K-12 STEM Education

Vol. 3, No. 2, Apr-Jun 2017, pp.205-216

Developing 21st Century Skills through

a Constructivist-Constructionist Learning Environment
1
Lay Ah-Nam, 2Kamisah Osman
Faculty of Education, The National University of Malaysia
Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia
1
[email protected], [email protected]

Abstract

Science and technology innovation and 21st century skills are increasingly important in the
st
21 century workplace. The purpose of this study is to propose an instructional strategy that develop
constructivist-constructionist learning environment that simultaneously develop chemistry knowledge
and 21st century skills. Based on constructivist and constructionist learning theories, we identified
three central guiding principles for this study: (1) engage students in discovery and problem solving
task through teamwork, (2) provide opportunities for communicating ideas, and (3) involve students
in the process of design. An intervention module, Malaysian Kimia (chemistry) Digital Game known as
MyKimDG, was developed as a mechanism for creating the learning environment. In this study,
students were required to work collaboratively to design educational media that help their peers who
face difficulty in learning particular concept. They were guided to go through the IDPCR (Inquiry,
Discover, Produce, Communicate and Review) phases. It is hypothesized that MyKimDG can create
learning environment that allows students to deepen subject content knowledge and practice various
21st century skills in real situation. This study employed quasi-experimental study with non-equivalent
control group pretest-posttest control group design. Results suggest that this approach is able to
improve the acquisition of chemistry knowledge and high productivity skill.

Keywords 21st century skills, constructionism, constructivism, IDPCR model, learning

through designing

Introduction
As science and technology (S&T) innovations are increasingly important in the global
economy market of the 21st century, Malaysia needs to produce students who are capable of
generating S&T innovation to contribute to the well-being of mankind as well as to trigger
the country’s economic growth. To become S&T innovators, students must be STEM
(Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) literate. STEM literate students will be
capable of identifying, applying, and integrating STEM concepts to understand complex
problems and generate innovation to solve the problems (Chew, Noraini, Leong & Mohd
Fadzil, 2013). Thus, STEM literate students must have mastered the knowledge of science.
Competent STEM literate students also need to become proficient in various new skills that
are known as “21st century skills”. For instance, innovation and problem solving in today’s
world is driven by the formation of networks with multiple parties including experts and
researchers with related interests as well as consumers and customers. 21st century skills
enable one to communicate and collaborate effectively with various parties.
Nevertheless, Malaysian students’ achievement in science and 21st century skills are
not satisfactory. For instance, in the Programme for International Student Assessment
(PISA) 2012 (OECD, 2014b) results, Malaysian students’ achievement in science and
mathematics ranked in the bottom third of participating countries. In addition, Trends in the
International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2011 (IEA, 2012) revealed that up to
38 percent of Malaysian students did not meet the minimum benchmarks in science. In
Lay Ah-Nam, Kamisah Osman

terms of 21st century skills, studies have reported that Malaysian students’ development of
21st century skills is not encouraging across all levels of education from the secondary to the
undergraduate level. For example, the results of PISA 2012 assessment on creative
problem-solving (OECD, 2014a) showed that the achievement of 15-year-old students in
tackling real-life problems is ranked 39th out of 44 participating countries. Additionally,
Tengku Faekah (2005) and Hew and Leong (2011) reported that the level of Form Four and
Pre-University students’ information and communications technology (ICT) skills is low.
Moreover, Hazilah, Johari, Zaihosnita, Saidah and Hamizah (2013) found that the
communication and problem solving skills for undergraduate students is at the moderate
level.
The above problems and situations have raised concerns about the lack of S&T
human capital for the nation’s economic growth by 2020. Hence, science education in
Malaysia should emphasize simultaneously acquiring science knowledge and 21st century
skills. Based on constructivist and constructionist theories of learning, the Malaysian Kimia
(chemistry) Digital Game module (MyKimDG) has been developed as a mechanism for
accomplishing the desired goals. The primary focus of MyKimDG is on creating learning
environments that promote the acquisition of science knowledge and 21st century skills. In
MyKimDG, students were guided to go through the IDPCR (Inquiry, Discover, Produce,
Communicate and Review) phases. The purpose of this paper is to describe the conceptual
framework of the MyKimDG module and its impact on students’ scientific knowledge and 21st
century skills.

