Introduction

Educational psychology informs teachers’ perspectives by providing them with evidence- based theories, research findings, and strategies that can enhance their teaching practices. By understanding the principles of educational psychology, teachers can make informed decisions about instructional methods, classroom management techniques, and assessment strategies that are more likely to promote effective learning and development in their students [1]. Teachers’ perspectives influence educational psychology by providing valuable input and feedback to researchers and theorists. Through their experiences in the classroom, teachers can offer insights into the practical implications of educational psychology theories, highlighting what works well and identifying areas that may require further investigation. Their perspectives can contribute to the refinement and development of educational psychology as a field, making it more relevant and applicable to the real-world context of teaching and learning [2].

In program research and program reform, the theoretical basis for changing the general education program is always a “hot issue”. The transformation of the general education program is crucial to meet the demands of a rapidly changing job market and prepare students for the challenges of the 21^st century. It requires a multidisciplinary approach that incorporates innovative teaching strategies and technologies. The birth and development of constructivist theory is called a “revolution in current educational psychology” because it has had a tremendous impact on the theory and practice of teaching and education in many nations throughout the world, especially the reform of the general education program [3]. The theory emphasizes the importance of individual differences and the need to tailor teaching methods to meet the unique needs of each student, which has led to a more personalized approach to education. Additionally, it has encouraged the use of technology in the classroom as a means of enhancing learning and engagement. The constructivist program emphasizes the importance of nurturing pupils’ creativity, sense of teamwork, and problem-solving skills. This approach has proven effective in preparing students for the demands of the modern workforce, where collaboration and innovation are highly valued. Furthermore, it has been found to promote long-term retention of knowledge and a deeper understanding of concepts. This theory challenges traditional teaching methods by promoting active learning and student-centered approaches. It encourages teachers to facilitate learning rather than simply imparting knowledge to students. The attention of educators has been drawn to this since it conforms to contemporary standards.

According to Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, schooling should enable both men and women to innovate through creativity, invention, and discovery [4,5]. Piaget believed that education should not only focus on imparting knowledge but also on developing critical thinking skills and problem-solving abilities in individuals, which would allow them to become active and productive members of society. This approach to education would foster creativity and innovation, enabling individuals to make significant contributions to their communities. Yet, as learning is a self-directed, individual activity in which students seek their own experiences, constructivism knowledge is necessary for teaching and learning. Constructivism knowledge emphasizes the importance of active learning, where students are encouraged to explore and discover new concepts on their own. This approach allows for a deeper understanding of the material and helps students develop critical thinking skills. Two theories, notably Piaget’s cognitive constructivist theory of learning and Vygotsky’s theory of social construction, provided the foundation for this study. Piaget’s theory emphasizes the importance of individual exploration and discovery, while Vygotsky’s theory highlights the role of social interaction in learning [6]. By combining these two theories, this study aims to explore how both individual and social factors contribute to students’ understanding and critical thinking skills. It is vital to maintain a full understanding of all system components to be studied in relation to the core principles of student learning. Piaget’s theory emphasizes the importance of individual cognitive development, while Vygotsky’s theory highlights the role of social interaction and cultural context in learning. Therefore, this study aims to explore how these two theories can be applied to understand student learning in a comprehensive manner. The theories of cognitive and social education concur that students generate or construct meaning from their experiences [7]. Furthermore, cognitive theory emphasizes the importance of individual mental processes in learning, while social education theory highlights the role of social interactions and cultural context in shaping learning experiences. By combining these two theories, a more holistic understanding of student learning can be achieved. Thus, Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s theories of learning assist this study’s efforts to guide and construct appropriate learning activities that enhance science processing abilities. Piaget’s theory emphasizes the importance of individual exploration and discovery, while Vygotsky’s theory emphasizes the role of social interaction and collaboration in learning. Therefore, incorporating both theories can provide a comprehensive approach to designing effective science learning activities that cater to different learning styles. The active engagement of a child with his environment, according to Piaget’s theory of intellectual development, is what generates cognitive development. Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, on the other hand, emphasizes the role of social interaction and cultural context in shaping a child’s cognitive development. This study aims to integrate both theories to design effective science learning activities that take into account both individual and social factors.

