in this
study was developed and adapted from CLES - AN INSTRUMENT FOR MONITORING
THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTIVIST LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS by Peter
C. Taylor, Barry J. Fraser and Loren R. White of National Key Centre for School
Science and Mathematics, Curtin University, Australia. The instrument was designed to
explore its adaptability and to measure the physics classroom environment. It used the
five-point Likert –type frequency response scale which included the following choices:
almost never (1 point), seldom (2 points), sometimes (3 points), often (4 points), and
almost always (5 points). It was composed of 42 items which will show and identify the
responses of the students on the six scales: personal relevance, shared control, critical
voice, student negotiation, physics uncertainty, and attitude.
Table 1
Example PCLES items
Shared Control I help the teacher to plan what I’m going to learn.
I help the teacher decide how well my learning is going.
I have a say in deciding the rules for classroom discussion.
Critical Voice I feel free to question the way I’m being taught.
It’s OK to complain about the activities that are confusing.
I’m free to express my opinion.
Personal Relevance 1 7 13 19 25 30 37
Shared Control 4 10 16 22 28 33 40
Critical Voice 3 9 15 21 27 32 39
Student Negotiation 5 11 17 23 29 34 41
Physics Uncertainty 2 8 14 20 26 31 38
Attitude 6 12 18 24 35 36 42
Reliability Statistics
Table 3
Reliability of the six scales
Attitude 7 0.393
The table 3 above showed that the alpha values for critical voice, student
negotiation and attitude were below the considered values with 0.313, 0.378 and 0.393
respectively. So then items from the said scales were deleted to increase their
respected alpha values. For critical voice, item number 3 and 39 to elevate it to 0.432.
On the student negotiation, item 29 was deleted to increase the value to 0.494 and item
36 is removed to have an alpha value of 0.519.
Table 4
Reliability of the six scales
Descriptive Statistics
Table 5
Class Means and Standard Deviation of the scales on the PCLES
30
25
20 Mean
15 StandardDeviation
10
5
0
ty
e
on
nc
in
ro
ti
t N oic
de
va
ta
ia
nt
itu
V
le
ot
er
Co
Re
eg
nc
al
tt
ed
ic
A
U
al
it
ar
s
on
Cr
en
ic
Sh
ys
rs
ud
Pe
Ph
St
The table also revealed a high ranged statistical mean. Students’ perception on
the personal relevance of the subject was on the highest with 25.68 and closely
followed by the students’ attitude towards the subject with 25.53. The scales critical
voice, student negotiation and physics uncertainty also displayed a significantly high
mean at a range of 23.22 to 23.78. 19.15 was the lowest computed mean for the shared
control.
Discussion
The high computed Cronbach’s alpha values which ranges from 0.419 to 0.662,
demonstrates a higher reliability of the PCLES (Physics Classroom Learning
Environment Survey) to be use as an instrument to assess physics classroom
environment based on the following scales; personal relevance, shared control, critical
voice, student negotiation, physics uncertainty, and attitude.
The prominently high standard deviation of values between 3.59 and 5.10, simple
implies that, students from the two schools being surveyed, the Iligan City National High
School and Bulua National High School, had varied answers. It illustrates heterogeneity
of response on the questions given.
On the other hand, student-student interaction has noticeably high mean score of
23.34, revealed that opportunities exist for students to explain and justify to other
students their newly developing ideas, to understand other students' ideas and reflect
on their possibility and, consequently, to reflect on the possibility of their own ideas.
Morever, the 25.53 mean score on attitude showed that respondents have a
positive attitude towards physics. Students exhibited eagerness on their physics class,
encouraged positive impact on their interest, enjoyment and understanding.
Lastly, the revealed low mean of 19.15 on shared control showed that students-
respondents are not being invited to share control with the teacher on the total learning
environment, which may include the design and management of learning activities,
determining and applying assessment criteria, and participating in the negotiation of the
social norms of the classroom.
References
Taylor, Peter C, Fraser, Barry J & White, Loren R. 1994. An Instrument for Monitoring
The development of Contructivist Learning Environment. American Educational
Research Association. New Orleans
MYINT Swe Khine & GOH Swee Chiew. 2001. Investigation of tertiary classroom
learning environment in Singapore. International Educational Research Conference,
Australian Association for Educational Research (AARE).