Conceptual Framework of MyKimDG

Principles derived from learning theories play an important role in the development
of MyKimDG. Two important theories in learning and education that have been incorporated
into the MyKimDG development are constructivism and constructionism. The former focuses
on the role of learners as builders of meanings and ideas while the latter added that the
building of new ideas occur best through constructing real-world artefacts.
According to the constructivist theory of learning, the individual learner actively
constructs new knowledge pursuant to his/her existing knowledge. The learner does not
receive knowledge passively, but he/she interprets the knowledge received and then
modifies the knowledge in a form acceptable to him/her. In addition, the process of
knowledge construction can be improved through social interaction and discovery.
Interaction between learner and teacher or more skilful peers will provide scaffolding to the
learner within what Vygotsky (1978) referred to as the Zone of Proximal Development to
construct new knowledge. However, no interaction would be beneficial if the new
information is presented to learners traditionally. Instead, learners should be given the
opportunity to explore or discover new knowledge. Bruner (1966) believed that learning and
problem solving emerged out of exploration of new knowledge.
In addition to the constructivist theory, the constructionist theory of learning asserts
that the construction of new knowledge happens felicitously in a context where learners are
consciously involved in the production of sharable external artefacts (Papert, 1991). This
theory goes beyond the idea of learning-by-doing (Papert, 1999b). Indeed, this theory
emphasizes the role of design (Kafai & Resnick, 1996) and digital technologies (Papert,
1999a) in facilitating the knowledge construction. Constructionism challenges the learners to
design artefacts by applying the knowledge being learned. In this process, computers or
digital technologies can be used as a building material. According to Papert and Franz
(1988), a computer can be a “material to be messed about with” to encourage exploration.
Besides, the introduction of computers in artefact design projects enables the addition of
unique and powerful aspects to the learning process. For instance, computers can serve as a
convivial tool (Falbel, 1991) and the willingness of learners to learn will increase (Papert,

206 K-12 STEM Education

 Developing 21st Century Skills through
a Constructivist-Constructionist Learning Environment