Students should not only be passive recipients of instruction; they should actively engage in their education. This means that students should participate in class discussions, ask questions, and take an active role in their own learning process. By doing so, they will not only gain a deeper understanding of the material but also develop critical thinking skills that will serve them well in the future. Active engagement from the youngster may take the form of physical manipulations, visual observations, or internal or mental movement or transformation. The teacher offers background knowledge, but it is the student’s responsibility to investigate a specific occurrence, discover pertinent material, quantify it, produce a hypothesis, and then verify their investigation’s interpretation and predictions by deducing or inducing. This approach to learning is known as inquiry-based learning, which encourages students to take an active role in their education and develop critical thinking skills [8]. Inquirybased learning also helps students to retain information better as they are actively engaged in the learning process, rather than just passively receiving information from the teacher [9,10]. It also prepares them for real-world problem-solving situations where they need to investigate and analyze information to make informed decisions. By engaging in this process, students are able to gain a deeper understanding of the subject matter and develop a sense of ownership over their own learning. It is also considered that interaction between students and teachers facilitates learning, improves communication, and promotes the exchange of ideas. Furthermore, students who are actively involved in the learning process are more likely to retain information and apply it in real-life situations. This approach to education also fosters critical thinking skills and encourages students to become lifelong learners. According to Vygotsky’s, cognitive growth is greatly impacted by other individuals and environmental factors. Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory emphasizes the importance of social interaction in cognitive development, suggesting that learning occurs through collaborative activities and communication with others. Therefore, creating a positive and interactive classroom environment can enhance students’ cognitive growth and academic achievement. Constructivist theory holds that individuals must first construct, comprehend, and remember what they have learnt (cognitive processing of information), then practice and apply their new skills and knowledge to make it more natural, efficient, and a permanent part of their practice (behavioral) [11,12]. Therefore, social interaction and collaboration with others play a crucial role in the learning process as they provide opportunities for individuals to construct knowledge together, receive feedback, and engage in discussions that promote critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Constructivist approaches also emphasize the importance of creating a supportive learning environment that encourages exploration, experimentation, and reflection.

If either of these processes is lacking, learning will fail. The two processes that are crucial for successful learning are attention and motivation. Without attention, the learner will not be able to focus on the material being presented, and without motivation, the learner will not have the drive to engage with the material. Theorists attempted to explain how students learned, emphasizing the significance of condition selection and mental growth. These theories led to the development of various teaching strategies that take into account the learner’s attention and motivation, such as active learning, problem-based learning, and inquiry-based learning. These approaches aim to create a more engaging and interactive learning environment that promotes deep understanding and long-term retention of knowledge. It is challenging to conclude that all learning is founded on a certain idea. Instead, learning is a complex process that involves various factors such as prior knowledge, motivation, and environment. Therefore, it is essential to consider multiple perspectives when studying the learning process. For teachers to have constructivist lessons, Powell and Kalina claimed that cognitive and social constructivism must be utilized [13]. Cognitive constructivism emphasizes the individual’s active role in constructing knowledge, while social constructivism highlights the importance of collaboration and interaction with others in the learning process. Therefore, teachers should integrate both approaches to create a comprehensive and effective learning experience for their students. It is believed that no one hypothesis adequately explains learning. By combining both approaches, teachers can address the strengths and weaknesses of each theory and tailor their teaching methods to meet the diverse needs of their students. This approach can help students develop a deeper understanding of the subject matter and improve their overall academic performance.

Currently, Vietnam is in an important period of program reform, so it is necessary to attach importance to the role of program theory, systematically study program theory (including constructivist theory), facilitate a comprehensive and systematic view, and create the ability to evaluate and choose good and positive experiences from around the world, and avoid one-sided, conservative, dogmatic approaches. By incorporating constructivist theory into their teaching methods, educators in Vietnam can create a more dynamic and interactive learning environment that promotes critical thinking and problem-solving skills. This approach can also help students develop a deeper understanding of the subject matter and better retain information. Furthermore, constructivist theory encourages students to take an active role in their own learning, which can lead to increased motivation and engagement in the classroom. Ultimately, this can lead to better academic outcomes and prepare students for success in their future careers.

Prior to now, there has been a dearth of studies on primary teachers in Vietnam, particularly the designing of teaching methods and forms through experiential activities using the constructivist theory of primary teachers. This research aims to fill this gap by investigating the effectiveness of using constructivist theory in designing teaching methods and forms through experiential activities for primary teachers in Vietnam. The findings of this study could potentially contribute to the improvement of primary education in Vietnam. In order to fill this void, this study evaluates which experiential activities primary teachers are designing by using constructivist theory and following an intervention: the research findings will provide a solid scientific foundation for evaluating the current state of designing experiential activities in the topic according to constructivist theory in elementary schools and suggesting a suitable course design approach for elementary school students. The results of this study could also inform teacher training programs and professional development opportunities to better equip primary teachers with the skills and knowledge needed to design effective experiential activities for their students. Additionally, the findings may have broader implications for education systems in other countries that are seeking to incorporate constructivist theory into their primary education curriculum.

