[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-593713-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-593713-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","australian-journal-of-adult-learning-volume-56-issue-3-contemporary-constructivist-practices-in-higher-education-settings-and-academic-motivational-factors","Australian Journal of Adult Learning - Volume 56 - Issue 3 - Contemporary Constructivist Practices in Higher Education Settings and Academic Motivational Factors","","Assessing relationships among college students’ pre-entry factors, self-efficacy, and motivation for learning, this study examines perceived constructivist learning within traditional lecture-based courses and seminars. The sample includes 411 undergraduate third-year students who completed validated scales: CLHES across constructive activity, teacher-student interaction, and social activity, alongside Academic Motivation Scale-College and the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. Regression results show positive correlations for constructive activity and teacher-student interaction, with teacher-student interaction strongly enhancing intrinsic motivation, which then mainly supports academic self-efficacy. Multivariate analysis indicates seminar environments are perceived as more constructivist than lecture-based settings.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/australian-journal-of-adult-learning-volume-56-issue-3-contemporary-constructivist-practices-in-higher-education-settings-and-academic-motivational-factors/593713/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/australian-journal-of-adult-learning-volume-56-issue-3-contemporary-constructivist-practices-in-higher-education-settings-and-academic-motivational-factors/593713.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"4398046744996","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-06","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",6,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What was the study’s main aim?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To assess relationships between students’ pre-entry factors, self-efficacy, motivation for learning, and perceived constructivist learning in lecture-based courses versus seminars.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Which factors showed positive correlations in regression results?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Constructive activity and teacher-student interaction were positively correlated.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How did seminar and lecture environments differ in students’ perceptions?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Students perceived seminar learning environments as more constructivist compared with lecture-based course environments.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},593713,1792162035,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":11,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":133,"file_id":134,"file_url":135,"file_type":136,"file_size":137,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":138,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},4398046744996,"Australian Journal of Adult Learning Volume 56, Number 3, November 2016  \nContemporary constructivist practices in higher education settings and academic motivational factors  \nDorit Alt  \nKinneret College on the Sea of Galilee, Israel  \nThis study was aimed at assessing the relationships between college students’pre-entry factors, self-efficacy and motivation for learning, and the perceived constructivist learning in traditional lecture-based courses and seminars (SM). The study included 411 undergraduate third-year college students. Several scales were administered to the participants: The Constructivist Learning in Higher Education Settings scale (CLHES) aimed at measuring students’perceptions of occurrences of contemporary constructivist practices in learning environments, along three dimensions: constructive activity, teacherstudent interaction and social activity; the Academic Motivation Scale-College (CEGEP); and the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Regression analysis main results showed that the constructive activity and teacher-student interaction factors were positively correlated. The teacher-student interaction variable was highly effective in enhancing intrinsic motivation for learning which in turn, contributed primarily to academic self-efficacy. The motivational factors were not solely affected by the learning environment perception but were also informed, to some extent, by several pre-entry factors.  \nContemporary constructivist practices in higher education settings and academic motivational factors 375  \nMultivariate analysis of covariance results have corroborated the research hypothesis, indicating that students perceive seminar learning environments as more constructivist when compared with lecture-based course perceptions. Implications of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.  \nKeywords: constructivist learning; academic self-efficacy; academic motivation  \nIntroduction  \nIn the face of the growing Internet–based information, the fast development of technologies, social changes, globalization of education, and the pursuit of quality, it has become clear that students as adult learners must develop the ability to become lifelong learners by learning new skills and creating knowledge throughout their careers. Lifelong learning is defined as “all learning activity undertaken throughout life, with the aim of improving knowledge, skills and competence, within a personal, civic, social and/or employment-related perspective”(EU, 2001: 9) .  \nBeing a lifelong learner involves not simply knowing existing practices, but also having the skills and will to search for new knowledge  \nwhen needed, to move beyond existing routines, rethink key ideas, practices, and even values in order to change and adapt to changing circumstances. These types of renewal needs require developing updated instructional practices that could integrate knowledge with the personal transferable skills (Pellegrino & Hilton, 2012) . In the field of higher education, the creation of learning environments based on the constructivist pedagogy is suggested to engage learners in knowledge construction learning, carried out by cooperative learning processes in real-world contexts (Schwarz & de Groot, 2011) while enhancing students’ ability to regulate their learning (de Kock et al., 2004) . The constructivist learning is often described as ‘a holistic approach’(McGrath, 2007), aimed at educating for sustainable development, that is, offering learning experiences that are integrated into day-today personal and professional life. Compared to traditional instruction methods, in this authentic approach, educational efforts are purposely tailored to the goals and needs of the learner.  \n376 DoritAlt  \nDespite the many theoretical appeals of comparing between these contradictory views of the learning environment, few are the empirically based discussions that focus on affective (rather than cognitive) var","cbCainLDN4RXQo1C","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCainLDN4RXQo1C","pdf",614893,26,"English","# Introduction\n## Lifelong learning and constructivist pedagogy\n# Theoretical Framework\n## Contemporary Social-Constructivist Practices","[{\"question\":\"What was the study’s main aim?\",\"answer\":\"To assess relationships between students’ pre-entry factors, self-efficacy, motivation for learning, and perceived constructivist learning in lecture-based courses versus seminars.\"},{\"question\":\"Which factors showed positive correlations in regression results?\",\"answer\":\"Constructive activity and teacher-student interaction were positively correlated.\"},{\"question\":\"How did seminar and lecture environments differ in students’ perceptions?\",\"answer\":\"Students perceived seminar learning environments as more constructivist compared with lecture-based course environments.\"}]","Australian Journal of Adult Learning - Volume 56 - Issue 3 - Contemporary Constructivist Practices in Higher Education Settings and Academic Motivational Factors | PDF",1792077773,66]