Towards Adoption of Constructivist Instructional Approach in Learning Biology in Secondary School Students in Kenya: Addressing Learner Attitude
International Journal of Secondary Education
Volume 5, Issue 1, February 2017, Pages: 1-11
Received: Aug. 13, 2016; Accepted: Aug. 27, 2016; Published: Feb. 21, 2017
Views 1232      Downloads 47
Gideon Mwanda, Department of Education Technology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya
Paul Odundo, Department of Education Technology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya
Ronnie Midigo, Department of Education Technology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya
Article Tools
Follow on us
Learning Biology helps learners to acquire requisite knowledge in understanding life processes for positive coexistence. In instances where learners appreciate the position of biology in life, they develop positive attitude and this is reflected in their performance. However, in Kenya, most students have continued to register poor performance in biology in national examinations and this has been attributed to negative attitude towards the sciences by most learners. To address this, changes in the educational curricula and teaching methods from the transmission curriculum to a transactional curriculum has been suggested. The changes imply adjustments in the instructional process to include learner centred activities. On the other hand, studies have shown that the attitude of learners towards changes influence the adoptability and workability of the introduced change. This study investigated attitude of learners towards the constructivist instructional approach. The study adopted a cross-sectional survey technique. Data was obtained from four boys’, four girls’, and four mixed secondary schools with a total of 477 students and were analysed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. The results indicated that learners have positive attitude towards the constructivist instructional approach. Boys obtained a scores of (M=58.30; SD=9.15, N=150) while girls had a score of (M=53.14; SD=8.24, N=146). Based on this finding, it is recommended that instructors adopt the constructivist approach in learning so as to boost the attitude of students towards learning biology. It would also be appropriate for further investigations to be conducted in other fields of science such as chemistry and Physics so as to find out if the constructivist approach would also boost the attitude of students in such subjects. Finally, policy makers in the field of education in Kenya (The Ministry of Education, Science and Technology through the Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD)) should come up with policies to ensure appropriate learning approaches which foster positive attitude towards learning.
Constructivist Approach, Attitude, Constructivist Learning, Transmission, Transactional, Sitting Arrangements, Assignments, Evaluation
To cite this article
Gideon Mwanda, Paul Odundo, Ronnie Midigo, Towards Adoption of Constructivist Instructional Approach in Learning Biology in Secondary School Students in Kenya: Addressing Learner Attitude, International Journal of Secondary Education. Vol. 5, No. 1, 2017, pp. 1-11. doi: 10.11648/j.ijsedu.20170501.11
Copyright © 2017 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License ( which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Brown, C. R. (2014). The Effective Teaching of School Biology. Routledge.
Maundu, J. N., Sambili, H. J., & Muthwii, S. M. (2005). Biology education: A methodological approach.
Kenya National Examinations Council (KNEC). (2000-2013) Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education Examinations Report. Nairobi: Kenya Nationa Examinations Council.
CEMASTEA, (2011). Effective resource mobilization, prioritization and utilization for quality education, Training Manual for Secondary Schools’ Principals workshop, CEMASTEA, Nairobi.
Fensham, P. J. (2004) Defining an Identity: The Evolution of Science Education as a Field of Research. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Fosnot, C. T. (2005). Constructivism: Theory perspective and practice (2nd ed) New York: Teachers College, press, Columbia University.
Brooks, J. G. & Brooks, M. G. (2001). In search of understanding: The case for Constructivist classrooms. New Jersey, Prentice Hall.
Denton, D. W. (2012). Enhancing instruction through constructivism, cooperative learning, and cloud computing. TechTrends, 56 (4), 34-41.
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (2013). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. Psychology Press.
Brophy, J. E. (2013). Motivating students to learn. Routledge.
Ewing, A. C. (2012). The Fundamental Questions of Philosophy (Routledge Revivals). Routledge.
Earl, L. M. (2012). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Corwin Press.
Savery, J. R. (2015). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Essential Readings in Problem-Based Learning: Exploring and Extending the Legacy of Howard S. Barrows, 5.
Baybee, R., Tayler, J., Gadner, R., Scotter, P., & Powell, J. West brook, A., & Lardes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E Instructional Model: Origins, Effectives and Applications. Executive Summary BSCS.
Yoon, J., & Onchwari, J. A. (2006). Teaching young children science: Three key points. Early Childhood Education Journal, 33 (6), 419-423.
Kuh, G. D. (2007). How to help students achieve. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53 (41), B12-13.
Krause, K. L., & Coates, H. (2008). Students’ engagement in First‐year University. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33 (5), 493-505.
Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science.
Pratkanis, A. R., Breckler, S. J., & Greenwald, A. G. (2014). Attitude structure and function. Psychology Press.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The Process of education. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Danielson, C. (2011). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. ASCD.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational researcher, 18 (1), 32-42.
Hanke, R. (2009, January). Problem-based learning entrepreneurship education: a preliminary exploration. In United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Conference Proceedings (p. 129). United States Association for Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
Hirst-Loucks, C., & Loucks, K. P. (2013). Serious Fun: Practical Strategies to Motivate and Engage Students. Routledge.