The inquiry commences with a literature review on designing the experiential activity by using constructivist theory of primary teachers. The second section provides a foundational framework for analysis, including the study’s methodology, results, and discussion. The conclusion is contained in the final section.

Methodology

Participant and procedure

The findings surveyed 543 primary teachers working in 6 localities in the Northern region: Hanoi Capital, Vinh Phuc City, Ninh Binh City, Cao Bang City, Lao Cai City and Bac Giang City. The average tenure of teachers is nearly 11 years (Table 1).

Table 1 shows that the teachers participating in the survey have a bachelor’s degree or higher, the highest professional qualification of teachers is a master’s degree. The teachers are mainly qualified from university of pedagogy (62.8%), college of pedagogy (30.9%), pedagogical practice (4.2%), and graduate school (2.1%). Teachers’ teaching experience ranges from 1 year to 35 years, with a mean of 10.69 years. In which, 41.4% of teachers work in places with difficult facilities and socio- economic conditions, 58.6% of teachers working at schools with favorable facilities and socio- economic conditions. Thus, the majority of teachers participating in the survey have professional qualifications that meet and exceed standards, most teachers have less than 10 years of teaching experience. The number of teachers participating in the survey working in a place with favorable facilities and socio-economic conditions is more than the number of teachers working in a place with favorable facilities and economic conditions- difficult society. From April 2021 to April 2022, an entire year was devoted to the collection of data. Participants were given informed consent, and anonymity and confidentiality rules were conveyed to them; the information sheet outlined their obligations and right to withdraw from the study.

Instrument

The author collects information on the practice of designing experiential activities in a constructivist primary school subject by using questionnaire survey methods, conducted using a teacher’s questionnaire of primary schools in 6 provinces: Hanoi, Vinh Phuc, Ninh Binh, Cao Bang, Bac Giang, and Lao Cai. The questionnaire is designed and collected through Google Form. The questionnaires were sent to teachers to collect information, the total number of questionnaires collected was 543 with complete answers. Each questionnaire consists of two parts: the information part of the survey respondents and the answer to the survey questions. The survey questions include:

1. Survey of primary school teachers’ perceptions of experiential learning is done through a questionnaire including the characteristics of experiential learning and non-experiential learning characteristics with answers. are choices divided by Likert scale with 3 levels: disagree, agree, strongly agree and are scored from 1 to 3, respectively;

2. Survey the design of experiential activities in the subject with questions about criteria, bases, design process, methods and forms of teaching with options divided on a Likert scale of 5 levels: never, rarely, occasionally, often, very often, and are scored from 1 to 5, respectively.

Values on the Likert scale are divided into 3 or 5 equal parts and distribute each part corresponding to a measure value: there are 3 levels: Distance value=(Maximum-Minimum)/3=(3-1)/3=0.66. Authors define the value fragments: 1.00-1.66 (rounded to 1): Disagree; 1.67-2.33 (rounded to 2): Agree; 2.34-3.00 (rounded to 3): Strongly agree. For the Likert scale, there are 5 levels: Distance value=(Maximum-Minimum)/5=(5-1)/5=0.80. The authors also define the value fragments: 1.00-1.80 (rounded to 1): Never; 1.81-2.60 (rounded to 2): Rarely; 2.61-3.40 (rounded to 3): Occasionally; 3.41-4.20 (rounded to 4): Regular; 4.21-5.00 (rounded to 5): Very often. The author determines the value segments as above because the value segments are divided equally, creating a balance between each evaluation level.

Results

Teaching methods, teaching forms to organize experiential activities in the subject according to constructivism theory

When designing and organizing experiential activities in the subject according to constructivist theory, primary teachers also often use a variety of teaching methods and different teaching methods. According to the survey results in Table 2, the teaching methods and teaching forms used most often by teachers are: Observation (M=4.26; SD=0.603), Conversation (M=4.13; SD=0.637), Discussion (M=4.18; SD=0.568), Practice (M=4.18; SD=0.612), Problem-stating and Problem-solving (M=4.07; SD=0.603), Games (M=4.09; SD=0.597) (Table 2).

