Contact us:
+1 (520) 226-8615
Email:
[email protected]
Ms. Rahn, a sixth-grade middle school science teacher, is sitting at a table with four students. They are about to perform an experiment on the physical properties of matter called the “mystery substance experiment.” On the table are the following materials: mixing bowl, 16 ounces of cornstarch, measuring cup, bottles of water, spoon, scissors, plate, and paper towels.
Ms. Rahn:
Okay, we’re ready to begin. Jenna, empty the box of cornstarch into the bowl. Can you tell me, what do you notice about the cornstarch? What does it look like?
Trevor:
It’s soft and powdery.
Ali:
It’s whiteish.
Ms. Rahn:
Touch it with your fingers. What does it feel like? Does it have an odor?
Matt:
It’s soft, sort of flaky like. No odor.
Ms. Rahn:
Yes, all of those things. Okay now, Trevor, fill the measuring cup with one cup of water and slowly pour it into the bowl. Put your hand inside the bowl and mix it up. What does it feel like?
Trevor:
Clumpy, wet, gooey.
Ms. Rahn:
What does it look like?
Ali:
Like a paste or something like that.
Ms. Rahn:
Yes, it does. Now reach down into the bowl and grab a bunch of it. Let it rest in your hand. What happens to it?
Matt:
It’s dripping down.
Ms. Rahn:
Pick up a handful and squeeze it. What does it feel like?
Jenna:
It gets hard, but it’s still gooey.
Ms. Rahn:
What happens to the liquid oozing out?
Ali:
It’s dripping down through my fingers.
Ms. Rahn:
Grab another handful and give it a squeeze. Let it rest in your hand. As some falls between your fingers, have your partner try cutting it with a scissors. Can you cut it?
Trevor:
Yes! That’s so weird!
Ms. Rahn:
Take a spoonful and drop it onto the plate. Touch it. What does it feel like?
Ali:
Hard! Like silly putty.
Ms. Rahn:
Tip the plate sideways. What happens?
Jenna:
It’s dripping like water. But it doesn’t feel wet!
Ms. Rahn:
Poke it with your finger. What happens?
Matt:
It goes in but it doesn’t stick to my finger.
Ms. Rahn:
Now go back to the bowl. Push your fingers slowly through until you touch the bottom of the bowl. What do you notice?
Jenna:
It gets thicker as you go deeper. It feels hard.
Ms. Rahn:
So what is this substance? Is it a solid or a liquid?
Ali:
It’s a solid. It’s hard.
Matt:
No, it’s a liquid because when you lift it, it drips and gooey stuff comes out.
Ms. Rahn:
Could it be both a liquid and a solid?
Trevor:
I think it is.
Constructivism is a psychological and philosophical perspective contending that individuals form or construct much of what they learn and understand (O’Donnell, 2012 ). A major influence on constructivism is theory and research in human development, especially the theories of Piaget and Vygotsky (discussed in this chapter). The emphasis that these theories place on the role of knowledge construction is central to constructivism.
Over the past several years, constructivism increasingly has been applied to learning and teaching. The history of learning theory reveals a shift away from environmental influences and toward human factors as explanations for learning. Cognitive theorists and researchers ( Chapters 4 – 7 ) disputed the claim of behaviorism ( Chapter 3 ) that stimuli, responses, and consequences were adequate to explain learning. Cognitive theories place great emphasis on learners’ information processing as a central cause of learning. Despite the elegance of cognitive learning theories, some researchers believe that these theories fail to capture the complexity of human learning. This point is underscored by the fact that some cognitive perspectives use behavioral terminology such as the “automaticity” of performance and “forming connections” between items in memory.
Many contemporary learning researchers have shifted toward a stronger focus on learners. Rather than talk about how knowledge is acquired, they speak of how it is constructed. Although these researchers differ in their emphasis on factors that affect learning and learners’ cognitive processes, the theoretical perspectives they espouse may be loosely grouped and referred to as constructivism . Learners’ constructions of understandings are evident in the opening vignette.
This chapter begins by providing an overview of constructivism including a description of its key assumptions and the different types of constructivist theories. The theories of Piaget, Bruner, and Vygotsky are described next, with emphasis on those aspects relevant to learning. The critical roles of private speech and socially mediated learning are explained. The chapter concludes with a discussion of constructivist learning environments and instructional applications that reflect principles of constructivism.
When you finish studying this chapter, you should be able to do the following:
· ? Discuss the major assumptions and various types of constructivism.
· ? Summarize the major processes in Piaget’s theory that are involved in learning and some implications for instruction.
· ? Discuss the types of knowledge representation proposed by Bruner and what is meant by the “spiral curriculum.”
· ? Explain the key principles of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and implications for teaching in the zone of proximal development.
· ? Explain how private speech can affect learning and the benefits of socially mediated learning.
· ? List the key features of constructivist learning environments and the major components of the APA learner-centered principles.
· ? Explain how teachers can become more reflective and thereby enhance student achievement.
· ? Describe how discovery learning, inquiry teaching, and discussions and debates can be structured to reflect constructivist principles.
ASSUMPTIONS AND PERSPECTIVES
Many researchers and practitioners question some of classic information processing theory’s assumptions about learning and instruction because they believe that these assumptions do not completely explain students’ learning and understanding. These questionable assumptions of the classic view are as follows (Greeno, 1989 ):
· ? Thinking resides in the mind rather than in interaction with persons and situations.
· ? Processes of learning and thinking are relatively uniform across persons, and some situations foster higher-order thinking better than others.
· ? Thinking derives from knowledge and skills developed in formal instructional settings more than on general conceptual competencies that result from one’s experiences and innate abilities.
Constructivists do not accept these assumptions because of evidence that thinking takes place in situations and that cognitions are largely constructed by individuals as a function of their experiences in these situations (Bredo, 1997 ). Constructivist accounts of learning and development highlight the contributions of individuals to what is learned. Social constructivist models further emphasize the importance of social interactions in acquisition of skills and knowledge. Let us examine further what constructivism is, its assumptions, and its forms.