1991). Papert (1980) has stated that “The computer is the Proteus of machines. Its essence
is its universality, its power to simulate. Because it can take on a thousand forms and can
serve a thousand functions, it can appeal to a thousand tastes”. However, he stressed that
the main focus is not on the computer but on the minds of learners (Papert, 1980).
In summary, the constructivist and constructionist learning theories assert the
following ideas:
 Knowledge reconstruction: Learner constructs new understanding pursuant to
his/her existing knowledge.
 Collaboration: Peer collaboration may trigger cognitive conflict and this may result
in reconstruction of ideas.
 Exploration: Understanding is lifted when learners discover new knowledge
themselves.
 Learning through designing: Learning can be enhanced if learners are involved in
designing artefacts from their own ideas.
 Technological literacy: Learners use technology efficiently and effectively to
achieve specific goals.
Based on the constructivist and constructionist learning theories, the authors
identified three central guiding principles for this study:
1. Engage students in discovery and problem solving tasks through teamwork.
Students should be allowed to work together to learn and discover idea or concepts.
Therefore, it is essential to engage students in collaborative discovery task. Taking part in
these collaborative task deepen students’ understanding as they discover or construct new
understanding for themselves. Group members help each other and act as co-constructors
of knowledge. This approach also assists students in acquiring problem-solving skills,
scientific literacy, and stimulating their own thinking. Furthermore, it improves students’ 21st
century skills such as collaboration, communication and interpersonal skills because students
are able to practice in real world contexts.
2. Provide opportunities for communicating ideas.
Students should have opportunities to engage in discussion, and to share and exchange
ideas in groups. Design justification is one way to engage students in discussion or
communicating ideas. When engaging in design justification, students listen to input from
peers and defend their ideas. Peer input may trigger cognitive conflict and sharpen students’
awareness of their alternative ideas when they share their ideas from their own perspective.
Such scaffolding will inevitably result in self-assessing and restructuring of existing ideas,
and hence towards deeper levels of understanding. Justification of design is parallel to the
strategy of argumentation in science education (Bryan, Moore, Johnson, & Roehrig, 2016).
Collaborative and argument-driven classrooms were reported to be more successful than
traditional classrooms for improving academic achievement (Capar & Tarim, 2015;
Demircioglu & Ucar, 2015).
3. Involve students in the process of design.
Problem solving requires students to integrate knowledge across disciplines, especially
engineering and technology (Lee & Kamisah, 2015). Therefore, it is important to engage
students in design projects as design projects are often interdisciplinary, bringing together
knowledge from STEM subjects as well as other disciplines (Resnick, 2003). Design projects
allow students to apply the science and mathematics to the engineering design (Bryan et al.,
2016). The applications of science knowledge and practices to engineering have contributed
to the technologies and the systems that support them that serve people today (National
Research Council, 2012). ITEA (2000) defines technology as “the innovation, change, or
modification of the natural environment in order to satisfy perceived human wants and

Vol. 3, No. 2, Apr-Jun 2017 207

Lay Ah-Nam, Kamisah Osman

needs”. Clearly, technology means innovations or products that solve problems and extend
human capabilities. However, the focus is not on the technology or product alone, but also
on the process of design. The ultimate aim is promoting technological literacy. Students
must be technologically literate to live, learn, and work successfully in today’s Digital Age.
To establish a learning environment based on the three central constructivist-
constructionist guiding principles, activities in MyKimDG were designed so that students
engage in discovery activities through teamwork. In addition, they are required to work
collaboratively to design educational media that help their peers who face difficulty in
learning particular science concepts. In this process, the designers (or students) create
educational media based on their understanding. The products may be used for discussion -
they share their products and design process with others, and reflect on their experiences.
Eventually, they refine their products based on group consensus. Contemporary
technologies such as ICT can be leveraged to communicate, collaborate, solve problems,
accomplish tasks and as construction material.
The discovery and educational media design activities in MyKimDG have been
formulated based on the BSCS 5E Instructional Model (Bybee et al., 2006) and Creative
Design Spiral (Rusk, Resnick, & Cooke, 2009). To increase the effectiveness of MyKimDG,
the phases of the BSCS 5E Instructional Model and Creative Design Spiral have been
modified and standardized. The resultant phases are Inquiry, Discover, Produce,
Communicate and Review (IDPCR). The acronym IDPCR also aims to help students
remember the five important domains of 21st century skills, i.e. Inventive thinking, Digital-
age literacy, high Productivity, effective Communication and spiritual values (nilai
keRohanian) identified by Kamisah and Neelavany (2010). Table 1 shows the IDPCR phases,
and related phases of the BSCS 5E Instructional Model and Creative Design Spiral. It is
important to point out that the IDPCR phases do not always follow in order. For instance, at
any phase, students can communicate information or findings to people from many different
backgrounds and specialties to gain input from them. They are also encouraged to
communicate in groups and report back with their findings at any phase. In Table 2, the
authors present the instructional activities outline of MyKimDG.