There is a difference between teachers in the two groups when using teaching methods and teaching forms: Observation, Conversation, Discussion, Practice, Experiment, Explanation, Problem-stating and Problem-solving, Project, Hand making dough, Games when designing experiential activities in the subject according to constructivist theory (the Sig index of the F-test of these teaching methods and teaching forms are all less than 0.05).

Groups of teachers who are working in schools with difficult facilities and socio-economic conditions often use these teaching methods and teaching forms less often than teachers working in schools with favorable facilities and socio-economic conditions, the mean score of these teaching methods and teaching forms in the group of teachers working in schools with difficult facilities and socio-economic conditions is often higher than the mean score of teachers working in schools with favorable facilities and socio-economic conditions. Results of a one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test on the difference in selection between primary teachers with different teaching experience, showed that there is no difference between teachers in groups of seniority when choosing ideas (p>0.05). Thus, primary school teachers often use traditional and popular methods and forms of teaching to organize experiential activities in the subject according to constructivist theory. Modern teaching methods, teaching forms: projects, hands on dough, plays, clubs, etc., are used less often by teachers.

The results of the independent samples test to examine the differences in the use of teaching methods and teaching forms in the design of experiential activities in the subject according to constructivist theory are shown in Table 3 and Table 4.

Tables 3 and Table 4 show that there is no difference in the use of teaching methods, teaching forms: Storytelling, Investigation, Role-playing, Sightseeing, Contest, Drama, Club (Sig index of control F-determination and Sig index of t-test of these teaching methods and teaching systems are both greater than 0.05) of two groups of teachers working in schools with different facilities, socio- economic conditions.

The process of designing experiential activities in the subject according to constructivist theory

When teachers were asked about the process of designing experiential activities in primary school subjects according to constructivist theory with the question “When designing experiential activities in the subject, what do you usually do?” with 5 levels of opinion: 1-Never: This should not be done when designing any experiential activity; 2-Rarely: This is done when the design is less than 25% of the experience; 3-Occasionally: This is done when designing about 25% less than 50% of the experience; 4-Regularly: This is done when designing about 50%-75% of experience activities; 5-Very often: This is done when designing more than 75% of the experience activities, the results are shown in Table 5.

It can be seen from Table 5 that teachers regularly perform the following tasks: “Identifying lessons or activities in the lesson that can be used for experiential activities” (M=4.10, SD=0.572); “Identifying the purpose of experience activities” (M=4.07, SD=0.592); “Finding out the needs, current capacity/existing knowledge of students” (M=3.99, SD=0.562); “Identifying the means of supporting the activity/experience environment” (M=3.98; SD=0.571); “Building experience situations” (M=3.98, SD=0.605); “Building an experience implementation guide” (M=3.96; SD=0.591); “Identifying the form of experience” (M=3.97; SD=0.566); “Developing methods and tools to evaluate experience activities” (M=3.96; SD=0.562) when designing experiential activities in primary school subjects according to constructivist theory. Results of one-way ANOVA test on the difference in choice between groups of primary teachers with different teaching experience when implementing the steps of designing experiential activities in the subject according to constructivist theory, show that there is a difference between groups of teachers with different seniority when choosing opinions (p>0.005). Teachers regularly take steps to design experiential activities in the subject according to the proposed constructivist theory.

Discussion

According to the constructivist theory, the purpose of this study was to analyze the process of organizing and designing experiential activities in the subject by primary school teachers. The constructivist theory posits that learners construct knowledge based on their experiences and interactions with the environment. Therefore, analyzing the process of organizing and designing experiential activities in the subject by primary school teachers can help improve students’ learning outcomes. Using the given data, the investigation led to the following conclusions:

1. Story-telling and conversation were the most chosen of teaching methods and instructional forms in the creation of experiential activities in the subject based on constructivist theory; and

