Classroom Climate and Students’
Goal Structures in High-School
Biology Classrooms in Kenya
Winnie Mucherah
Ball State University
Muncie, Indiana, USA
June, 2015
Classroom climate and student
learning

“Typically, teachers concentrate
almost exclusively on the
assessment of academic
achievement and devote little
attention to factors which might be
related to their students’ patterns of
adaptive learning and performance”
p. 63
Background on Classroom
Climate

Does a classroom’s environment affect student
learning and goal structures?

Can teachers conveniently assess the climates
of their own classrooms?

Do teachers and their students perceive the
same classroom environments similarly?

Do students of different goal structures, grade
levels or genders perceive the same classroom
differently?
Prior Research
Classroom climates that are high in
cooperation and cohesion:
◦ Reduction of inappropriate behaviour
◦ Increased attendance
◦ Reduction in the number of assignments
not completed
◦ Academic improvement
◦ Positive attitudes
◦ Perceptions of fairness of grading
Prior Research






Classroom climate differ by subject
matter
Science classrooms (mixed findings):
High in competition, low in affiliation
Low in cooperation and cohesion
Social studies classrooms:
High in affiliation, low in competition
Diversity in science classrooms-could
be due to teacher’s teaching style
Influence of classroom climate on
student goal structures and learning
outcomes
The goal structures of classrooms influence whether
students pursue learning goals (mastery orientation) or
performance goals (ego orientation).

Classroom environments high on task involvement and
innovation: students with learning goal orientations
◦ HOWEVER - classroom environments high on competition
had students with performance goal orientations (Patrick
et al. 2003)

Students who have learning goals are more likely to
maintain positive motivation in school (Anderman et al.
2002; Kaplan et al. 2002; Urdan et al. 1998).
Goal Orientations
(Dweck & Legget, 1988)
Mastery goals: focus on mastering
tasks and increasing competence at
different tasks (e.g., how can I do
this task? What will I learn?)
 Performance goals: seek to
maximize favorable evaluations of
their ability and minimize negative
evaluations of ability (e.g., Will I look
bright? Can I beat others?)

Research questions
1.
What is the classroom climate in biology
classrooms?
2.
Are there school and grade-level differences
in students’ perceptions of their classroom
climate?
3.
What classroom climate factors predict
student goal structures?
4.
Do students, teachers and observers
perceive the classroom climate and goal
structures similarly?
Design

Participants
◦ Form 2 and 3
 Ages 15 and 16
◦ 1 male boarding school (n=490)
◦ 1 female boarding school (n=401)
◦ 12 teachers

Quantitative + Qualitative
◦ Student questionnaires
◦ Teacher questionnaires
◦ Classroom observations
Measures: STUDENTS

Classroom Climate Questionnaire
(Trickett & Moss, 1974, 1995)
•
•
•
•
•

Involvement
Affiliation
Teacher Support
Task Orientation
Competition
•Order and Organization
•Rule Clarity
•Rule Strictness
•Innovation
Patterns of Adaptive Learning
 Mastery Goals
 Performance Approach Goals
 Performance Avoidance Goals
Measures:TEACHERS &
OBSERVERS

Teacher Classroom Climate
Questionnaire (Trickett & Moss, 1974,
1995) & Patterns of adaptive learning
scale (Midgley et al., 1996b, 2000)

Similar to student version
Classroom observations
 2 Observation forms (climate &
goals)

◦ Inter-rater reliability (.95)
Construct Validity
Prior to the visit, the 2 surveys were
sent to two volunteer teachers from
each school to examine validity of
items
 Recruited via e-mail
 Identified 2 terms: “smart” & “dumb”
which were later replaced by “bright”
and “stupid”
 These teachers did not participate in
the study to control for possible biases

ANALYSIS

MANOVA:
◦ Independent Variables:
 School
 Form
◦ Dependent Variables
 All measures
RESULTS for Classroom
Climate

Significant difference between
schools:


Schools 1 and 2 differed on all the classroom
climate variables except Teacher Support and
Competition
Significant difference between
grades:
◦ Form 3 perceived significantly more
Teacher support, Task focus,
Competition, and Rule strictness.
RESULTS for Learning Goals

Male boarding school(1) reported:
◦ Significantly higher personal
performance-approach goals
◦ Teachers encouraging performance
approach goals and performance
avoidance goals

Female boarding school:
◦ Teachers encouraging mastery goals
What classroom climate factors
predict student goal structures?
STUDENTS’ GOALS
◦ Teacher Support and Order and
Organization predicted personal mastery
goals
◦ Task Focus and Innovation predicted
personal performance approach goals
◦ Competition and Rule Strictness
predicted personal performance
avoidance goals
What classroom climate
factors predict student goal
structures?
PERCEIVED TEACHERS’ GOALS
◦ Affiliation,Teacher Support, Rule Clarity,
and Innovation predicted perceived
teacher mastery goals
◦ Involvement,Teacher support,Task Focus,
Competition, Order and Organization, and
Rule Clarity predicted perceived teacher
performance approach goals.
◦ Competition and Rule Strictness predicted
perceived teacher performance-avoidance
goals
What classroom climate
factors predict student goal
structures?
CLASSROOM GOALS
 Affiliation was the only significant
predictor for classroom mastery
goal structures
 Affiliation and Competition
predicted classroom performance
approach goals
 Competition and Rule Strictness
predicted classroom avoidance goals
Do teachers and students
perceive the classroom climate
similarly?

Teachers generally viewed their
classroom climates more positively

Teachers and students differed on
the classroom climate aspects of
◦ Teacher support
◦ Task focus
◦ Innovation
What are teachers’ perceptions
of their classroom and school
goal structures?

Teachers more frequently reported a
school structured performanceapproach and mastery goals than
classroom structured goals, but no
statistical difference.
Classroom Observations
CLIMATE





Classroom climates were conducive to high
student involvement and had supportive
teachers
Students interacted positively with each other
Classroom activities and tasks were low in
innovation
Clear rules and strict in enforcing these rules
No significant differences between the
teachers, classes or schools
Classroom Observations
GOAL STRUCTURES
Teachers stayed on task and checked
to see if students understood
 Few incidences where students
worked in collaborative groups
 No significant differences between
the teachers, classes and schools

Discussion
Classroom climate similar in
teacher support and competition
 Grade differences: form 3 high on:
 Involvement, task focus &
competition
 School/Gender differences: Malesmore performance approach goals
 Difference between student and
teacher perceptions on climate

Discussion
Teachers and observers revealed
positive classroom environments
that are high on task focus and high
performance-approach goal
structures at the personal, classroom
and school levels.
 Cross-cultural differences: contrary
to past research, there was high
affiliation & performance goals
 Importance of cross-cultural studies
Limitations
Teacher sample size-small, not
representative of biology teachers in
Kenya
 Only 4 teachers involved in validity
check
 Reliabilities for the classroom
climate scales were relatively low
(could be due to difference in
meaning making of some of the
items-cultural difference?)

Conclusion


Goals: Mastery vs Performance
“Given that the definition of a mastery
goal structure centers on learning,
understanding and improvement, it is
likely that culturally valued activities
that reflect this goal are necessary, if
not sufficient, for the creation of a
meaningful goal structure which, in
this study, involves performance
approach goals” p. 78