Table 1. IDPCR phases and related phases of the BSCS 5E Instructional Model
and Creative Design Spiral

IDPCR BSCS 5E Instructional Model Creative Design

Spiral
Inquiry Engage Imagine
Discover Explore Experiment
Produce Elaborate Create
Communicate Explain Share
Review Evaluate Reflect

208 K-12 STEM Education

 Developing 21st Century Skills through
a Constructivist-Constructionist Learning Environment

Table 2. Outline of instructional activities in MyKimDG

IDPCR Purpose Activity

Phase
Inquiry 1. Arouse students’ 1. Teacher shows discrepant events.
interest 2. Students make observations and explain
2. Access students’ prior the phenomena at the sub-microscopic
knowledge and symbolic levels.
3. Elicit students’ ideas 3. Students discuss in groups and compare
and misconceptions their ideas with their peers.
4. Clarify and exchange
current conceptions
Discover 1. Expose to conflicting 1. Students perform hands-on and minds-on
situations activities in groups.
2. Modify current 2. Students are encouraged to engage in
conceptions and discussions and information seeking.
develop new 3. Students are asked to communicate in
conceptions groups and report back with their
3. Provide opportunities findings.
for students to 4. Students generate an explanation of the
demonstrate their phenomenon.
conceptual 5. Students also listen to the teacher's
understanding, and explanations. Teacher’s input may guide
skills them towards a deeper level of
understanding. The key concepts involved
may be described with computer
animation.
6. Students compare their ideas with the
teacher's explanations.
7. Students practise the skills needed in an
experiment or activity.
Produce 1. Challenge and deepen Students apply their understanding of the
students’ conceptual concept by conducting additional activities:
understanding and 1. Students play an existing game.
skills 2. Students are asked to differentiate
2. Provide additional between a good game and a bad game.
time and experiences 3. Students are asked to improve the game
that contribute to the they played to make it more educational
generation of new and entertaining based on IDPCR phases:
understanding
Inquiry: Students brainstorm the design
of the game in groups and select a
favourite design from their brainstorming
session and sketch their chosen design.
Discover: Students create their designs
using PowerPoint.
Produce: Students are encouraged to
test frequently and think critically about
their designs, and rebuild as needed.
Communicate: Students share their
designs and digital games and get input
from other groups.

Vol. 3, No. 2, Apr-Jun 2017 209

Lay Ah-Nam, Kamisah Osman

Review: Students describe the key

strengths and weaknesses of their
designs and digital games. Students
create their own digital game in groups
that incorporates the best aspects of all
the designs.
Communicate 1. Provide opportunities 1. Students communicate their ideas,
for students to share process and new findings.
their new 2. Students engage in argument from
understanding and evidence.
skills 3. Students also listen to input from peers
2. Provide opportunities and defend their ideas. Peer’s input may
for students to guide them towards a deeper level of
exchange their new understanding.
understanding
Review 1. Students assess their 1. Students reflect upon the extent to which
understanding, skills their understanding, abilities and
and competencies. competencies have changed.
2. Teachers evaluate 2. Teacher conducts tests to determine the
student progress level of understanding of each student.
toward achieving the
learning outcomes.

Objectives
The authors developed the MyKimDG and carried out the study to identify the
effectiveness of MyKimDG on students’ achievement in chemistry and 21st century skills. It is
hypothesised that the MyKimDG may help deepen students’ conceptual understanding in
chemistry. At the same time, it provides students with opportunities to develop their 21st
century skills.

Methodology
Research design
The study is quasi-experimental with a non-equivalent control group pretest-posttest
design. There were two intervention groups: the treatment group and the control group.
Subjects in the treatment group learned the Salt topic using the MyKimDG developed by the
authors. On the other hand, the control group subjects were instructed in conventional
methods using learning materials (i.e. text book and practical book) mandated by the
national curriculum for Chemistry.
Subjects of study
A total of 138 (56 males and 82 females) Form Four students (16 years old) from
four secondary schools in one of the districts in Malaysia were involved in the study. Two
schools were randomly selected as the treatment group and another two schools were
assigned as the control group. The students then completed the pre-test to ensure that
students from the both groups were homogenous in terms of existing knowledge in the Salt
topic and 21st century skills. Independent-samples t-test results showed that both groups
had no significant difference in prior knowledge in the Salt topic and 21st century skills.