2. Experiential activity in the subject based on constructivist theory was the most chosen of primary teachers.

The first field was the use of teaching methods and instructional forms in the creation of experiential activities in the subject based on constructivist theory. Observation was the most teaching method which primary teachers used the most to develop the experiential activity in the subject according to constructivist theory. The following were conversation and storytelling. And the last teaching method was club. In the academic life of any student, all subjects are regarded to be main subjects. The club method involves extracurricular activities that complement the academic curriculum and provide opportunities for students to explore their interests and develop new skills. Therefore, it is important for students to balance their academic and extracurricular pursuits to achieve a well-rounded education. When students move from one cycle to the next, they experience reversibility and commitment. Presently, there is a need to assist students with this transition, which is related to constructivist theory. Educators attempt to implement the most effective method of instruction, regardless of the subject matter being taught or learned, in order to improve student learning. To assist children in acquiring higher- order thinking skills, both teachers and students participate in the learning process. Teachers’ understanding of many teaching styles enables them to employ a variety of methods when developing lesson plans, which promotes higher order thinking. Acting and exchanging through conversation or story-telling is also one of the proactive ways in a student-centered classroom that will help maximize the learners’ related skills. In a constructivist classroom, learners acquire new knowledge and concepts through a variety of learning activities, and it is the teachers’ responsibility to encourage such classrooms. In addition, Hussain noted that, according to Vygotsky’s social constructivism, effective learning may be achieved through group work and social interaction in order to learn new things and ideas and enhance intellectual development [14]. In other words, the constructivist approach emphasizes the importance of active participation and collaboration among learners, as well as the role of the teacher in facilitating and guiding the learning process. This approach also recognizes that knowledge is not simply transmitted from teacher to student, but rather constructed by learners through their own experiences and interactions with others. Learning through conversation and story-telling is also one of the ways to improve learners’ language ability. As according to Hajal, language is a very useful factor for students to utilize when learning a new notion; the zone of proximal development is where the learner develops new information based on their existing knowledge [15]. Therefore, incorporating conversation and story-telling in language learning can help learners to bridge the gap between their current knowledge and the new information they need to acquire, leading to a more effective learning experience. Additionally, these methods can also enhance learners’ communication skills and cultural understanding.

The second field was the process of developing experiential activities in the subject based on constructivist theory. While choosing opinions of developing experiential activities in the subject based on constructivist theory, there is a difference between groups of teachers with varying levels of experience. In accordance with the proposed constructivist theory, educators regularly design experiential activities in the field of study, the most chosen option was identifying lessons or activities in the lesson that can be used for experiential activities. This indicates that teachers with more experience may have a better understanding of how to incorporate experiential activities into their lessons, while those with less experience may need more guidance and support in this area. Additionally, it highlights the importance of providing professional development opportunities for all teachers to enhance their ability to design and implement experiential activities. For education, experiential learning is one of the newest but most effective approaches in the new era, especially in the constructivist subject design of subjects with experiential activities. Constructivist learning theory is consistent with experiential activity in that the consequences of the learning process are variable and frequently unpredictable, and learners take a significant part in evaluating their own learning. For instance, how one student chooses to handle an issue and what one student infers from experience will differ from that of another student [16]. According to Lewis and Williams, the simplest definition of experiential learning is learning from experience or learning by doing [17]. Experiential learning allows students to actively engage in the learning process and apply their knowledge to real-world situations, leading to a deeper understanding and retention of the material. This approach also promotes critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and collaboration among students. In order to build new abilities, new attitudes, or new ways of thinking, experiential education first immerses adult learners in an experience and then invites reflection on the encounter. Experiential learning encompasses all modes of learning despite its oftenoverlooked value. Active engagement involving the full person, including his ideas, emotions, and physical action, is one of its fundamental principles. In addition, they state that experiential learning can take numerous forms, including leisure activities, travel, experiences, cooperative learning, and play [18-21]. Experiential learning is a holistic approach that encourages learners to actively participate in their own learning process, leading to deeper understanding and long-term retention of knowledge. This approach has been shown to be effective across a wide range of subjects and age groups, making it a valuable tool for educators at all levels. In this regard, Enright believes that people must learn from experience in order to survive and that they possess a highly developed aptitude for doing so [22]. He concluded that as people mature, their experiences alter their learning process, and that their motivation to learn, their field of study, and their learning style are all affected by the educational process.

