Committing to Social Responsibility: A Grounded Theory of a Conducive Learning Environment

• Authors: Peter S. Bathan Jr.

Abstracts

EN

This qualitative study examined the roles and duties of the administrators, teachers, stakeholders, and students in a conducive learning environment and how to make the learning environment conducive to the 21st century learners. Administrators, teachers, stakeholders, and learners were the participants of this study for the year 2018. Since the constructivist grounded theory method was used, data were gathered through in-depth interviews and observations. After going through initial coding, focused coding and comparative analysis, three categories emerged on what makes the environment conducive for learning: teaching efficiently, learning collaboratively, and performing responsibilities. Finally, the core category that emerged was committing to corporate social responsibility.

Keywords

EN

corporate social responsibility; conducive learning environment; grounded theory; Philippines

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
• Journal: The New Educational Review
• Year: 2021
• Volume: 65
• Pages: 178-189

Dates

published

2021

Contributors

author

Peter S. Bathan Jr.

• Buug National High School

References

• Acero, V., Javier, E., & Castro, H. (2015). Principles of teaching I. Manila, Philippines: Rex Publishing
• Alonzo, A. (2007). Creating and sustaining environments to support teaching and learning. Retrieved from www.baltimorecityschools.org/safetyplan on July 19,2018.
• Armin, Luistro. (2015). Policy guidelines on classroom assessment for the K to 12 basic education program. DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2015.
• Charmaz, K. (2006). Grounded theory a practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage Publication: London
• Chopra, A. & Marriya, S. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and education in India. Issues and Ideas in Education: Vol. 1,13-22.
• Crowther, D. & Aras, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility. Retrieved from B o okboon.com
• Dunn, R. & Dunn K. (2000). Teaching students through their individual learning styles. Reston, VA:Reston
• Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. California, San Francisco: Sociology Press
• Mantle, S. (2001). The seven learning styles. Retrieved from www.lessontutor.com/sm1.html on July 19,2018
• Musindo, A. (2013). Situational analysis on conducive learning environment for children withdrawn and prevented from child labor. Kenya: International Labor Organization
• Nyoni, T. & Mufanechiya, T. (2012). Student teachers’ conception and perception of a conducive learning environment: A case of Great Zimbabwe University students on teaching practice. Greener Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 2,075-082.
• Oblinger, D. (2006). Learning spaces. Retrieved from www.educause.edu/learningspaces on July 19, 2018.
• Obsorne, M. (2013). Modern learning environments. Core education white papers:New Zealand
• Ozerem, A. & Akkoyunlo, B. (2015). Learning environments designed according to learning styles and its effects on mathematics achievements. Eurasian Journal of Education, 61-80.
• Rionda, Z. (2002). What is corporate social responsibility? Catalyst Consortium. USAID, Washington.
• Singh, A. (2014). Conducive classroom environment in schools. International Journal of Science and Research, 2319-7064.
• Warger, T., & Dobbin, E. (2009). Learning environments: Where space, technology, and culture converge. Educause Learning Initiative.
• Zakaria, S., & Daud, S.N. (2009). Creating and maintaining a conducive learning at private higher learning institutions. Retrieved from www.researchgate.net/publication on July 19, 2018.
• Zhou, M. & Brown, D. (2015). Educational learning theories. Retrieved from http://oer.galileo.usg.edu/education-textbook

Identifiers

DOI

10.15804/tner.21.65.3.14

Biblioteka Nauki

1964302