210 K-12 STEM Education

 Developing 21st Century Skills through
a Constructivist-Constructionist Learning Environment

Instruments
Achievement test
The achievement tests were administered in the form of a pre-test and post-test
before and after the intervention. Items in the pre-test and the post-test were similar in
terms of the level of Bloom’s taxonomy and the concepts tested. The pre-test was used to
identify students’ existing knowledge before interventions. The post-test scores were used to
compare the effectiveness of interventions (i.e. conventional method and MyKimDG) in
increasing student achievement in the topic of Salt.
M-21CSI questionnaire
This questionnaire is a Likert scale questionnaire developed by Tuan Mastura,
Kamisah and Nurazidawati (2012). There are five domains of 21st century skills involved:
digital age literacy, inventive thinking, effective communication, high productivity, and
spiritual values. The Cronbach’s alpha of each of the domains ranged from 0.80 to 0.93. The
overall Cronbach’s alpha of the M-21CSI was 0.97. The questionnaire was given to the
subjects before and after the interventions. The pre-test was used to measure students’
existing 21st century skills level before interventions. The pre-test and post-test scores were
used to evaluate the impact of the interventions in increasing students’ 21st century skills
level.

Results and Findings

Achievement test
Data screening was carried out prior to statistical procedures. No missing data or
outlier were found in the control group. On the other hand, two samples of the treatment
group in the original sample had missing data on either pre or post achievement test. Five
outliers were detected on pre-test, post-test or both among the sample in the treatment
group. After deletion of cases with missing data and outliers, the numbers of samples in the
treatment group were reduced to 72. Assumption regarding the normality of sampling was
met for both pre and post-test scores of control and treatment group.
An independent-samples t-tests was conducted to evaluate the impact of the
interventions on students’ scores in the achievement test. Table 3 shows the descriptive
statistics and results of the independent-samples t-test for achievement post-test. The
results showed that there was a statistically significant difference in post-test scores for the
treatment (M = 37.15, SD = 12.70) and the control groups (M = 19.29, SD = 10.99); t(129)
= -8.50, p < 0.001. The magnitude of the differences in the means (mean difference =
17.86, 95% Cl: 13.70 to 22.01) was large (eta squared = 0.36). Descriptive statistics
showed that students who learned the Salt topic with the MyKimDG module were achieving
higher results compared with the control groups who learned the same topic using the
conventional method. Hence, the MyKimDG developed in the study was proven to have
ability to help students produce better content achievement in the Salt topic.
Table 3. Descriptive statistics and results of independent-samples t-test
for achievement post-test
Group N M SD t Sig.(2-tailed)
Control 59 19.29 10.99 -8.50 0.000
Treatment 72 37.15 12.70
α = 0.05

Vol. 3, No. 2, Apr-Jun 2017 211

Lay Ah-Nam, Kamisah Osman

21st century skills

A doubly-multivariate analysis of variance was performed to investigate the group
differences in 21st century skills at two time points (pre and post interventions). No data
were missing. Preliminary assumption testing for normality, univariate and multivariate
outliers, homogeneity of variance-covariance matrices, linearity and multicollinearity showed
that no violations were found. Results (Table 4) showed that the interaction between group
and time is statistically significant for high productivity [F(1, 136) = 5.375, p = 0.022; partial
eta squared = 0.038]. Figure 1 shows the changes of high productivity scores across time
point by intervention groups.
Table 4. Univariate test for each domain of 21st century skills
Effect Domains SS df MS F Sig. Partial η2
Time*Group Digital age 0.192 1 0.192 2.497 0.116 0.018
literacy
Inventive thinking 0.034 1 0.034 0.342 0.560 0.003
Effective 0.258 1 0.258 2.246 0.136 0.016
communication
High productivity 0.586 1 0.586 5.375 0.022 0.038
Spiritual value 0.040 1 0.040 0.178 0.674 0.001
α = 0.05

