Validation and Standardization of the Constructivist Conceptual Learning and Thinking Questionnaire for Male Adolescents

Document Type : Original Article


1 PhD Student in Educational Psychology, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Psychology, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran


Aim: The present study aimed to validate and standardize a constructivist conceptual learning and thinking questionnaire for male adolescents. Methods: The study was descriptive and correlational, and its statistical population consisted of all male students of public secondary schools in Jiroft in the academic year of 2020-2021. The initial sample size was equal to 210 individuals who were selected using a multi-stage cluster sampling. The research tools included the constructivist conceptual learning and thinking scale- the revised version by Purdie and Hattie (2012), and the Constructive Thinking and Learning Scale by Epstein & Meier (1990). Data analysis was performed using confirmatory factor analysis and psychometric indices in SPSS-19 and AMOS. Result: The results of confirmatory factor analysis by omitting 4 questions confirmed the existence of six factors, namely information acquisition, recall, task, personal change, time and place, and social competence. Furthermore, total scores of the questionnaire and its components were significantly correlated with the constructive thinking scale by Epstein & Meier (P=0.05). The concurrent validity was equal to 0.71 and the Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.75. Conclusion: According to the results, the constructivist conceptual learning and thinking scale by Purdie and Hattie had the necessary validity and reliability.


برزگر بفروئی، کاظم.، و شیخ‌الاسلامی، علی. (1392). ویژگی‌های روان‌سنجی پرسشنامه محیط یادگیری سازدنده‌نگر. روانشناسی مدرسه، 2(4): 6-24
پرویز، کوروش. (1396). بررسی رابطه راهبردهای شناختی و فراشناختی با میزان موفقیت تحصیلی دانش آموزان شهری و روستایی مقطع متوسطه. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
شاهسون، روح‌الله. (1395). تأثیر آموزش راهبردهای شناختی و فراشناختی بر عملکرد حل مسئله ریاضی دانش آموزان حساب نارسای پایه پنجم ابتدایی شهر تهران. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه علوم بهزیستی و توان‌بخشی.
لوین، مل. (1389). آموزش و رشد اندیشه در مدارس. مترجم دکتر منوچهر کوپایی، تهران، انتشارات دفتر همکاری‌های علمی بین‌المللی وزارت آموزش و پرورش.
نیاز آذری، کیومرث. (1392). فراشناخت در فرآیند یاددهی و یادگیری. تهران، انتشارات فراشناختی اندیشه.
ورزدار، زیبا. (1396). تأثیر آموزش راهبردهای فراشناختی در پیشرفت تحصیلی دانش آموزان دختر پایه اول راهنمایی در درس ریاضی شهرستان اسلامشهر. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی
یوسفی طبایی، فخرالسادات. (1394). بررسی تأثیر آموزش راهبردهای شناختی و فراشناختی بر بهبود عملکرد حل مسئله دانش آموزان حساب نارسا. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی.
یوسفی لویه، مهناز (1392). تأثیر آموزش راهبردهای مرور ذهنی و سازمان‌دهی بر مشکلات حافظه کودکان عقب‌مانده ذهنی آموزش پذیر. سازمان آموزش‌وپرورش استثنایی، پژوهشکده کودکان استثنایی.
Aldridge, J. M., Dorman, J. P. & Fraser, B. J. (2015). Use of multitrait-multimethod modeling to validate actual and preferred forms of the Technology-Rich Outcomes-Focused Learning Environment Inventory (TROFLEI). Australian Journal of Educational and Development Psychology, 4, 110-125.
Anagün, S. S. & Anilan, H. (2010). The Turkish adaptation study results of constructivist learning environments scale: Confirmatory factor analysis results. Social and behavioral sciences, 2, 1482-1487.
Biggs, J. B., Kember, D. & Leung, Doris Y. P. (2001). The revised two- factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of education psychology, 21, 133-149.
Bukova-Guzel, E. & Alkan, H. (2005). Evaluating pilot study of reconstructed Turkish elementary school curriculum. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 5, 410–420.
Chang, C. Y. (2006). Effect of the interaction of instructional delivery model and preference of learning environment on students’ attitudes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37, 799–802.
Dart, B., Burnett, P., Purdie, N., Boulton-Lewis, G., Campbell, J. & Smith, D. (2016). Students’ conceptions of learning, the classroom environment, and approaches to learning. The Journal of Educational Research, 94(3), 263-272.
Dorman, J. P. (2003). Cross-national validation of the what is happening in the class? (WIHIC) questionnaire using confirmatory factor analysis. Learning Environments Research, 6, 231-245.
Johnson, B. & McClure, R (2014). Validity and reliability of a shortened, revised version of constructivist learning environment survey. Learning Environments Research, 7, 65-80.
Kim, H.B., Fisher, D.L. & Fraser, B.J. (2017). Classroom environment and teacher interpersonal behaviour in secondary school classes in Korea. Evaluation and Research in Education, 14, 3-22.
Koul, R. B. & Fisher, D. L. (2005). Cultural background and students’ perceptions of science classroom learning environment and teacher interpersonal behavior in Jammu, India. Learning Environments Research, 8, 195–211.
Liang, J. C. & Tsai, C. C. (2008). Internet self-efficacy and preferences toward constructivist Internet-based learning environments: A study of pre-school teachers in Taiwan. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 226-237.
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.
Ozkal, K., Tekkaya, C., Cakiroglu, J. & Sungur, S. (2019). A conceptual model of relationships among constructivist learning environment perceptions, epistemological beliefs, and learning approaches. Learning & Individual Differences, 19(1), 71-79.
Patrick, H., Ryan, A. & Kaplan, A. (2007). Early adolescents' perceptions of classroom environment, motivation, and beliefs. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 83-98.
 Petegem, P. V., Donche, V. & Vanhoof, J. (2005). Relating pre-service teachers Approach to learning and preferences for constructivist learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 8, 309-332.