Conclusion

The design of experiential activities in the subject, according to the constructivist theory of the teacher, is aimed at the learners and based on the objectives and content of the lesson or learning activities. The teacher should create opportunities for learners to construct their own knowledge educathrough hands-on experiences, problem-solving, and collaboration. This approach can enhance students’ motivation, engagement, and retention of the subject matter. The constructivist theory emphasizes that learners actively construct their own knowledge and understanding through their experiences. Therefore, the design of experiential activities should provide opportunities for learners to engage in meaningful and authentic tasks that promote active learning and reflection. The design steps ensure the requirements and characteristics of experiential activities according to constructivist theory but have not yet brought about high efficiency. Therefore, in order to improve the effectiveness of the design of experiential activities in primary school subjects according to constructivist theory, teachers need to fully and correctly perceive the characteristics of experiential activities in subjects based on constructivist theory. This can be achieved through continuous professional development and training programs for teachers to enhance their understanding and implementation of constructivist theory in designing experiential activities. Additionally, collaboration among teachers and the sharing of best practices can also contribute to improving the effectiveness of experiential activities in primary school subjects. When teachers design well-designed experiential activities in primary school subjects according to constructivist theory, they will significantly contribute to the development of quality and capacity for students at this foundation level.

Acknowledgment

The authors acknowledge to the teachers in Vietnam, who had supported us in gathering the field data for this research.

Funding

This research is funded by the Vietnam Ministry of Education and Training and Hanoi Pedagogical University 2 under grant number B.2021-SP2-03.

References

1. Anderson LM, Blumenfeld P, Pintrich PR, Clark CM, Marx RW, et al. Educational psychology for teachers: Reforming our courses, rethinking our roles. Educational Psychologist. 1995;30(3):143-157.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar]

2. Shuell TJ. The role of educational psychology in the preparation of teachers. Educational Psychologist. 1996;31(1):5-14.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar]

3. Kaufman D. Constructivist-based experiential learning in teacher education. Action in Teacher Education. 1996;18(2):40-50.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar]

4. Piaget J. Piaget’s theory. Springer.1976.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar]

5. Bete AO. Students’ knowledge and process skills in learning grade-8 chemistry. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers and Teacher Education. 2020;10(1):1-3.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar]

6. Vygotsky LS, Cole M. Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. 1978.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar]

7. Colburn A. An inquiry primer. Science Scope. 2000;23(6):42-44.

   [Google Scholar]

8. Lim BR. Guidelines for designing inquiry-based learning on the web: Online professional development of educators. Indiana University; 2001.

   [Google Scholar]

9. Gilardi S, Lozza E. Inquiry-based learning and undergraduates’ professional identity development: Assessment of a field research-based course. Innovative Higher Education. 2009;34:245-256.

   [Crossref][Google Scholar]

10. Shih JL, Chuang CW, Hwang GJ. An inquiry-based mobile learning approach to enhancing social science learning effectiveness. Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 2010;13(4):50-62.

    [Google Scholar]

11. Liu CC, Chen IJ. Evolution of constructivism. Contemporary Issues in Education Research. 2010;3(4):63-66.

    [Crossref][Google Scholar]

12. Woolfolk Hoy A, Davis HA, Anderman EM. Theories of learning and teaching in TIP. Theory into Practice. 2013;52(sup1):9-21.

    [Crossref][Google Scholar]

13. Kalina C, Powell KC. Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for an effective classroom. Education. 2009;130(2):241-250.

    [Google Scholar]

14. Hussain I. Use of constructivist approach in higher education: An instructors’ observation. Creative Education. 2012;3(02):179.

    [Crossref][Google Scholar]

15. Hajal CP. Towards a conceptual framework for effective mathematics teaching in Lebanon: A multiple case-study. 2018.

    [Google Scholar]

16. Wurdinger SD. Using experiential learning in the classroom: Practical ideas for all educators. R&L Education. 2005.

    [Google Scholar]

17. Lewis LH, Williams CJ. Experiential learning: Past and present. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. 1994;1994(62):5-16.

    [Crossref][Google Scholar]

18. Beard CM, Wilson JP. Experiential learning: A best practice handbook for educators and trainers. Kogan Page Publishers; 2006.

    [Google Scholar]

19. Oxendine C, Robinson J, Willson G. “Experiential Learning,” in Learning, Teaching and Technology. 2004.
20. Rogers CR, Freiberg HJ. Freedom to Learn (3rd edn). Columbus OH: Merrill. 1994.

    [Google Scholar]

21. Wurdinger SD, Carlson JA. Teaching for experiential learning: Five approaches that work. R&L Education; 2009.

    [Crossref][Google Scholar]

22. Enright JB. Enlightening Gestalt: Waking up from the nightmare. Pro Telos; 1980.

    [Google Scholar]

Citation: Vietnamese Primary School Teachers’ Perspectives on Developing Constructivist-Based Experiential Activities for Primary School Subjects ASEAN Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 24 (5) May, 2023; 1-13