Figure 1. High productivity scores across time point by intervention group

As shown in Table 5, further analyses of the interaction between group and time for
high productivity scores revealed that there was no significant differences between groups
at pre-test [t(136) = 0.782, p = 0.436], but there was a significant differences between
groups at post-test [t(136) = -2.266, p = 0.025]. An inspection of the post-test mean scores
indicated that treatment group reported slightly higher levels of high productivity (M = 3.77,
SD = 0.36) than control group (M = 3.63, SD = 0.36). The magnitude of the differences in
the means (mean difference = 0.14, 95% Cl: 0.02 to 0.26) was small (eta squared = 0.04).
Further analyses as presented in Table 6 also showed that the high productivity scores
improved significantly between pre-test and post-test for treatment group, t(136) = -3.949,
p < 0.001. These findings showed that students who used the MyKimDG were achieving
higher in high productivity skills compared with the control groups who were taught by
conventional methods. Hence, the MyKimDG was shown by support of the hypothesis to
have the ability to increase students’ high productivity skills.

212 K-12 STEM Education

 Developing 21st Century Skills through
a Constructivist-Constructionist Learning Environment

Table 5. Descriptive statistics and results of independent-samples t-test

for high productivity

Time Group N M SD t Sig. (2-tailed)

Pre Control 59 3.60 0.38 0.782 0.436
Treatment 79 3.55 0.33
Post Control 59 3.63 0.36 -2.266 0.025
Treatment 79 3.77 0.36
α = 0.05

Table 6. Descriptive statistics and results of paired-samples t-test for high productivity

Group Test N M SD t Sig. (2-tailed)

Control Pre 59 3.60 0.38 -0.680 0.499
Post 59 3.63 0.36
Treatment Pre 79 3.55 0.33 -3.949 0.000
Post 79 3.77 0.36
α = 0.05

Discussion
Our findings suggested that learning through MyKimDG was more effective than the
conventional method at supporting a higher achievement in the salt topic as well as the 21st
century skills level. In particular, it is shown that MyKimDG may help students develop one
of the domains of 21st century skills, namely, high productivity skill. The high productivity
skill in this study consists of three dimensions: (i) prioritize, plan, and manage for results,
(ii) effective use of real-world tools, and (iii) ability to produce relevant and high-quality
products.
Generally, the practice in Malaysian science classrooms is very much taught by
conventional methods that use learning materials mandated by the Ministry of Education
(i.e. text book and practical book). The conventional methods employed by science teachers
generally focus on knowing content in the learning materials for summative assessment
purposes (Ministry of Education, 2013). In some science classrooms, teachers’ practices do
not reflect the real constructivist learning approach required by the Malaysian Science
Curriculum (Sim & Mohammad Yusof, 2015; Tan & Mohammad Yusof, 2014). In addition,
there was little evidence of discussion. Teachers tend to think that only practical activity
promotes understanding and forget that understanding can be supported through discussion
(Newton, 2005). Discussion which involves idea exchange, reasoning and argument from
evidence may sharpen students’ awareness of their alternative ideas to promote deep
understanding. In this partially student-centred approach, direct teaching and rote learning
were generally still dominant. As a result, students had difficulties understanding science
concepts meaningfully.
Contrary to the conventional method, MyKimDG created a learning environment that
allows students to work together to learn and discover ideas or concepts. Activities in
MyKimDG were designed to engage students in self-assessing their ideas, communicating
their ideas and making decisions based on the group’s consensus. They were also engaged
in design or product justification. In these processes, students listened to input from peers
and defended their ideas. Peer input might have triggered cognitive conflict and resulted in
reconstruction of existing ideas. Such support or mental scaffolding can deepen students’
understanding. Furthermore, they were given opportunities to engage in collaborative digital
games modifying and designing projects. They were required to carefully plan, utilize time
and 21st century tools and resources toward the goal of creating digital games to help their

