PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHER CANDIDATES' PERSPECTIVES ON CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT DESIGN

Year 2025, Volume: 14 Issue: 1, 29 - 47, 31.03.2025

Ümran Şahin

https://doi.org/10.55020/iojpe.1486947

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to explore prospective teachers’ perspectives on the physical arrangement of an ideal classroom as a learning environment. A phenomenological design was used in this study to reveal the views of prospective teachers about the components and features of an ideal, desired classroom environment. Fifteen teacher candidates in their 4th year in the departments of primary education, science education, and social studies education participated in the research. In the study, two main themes (My classroom, My Advantages) along with ten sub-themes were created regarding the classroom environments envisioned by the prospective teachers. As a result of the analysis, six (6) sub-themes were identified under the theme of "My Classroom": technology-supported classroom, laboratory classroom, well-equipped classroom, interactive classroom, nature based classroom, and flexible classroom. Under the theme of "My Advantages", four (4) sub-themes were identified: one-to-one teaching, active participation, activity-based learning, and attention-grabbing features. The findings show that teacher candidates believe that the physical environment of classrooms should be different from the traditional classroom layout. They are aware of the importance of providing individualized attention to students and have designed technologically equipped, spacious, and flexible classrooms where they can implement engaging activities that will sustain their students' interests.

Keywords

Ideal classroom environment, design, phenomenology, primary school.

Ethical Statement

This research has an ethics committee permit issued by the Pamukkale University Ethics Committee on 11.03.2024 with the decision numbered E-93803232-622.02-506666. The author declares that they have no conflict of interest.