Bentley, M. L. (1998). Constructivism as a referent for reforming science education. Constructivism and education, 233-249.
Hofstein, A., & Yager, R. E. (1982). Societal issues as organizers for science education in the ‘80s. School science and mathematics, 82 (7), 539-547.
Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (2013). Promoting reflection in learning a model. Boundaries of adult learning, 1, 32.
Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. John Wiley & Sons.
Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2012). Understanding and Developing Science Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge (Vol. 12). Springer Science & Business Media.
Ergin, İ. (2012). Constructivist approach based 5E model and usability instructional physics. Latin-American Journal of Physics Education, 6 (1).
Knowles, M. S., Holton III, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2014). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. Routledge.
Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for All Americans. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Washington, Dc.
Boud, D. (Ed.). (2012). Developing student autonomy in learning. Routledge.
Bentley, T. (2012). Learning beyond the classroom: Education for a changing world. Routledge.
Brookfield, S. D. (2015). The skillful teacher: On technique, trust, and responsiveness in the classroom. John Wiley & Sons.
Hannafin, M. J., Hill, J. R., Land, S. M., & Lee, E. (2014). Student-centered, open learning environments: Research, theory, and practice. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 641-651). Springer New York.
Gregory, G. H., & Chapman, C. (2012). Differentiated instructional strategies: One size doesn't fit all. Corwin Press.
Quinn, D., Amer, Y., Lonie, A., Blackmore, K., Thompson, L., & Pettigrove, M. (2012). Leading change: Applying change management approaches to engage students in blended learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28 (1), 16-29.
Prince, M. J., & Felder, R. M. (2006). Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases. JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION-WASHINGTON-, 95 (2), 123.
Plotnik, R., & Kouyoumdjian, H. (2011). Introduction to psychology, (9 th ed). Mason, Ohio. Cengage Learning.
Slavin, R. E. (2009). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (9 th Ed.) Columbus: Pearson Inc.
Jurik, V., Gröschner, A., & Seidel, T. (2013). How student characteristics affect girls' and boys' verbal engagement in physics instruction. Learning and instruction, 23, 33-42.
Miheso-O’Conner, M. K. (2002). The relationship between interactive teaching and the acquisition of high order thinking skills in mathematics classroom. African Journal of Education Studies Vol. 1 Issue 1.
Intel Corporation (2008). Intel teach program: Getting started course, participant Teacher edition Vol. 2.0.
Becker, K., & Maunsaiyat, S. (2004). A comparison of students' achievement and attitudes between constructivist and traditional classroom environments in Thailand vocational electronics programs. Journal of Vocational Education Research, 29 (2), 133-153.
Donaldson, A. (2001). Biology exploration through technology: Taking the leap from theory to practice. Teach Treads (45): The H. W. Wilson Company.
Stoltzfus, G., Nibbelink, B. L., Vredenburg, D., & Hyrum, E. (2011). Gender, gender role, and creativity. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 39 (3), 425-432.
Rudman, L. A., & Phelan, J. E. (2015). The effect of priming gender roles on women’s implicit gender beliefs and career aspirations. Social psychology
Jones, M. G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students' experiences, interests, and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science education, 84 (2), 180-192.
Ongowo, Richard, Francis Indoshi, and Mildred Ayere. 'Perception of Constructivist Learning Environment: Gender and School Type Differences in Siaya County, Kenya'. AIR 4.1 (2015): 15-26. Web.
Spring, J. (2008). Research on globalization and education. Review of Educational Research, 78 (2), 330-363.
Taber, K. S. (2009). Progressing science education: Constructing the scientific research programme into the contingent nature of learning science (Vol. 37). Springer Science & Business Media.
Schwandt, T. A. (2003). Back to the Rough Ground!' Beyond Theory to Practice in Evaluation. Evaluation, 9 (3), 353-364.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1991). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge (No. 10). Penguin UK.
Steedman, M. (2000). Information structure and the syntax-phonology interface. Linguistic inquiry, 31 (4), 649-689.
Tudge, J. (1992). Vygotsky, the zone of proximal development, and peer collaboration: Implications for classroom practice.
Straits, W. & Wilke, R. (2007). How constructivist are we? Representation of transmission and participatory models of instruction in the journal of college science teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching (36) (7).
Santrock, J. W. (2004). Educational psychology (2nd ed) New York: McGraw-Hill.
Airasian, P. W. (2000). Assessment in the classroom: A concise approach (2nd ed). Boston, McGraw Hill Higher Education.
Entwistle, N. J. (2013). Styles of learning and teaching: An integrated outline of educational psychology for students, teachers and lecturers. Routledge.
Vygyotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The Development of High Psychological Process. Cambridge, M. A: Harvard University Press.
Rudolf, D. W. (2012). Effect of outdoor education methods and strategies on student engagement in science: a descriptive study.
Science Publishing Group
NEW YORK, NY 10018
Tel: (001)347-688-8931