Vol. 3, No. 2, Apr-Jun 2017 213

Lay Ah-Nam, Kamisah Osman

peers who face difficulty in learning a particular chemical concept. At the end of the project,
they were also asked to improve and produce higher quality games that incorporate the best
aspects of other groups’ designs. The findings showed that this approach was able to
increase students’ high productivity skill because students were able to immerse themselves
in the real-world practice.
Conclusion
MyKimDG has been developed to establish constructivist-constructionist learning
environments that simultaneously put conceptual understanding and 21st century skills
development in the center of learning. The implementation of MyKimDG immersed students
in collaborative discovery and problem solving. Students were guided through the IDPCR
phases to explore subject content knowledge and design educational media related to
science concepts using ICT. They applied the knowledge they had learned to create
educational media in groups. The findings showed that the MyKimDG developed in the study
was proven to have the ability to increase students’ achievement in chemistry and their high
productivity skills. In conclusion, the MyKimDG can create a learning environment that
allows students to deepen subject content knowledge and practice various 21st century skills
in real situations, hence produce students who have a strong foundation of science
knowledge and design process, as well as able to work and communicate effectively in
groups to generate innovations.

Lay Ah-Nam is a PhD candidate at the Faculty of Education,

The National University of Malaysia (UKM). After receiving his
B.Sc.Ed. from UKM in 2000, he taught chemistry at Keningau
Technical Secondary School, Sabah. He later obtained M.Ed. in
Chemistry Education from Universiti Teknologi Malaysia in 2008.
Currently, he is a lecturer attached at Institute of Teacher
Education, Sultan Abdul Halim Campus in Sungai Petani, Kedah,
Malaysia. His research interests include pedagogical approaches
in STEM education and 21st century skills.

Dr. Kamisah Osman, is a Professor from UKM in Bangi in the

Department of Teaching and Learning Innovation, Faculty of Education.
Dr. Kamisah Osman earned her master’s and Ph.D. studies at the
University of Manchester, United Kingdom. She was the executive
editor of Asian Journal of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education
(2013–2014), an active editorial board member of the Eurasian Journal
of Science and Mathematics Education, International Journal of
Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, Science Education
Review, Malaysian Journal of Education, Malaysian Action Research
Journal, AKADEMIKA Journal of Southeast Asia Social Sciences and
Humanities and more recently Educational Process: International
Journal. Her expertise is STEM education specializing in the assessment
of problem-solving and higher order thinking as well as innovative
pedagogical approaches in STEM learning.

214 K-12 STEM Education

 Developing 21st Century Skills through
a Constructivist-Constructionist Learning Environment

References
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Bryan, L. A., Moore, T. J., Johnson, C. C., & Roehrig, G. H. (2016). Integrated STEM
education. In C. C. Johnson, E. E. Peters-Burton, & T. J. Moore (Eds.), STEM road
map: A framework for integrated STEM education (pp. 23–37). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J., Westbrook, A., &
Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness.
Colorado Springs, CO: Biological Sciences Curriculum Studies.
Capar, G., & Tarim, K. (2015). Efficacy of the cooperative learning method on mathematics
achievement and attitude: A meta-analysis research. Educational Science: Theory &
Practice, 15 (2), 553–559.
Chew, C. M., Noraini Idris, Leong, K. E., & Mohd Fadzil Daud. (2013). Secondary school
assessment practices in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)
related subjects. Journal of Mathematics Education, 6 (2), 58–69.
Demircioglu, T., & Ucar, S. (2015). Investigating the effect of argument-driven inquiry in
laboratory instruction. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15 (1), 267–283.
Falbel, A. (1991). The computer as a convivial tool. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.),
Constructionism (pp. 29–37). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Hazilah Mohd Amin, Johari Jaafar, Zaihosnita Hood, Saidah Saad, & Hamizah Mohd Amin.
(2013). Kemahiran insaniah pelajar prasiswazah: Analisis perbezaan jantina. Jurnal
Teknologi (Social Sciences), 61 (1), 19–25.
Hew, T. S., & Leong, L. Y. (2011). An empirical analysis of Malaysian pre-university students’
ICT competency gender differences. International Journal of Network and Mobile
Technologies, 2 (1), 15–29.
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). (2012).
TIMSS 2011 international results in science. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS
International Study Center.
ITEA. (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology.
Reston, VA: International Technology Education Association.
Kafai, Y. B., & Resnick, M. (1996). Introduction. In Y. Kafai & M. Resnick (Eds.),
Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world (pp.
1–8). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Kamisah Osman, & Neelavany Marimuthu. (2010). Setting new learning targets for the 21st
century science education in Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2,
3737–3741.
Lee, C. H., & Kamisah Osman. (2015). An interdisciplinary approach for Biology, Technology,
Engineering and Mathematics (BTEM) to enhance 21st century skills in Malaysia. K-
12 STEM Education, 1 (3), 137–147.
Ministry of Education. (2013). Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025.
Putrajaya: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices,
crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press.