References

• Ahmad, C. N. C., & Amirul, N. J. (2017). The effect of the physical learning environment on students’ health, enjoyment and learning. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains & Mathematic Malaysia. 7(1), 47-55.
• Ahmad, C. N. C., Osman, K., &Halim, L. (2010). Physical and psychosocial aspect of science laboratory learning environment. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 87-91.
• Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., & Taylor, P. C. (2000). Constructivist learning environments in a cross-national study in Taiwan and Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 37-55.
• Ayas A, (2006). Use of laboratory in science teaching. Anadolu University, http://www.aof.edu.tr / book/IOLTP/2283 / unite07.pdf . 30 March 2024 retrieved from
• Ayaz, M. F. (2016). The effect of using teaching materials on students' attitudes towards courses: a meta-analysis study. OMÜ Journal of the Faculty of Education, 35(1), 141-158. doi: 10.7822/omuefd.35.1.11.
• Bal, H., Keleş, M., & Erbil, O. (2002). Faculty of Education Journal Educational technology guide. Revised 2nd Edition. Ankara: Ministry of National Education Education Research and Development Department Publications.
• Barrantes-Elizondo, L. (2019). Creating space for visual ethnography in educational research. Revista Electrónica Educare, 23(2), 1-15.
• Beames, S., Higgins, P., & Nicol, R. (2012). Learning outside the classroom. Theory and guidelines for practice. Newyork and London: Routledge
• Berberoğlu, H., & Uygun, S. (2013). Examining the development of outdoor education in the world and in Turkey. Mersin Journal of the Faculty of Education, 9(2), 33-42.
• Betoret, F. D., & Artiga, A. G. (2004). Trainee teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning, classroom layout and exam design, Educational Studies, 30(4), 355-372.
• Chism, N. V. N., & Bickford, D. J. (2002). Improving the environment for learning: An expanded agenda, in The Importance of physical space in creating supportive learning environments: New directions in teaching and learning, No. 92, Nancy Van Note Chism and Deborah J. Bickford, eds., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Bland, D. (2012). Analysing children's drawings: applied imagination. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 35(3), 235-242.
• Bland, D. (2018). Using drawing in research with children: lessons from practice. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 41(3), 342-352.
• Brooks, J. G. & Brooks, M. G. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.Brown, J. M. (2011). Does the Use of Technology in the Classroom Increase Students‟ Overall Academıc Performance (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Gonzaga, USA.
• Bucholz, J. L. & Sheffer, J. L. (2009). Creating a warm and ınclusive classroom environmet: Planning for all children to feel welcome. Electronic Journal of Inclusive Education, 2(4), 1-13. http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/ejie/vol2/iss4/4 30 March 2023 retrieved from
• Budge, D. (2000). Secret is in the seating. Times Educational Supplement, 4396, 26-27. https://www.tes.com/news/tes- archive/tes-publication/secret-seating 30 April 2024 retrieved from
• Cheung, D. (2007). Facilitating chemistry teachers to implement inquiry-based laboratory work. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(1), 107-130.
• Chism, N. V. N., & Bickford, D. J. (2002). "Improving the environment for learning: An expanded agenda," in The Importance of physical space in creating supportive learning environments: New directions in teaching and learning, No. 92, Nancy Van Note Chism and Deborah J. Bickford, eds., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Cookson, P. (2006). Your ideal classroom. TeachingK-9.com. https://www.essentiallearningproducts.com/your ideal- classroom-peter-w-cookson-jr 28 March 2024 retrieved from
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. New York: Sage. Çağıltay, K., Çakıroğlu, J., Çağıltay, N. ve Çakıroğlu, E. (2001). Teachers' opinions on the use of computers in teaching. Hacettepe University Faculty of Education Journal, 21: 19-28.
• Diem-Wille, G. (2001). A therapeutic perspective: the use of drawings in child psychoanalysis and social science. In T. V. Leeuwen & C. Jewitt (Eds.), Handbook of visual analysis (pp. 119–133). London: Sage
• Doğanay, A., & Sarı M. (2007, September). How much constructivism has been established in primary schools? A comparative study in social studies, science and technology and mathematics courses. E. Erginer (Ed.), 16th National Educational Sciences Congress (s.149-163). Gaziosmanpaşa University, Faculty of Education, Tokat, Türkiye.
• Doğanay, A., & Sarı, M. (2012). The Prediction Level of Constructivist Learning Environment Features on Thinking-Friendly Classroom Features. Çanakkale University Social Sciences Institute Journal, 21(1).
• Domin, D. S. (2007). Students’ perceptions of when conceptual development occurs during laboratory instruction. Chemistry Educational Research and Practice, 8(2), 140-152.
• Edwards, N. C. (2006). School facilities and student achievement: student perspectives on the connection between the urban learning environment and student motivation and performance. Doctorate Thesis, Philosophy Department of the Ohio State University, Ohio, America
• Emmer, E. T., Evertson, C. M., & Worsham, M. E. (2013). Classroom Management for Elementary School Teachers (9th Edition). (Ahmet Aypay, Trans. Ed). Ankara: Nobel Publications
• Evans, G. (2006). Learning, violance and the social structure of value. Social Anthropology, 14(2), 247-259.
• Fisher, K. (2001). Building better outcomes: The impact of school infrastructure on student outcomes and behavior. Schooling issues digest. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED455672.pdf 15 March 2024 retrieved from
• Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C.T. Fosnot (Ed.). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives and practice (pp. 8-33). New York: Teacher College Press.
• Freedman, P. M. (1997). Relationship among laboratory instruction, attitude toward science, and achievement in science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 343-357.
• Gulek, J. C. & Demirtaş, H. (2005). Learning With Technology: The Impact of Laptop Use on Student Achievement. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 3 (2), doi: http://www.jtla.org
• Güven, G., & Sülün, Y. (2012). The effect of computer-assisted teaching on academic success and students' attitudes towards the course in 8th grade science and technology course. Turkish Journal of Science Education, 9(1), 68-79.
• Hannah, R. (2013). The effect of classroom environment on student learning. Honors Theses. Paper 2375.