Vol. 3, No. 2, Apr-Jun 2017 215

Lay Ah-Nam, Kamisah Osman

Newton, L. D. (2005). Pupil’s learning in science. In L. D. Newton (Ed.), Meeting the

standards in secondary science: A guide to the ITT NC (pp. 122–142). Abingdon,
Oxfordshire: Routledge.
OECD. (2014a). PISA 2012 results: Creative problem solving: Students’ skills in tackling real-
life problems (Volume V). PISA, OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2014b). PISA 2012 results: What students know and can do – Student performance
in mathematics, reading and science (Volume I, Revised edition, February 2014).
PISA, OECD Publishing.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorm: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic
Books.
Papert, S. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism
(pp. 1–28). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Papert, S. (1999a). Eight big ideas behind the constructionist learning lab. Retrieved from
http://stager.org/articles/8bigideas.pdf
Papert, S. (1999b). Introduction: What is Logo? Who needs it? In C. Fonseca, G. Kozberg,
M. Tempel, S. Soprunov, E. Yakovleva, H. Reggini, … D. Cavallo (Eds.), Logo
philosophy and implementation (pp. IV–XVI). Canada: Logo Computer System Inc.
Papert, S., & Franz, G. (1988). Computer as material: Messing about with time. Teachers
College Record, 89 (3), 408–417.
Resnick, M. (2003). The clubhouse learning approach: Learning by designing. Retrieved from
http://web.media.mit.edu/~mres/clubhouse/handouts/design-v6.pdf
Rusk, N., Resnick, M., & Cooke, S. (2009). Origins and guiding principles of the Computer
Clubhouse. In Y. B. Kafai, K. A. Peppler, & R. N. Chapman (Eds.), The Computer
Clubhouse: Constructionism and creativity in youth communities (pp. 17–25). New
York, NY: Teachers College.
Sim, W. S. L., & Mohammad Yusof Arshad. (2015). Inquiry practices in Malaysian secondary
classroom and model of inquiry teaching based on verbal interaction. Malaysian
Journal of Learning and Instruction, 12, 151–175.
Tan, Y. P., & Mohammad Yusof Arshad. (2014). Teacher and student questions: A case
study in Malaysian secondary school problem-based learning. Asian Social Science,
10 (4), 174–182.
Tengku Faekah Tengku Ariffin. (2005). Gender differences in computer attitudes and skills.
Jurnal Pendidikan, 30, 75–91.
Tuan Mastura Tuan Soh, Kamisah Osman, & Nurazidawati Mohamad Arsad. (2012). M-
21CSI: A validated 21st century skills instrument for secondary science students.
Asian Social Science, 8 (16), 38–44.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

216 K-12 STEM Education