• Harvey E. J., & Kenyon MC. (2013). Classroom seating considerations for 21st century students and faculty. Journal of Learning Spaces, 2(1)
• Herreid, C. F., & Schiller, N. A. (2013). Case studies and the flipped classroom. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 62-66.
• Hill, M. C, & Epps, K. K. (2010). The impact of physical classroom environment on studentsatisfaction and student evaluation of teaching in the university environment. Academic Education Leadership Journal, 14, 65-79. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b1c7/9d8585d8cc3d7236dd798350f01af5e4399f.pdf 28 March 2024 retrieved from
• Judge, S. (2005). The Impact of Computer Technology on Academic Achievement of Young African American Children. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 20 (2), 91-101.
• Kaya, S., & Kılıç Çakmak, E. (2015). Opinions of prospective teachers regarding the cognitive and metacognitive strategy activities applied in the instructional design course. Education and Science, 40(181), 329-347.
• Kırpık, M. A., & Engin, A. O. (2009). The Importance of the Laboratory in Teaching Science and Basic Problems Related to Teaching Biology. Kafkas University Institute of Science and Technology Journal 2(2).
• Kocakülah, A., &Savaş, E. (2011). Opinions of science teacher candidates regarding the experiment design and implementation process. Ondokuz Mayız University Faculty of Education Journal, 30(1), 1-28.
• Kuschnir, K. (2016). Ethnographic drawing: Eleven benefits of using a sketchbook for fieldwork. Visual Ethnography Journal, 5(1). 103-134.
• Lackney, J. A. (1999). Why optimal learning environment matter. Mississippi: Mississippi State University, Mississippi State Educational Design Institute.
• Laney, D. (1990). Micro computers and social studies. OCSS Review, 26, 30-37.
• Lefoe, G. (1998) Creating Constructivist learning environment on the web: The Challenge in higher education. ASCILITE’98 Annual Conference, 14-16 December, Wollongong Proceedings Book, 453-464.
• Leung, M. Y., & Fung, I. (2005). Enhancement of classroom facilities of primary schools and its impact on learning behaviors of students, Facilities, 23(13/14), 585-594.
• Liang, J. K., Liu, T. C., Wang, H. Y., Chang, B., Deng, Y. C., Yang, J. C., Chou, C. Y., Ko, H. W., Yang, S., & Chan, T. W. (2005). A few design perspectives on one-on-one digital classroom environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 181- 189.
• Lyons, J. B. (2001). Do school facilities really impact a child’s education? http://www.cefpi.on org:80/issuetraks.html 3 March 2024 retrieved from
• MEB (1995). Science laboratories for educational research-demonstration. TC. MEB Education Research and Development Department: Ankara.
• Neuman, W. L. (2012). Social Research Methods: Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches I‐II. Skin(5th Edition). Istanbul: Publishing Room.
• Oğuzkan, A. F. (1981). Dictionary of educational terms (2nd Edition). Ankara: Turkish Language Association Publication.
• Özden, Y. (2002). Organizing the learning and teaching environment in the classroom. Classroom management. 1st Edition. Ed. E. Karip. Ankara: PegemA Pub. 38-73.
• Özer, Ö., & Tunca, N. (2014). Opinions of teacher candidates regarding material preparation and use. Route Educational and Social Science Journal, 1(3), 214-229.
• Pramling Samuelsson, I. (2011). Why we should begin early with ESD: The role of Early Childhood Education. International Journal of Early Childhood, 43(2),103-118
• Sarıtaş, T., & Yılmaz, G. (2009). Effects of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) Based Learning Environments on Students' Critical Thinking Skills. IETC (6-7 May.2009). Hacettepe University, Ankara.
• Schratz, M., & Loffler, U. (1998). Pupils using photographs in school self-evaluation. In: Prosser J (ed.) Image-Based Research: A Sourcebook for Qualitative Researchers.(pp. 209–224). London: Falmer Press.
• Scott-Webber, L. (2004). In sync: environment behavior research and the design of learning spaces, Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University Planning.
• Sinclair, G. B. (2009). Is Larry Cuban Right About the Impact of Computer Technology on Student Learning?. Nawa Journal of Language and Communication, 3(1), 46- 54.
• Smith, G. A., & Sobel, D. (2010). Place and community based education in schools. Newyork: Routledge.
• Su, Y., & Klein, J. (2010). Using Scaffolds in Problem-based Hypermedia. Jl. of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 19(3) 221-241.
• Şahin, M. (2019). The Importance of Classroom Seating Arrangement in Education, Ihlara Journal of Educational Research,4(1), 73-101.
• Şensoy, S., & Sağsöz, A. (2015). The Relationship between Student Achievement and Class Achievement. Ahi Evran University Kırşehir Faculty of Education Journal, 16(3).
• Temiz, Z., & Karaarslan Semiz, G. (2019). My Best Teacher is Nature: Teacher Activities Prepared within the Scope of Pre- School Nature-Based Education Practices Project. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research, 8(1), 314- 331.
• Yeşiltaş, E. (2006). The effect of using tools and equipment on students' success levels in teaching social studies and physical geography subjects (Kars province example). (Master's thesis), Kafkas University, Institute of Social Sciences, Kars, Türkiye.
• Taylor, P. C., Fraser, B. J., & Fisher, D. L. (1997). Monitoring constructivist learning environment. International Journal of Educational Research, 27(2), 293-302
• Tanner, C. K. (2009). Effects of school design on student outcomes. Journal of Educational Administration, 47(3), 381-399. Vandier, B. (2011). The impact of school facilities on the learning environment. (Doctorate Thesis), Capella University, America.
• Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E., Lasure, S., Vaerenbergh, G. V., Bogaerts, H., & Ratinckx, E. (1999). Learning to solve mathematical application problems: A design experiment with fifth graders.Mathematical Thinking and Learning,. 1(3), 195-229.
• Wasnock, D. P. (2010). Classroom environment: Emphasis on seating arrangement. Mathematical and computing sciences masters, Paper 17. MS in Mathematics, Science, and Technology.
• Wilson, B. G. (1995). Maintaining the ties between learning theory and instructional design. http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~bwilson/mainties.html 25.02.2024 retrieved from
• Weathersbee, J. C. (2008). Impact of technology ıntegration in public schools on academic performance of Texas school children. (Unpublished master’s thesis), Texas State University, Texas, ABD.
• Yager, R. E. (1991). The constructivist learning model: Towards real reform in science education. The Science Teacher, 58(6), 52–57.