Which of the following is a constructivist approach to teaching and learning?
|
Finally, interventions and instructions will be viewed here in relation to individually-constructed experiences and their applicability and fit. These three characteristics are core features of constructivist reasoning. The following representation of constructivist perspectives in psychology refers to the consideration of these features and not only to the fact that the author calls himself a constructivist. This manner of thinking is legitimate because on the one hand there are numerous authors who do not call themselves constructivists but are closely associated with this perspective. On the other hand, there are considerable differences between various constructivist approaches, especially between radical constructivism and social constructivism as well as between constructivist approaches to learning and knowledge acquisition. Show
Radical constructivism—which views realism in science as inadequate and assumes an informational closeness of cognitive systems (Maturana & Varela 1987)—plays a subsidiary role in psychology, even though it is postulated as the prototype of constructivist perspectives. Radical constructivists like Maturana or Varela always question the possibility of objectivity and truth because only information which is viable and serves to support the system is, according to them, processed. Truth, objectivity and knowledge are thus constructed. Radical constructivism focuses on epistemology and studies the relationship between knowledge and the world, rejecting realism and any form of ontology. A second version of constructivism is named ‘constructionism’ or ‘social constructionism’. This version follows the tradition of the social psychology of Cooley and Mead. It analyses the processes ‘in which the individuals describe and explain the world in which they live or how they see it’ (Gergen 1985, p. 3f). Social constructionism, in contrast to radical constructivism, focuses on the acting and thinking individual and describes the construction of knowledge as the result of social interaction in contexts which form the foundation of shared knowledge. This view has proven itself remarkably fruitful for numerous psychological fields, for example, in the analysis of cognitive development or the development of prejudice and self-impression. A third version of constructivism is engaged in exploring the correlation of learning and instruction, especially in the area of mathematic knowledge (Cobb et al. 1997, Resnick 1994). Knowledge acquisition is discussed here in close connection with situated learning and related instructional approaches. In this review, only the two last-presented versions of constructivism will be discussed, due to the fact that these have been the most influential in cognitive psychology. First of all, approaches which define themselves as constructivist will be presented. Second, studies will be discussed which contain the core features of constructivist reasoning. Constructivism emphasizes the active experience-based knowledge construction and its embedding in social contexts. From this point of view intervention and instruction are chosen with regard to their individual fit. In this article cognitive tools which are typical for constructivistic approaches will be discussed first: conceptual metaphors, cognitive schemes, and subjective theories. In the second part they will be described in different psychological application areas. Therein the potential of constructivistic approaches for the research on text comprehension and the development of domain-specific knowledge can be shown. Moreover a better understanding of the relationship between construction and instruction can be gained. Read moreNavigate DownView chapterPurchase book Read full chapter URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0080430767014728 28th European Symposium on Computer Aided Process EngineeringAnne Marie Barthe-Delanoë, ... Jean Marc Le Lann, in Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 2018 AbstractIn process system engineering, we often adopt a constructivist approach to answer the question “How can we go from parts to a whole system?” To answer to this question we need to propose approach that, based on the knowledge of phenomena at small-scale, allows going up the different scales in order to design process but also to innovate thanks to the creation of new knowledge. In this paper, a bio inspired design approach is presented. It is based on two main principles which intervene repetitively to understand and analyze the passage between scales for living organisms: the juxtaposition of foundational blocks that assemble, and then differentiation. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate that these principles can find a more widespread use and in particular they can be integrated into a process system engineering constructivist approach for innovative design. After defining the fundamental building blocks to initiate the process of juxtaposition and integration, an example on distillation and reactive distillation is used to illustrate the method capabilities in process synthesis. View chapterPurchase book Read full chapter URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780444642356501388 Pilot StudyJ. Rodney Turner, in Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, 2005 Testing a Research ProjectHuemann and Winkler conducted a pilot project as part of a larger research project on benchmarking project processes. Since they adopted a social constructivist approach to their research, they were making measurements in a social context. They used the pilot to test their instrument before roll out to a larger sample. In this case, the product of the project, the desired outcome of the research, is well defined. The uncertainty lies in the method of achieving that product, the design of the questionnaire or research instrument. It is a type 2 project. The pilot study is used to reduce the uncertainty of the project process before roll out. Van Teilingen and Hundley confirm that this is good practice. Table I provides reasons for conducting such a pilot study to test a research instrument. Many of these are familiar. Table II lists procedures for improving the validity of the instrument. However, they caution that to avoid contamination, data gathered in the pilot study should not be included in the main results, and people surveyed in the pilot study should not be resurveyed because they will not give independent answers. Table I. Reasons for Conducting a Pilot of a Research Instrumenta Developing and testing adequacy.Assessing feasibility.Designing a protocol.Establishing and testing efficacy of the sampling technique.Assessing efficacy of recruitment processes.Identifying logistical problems.Estimating variability to determine optimum sample size.Planning and estimating resources need for the main study.Assessing the data analysis techniques.Training researchers in research techniques.Convincing funding bodies that the research team is competent.Convincing funding bodies that the study is feasible and worth funding.Convincing other stakeholders to give support. aAdapted from Van Teilingen and Hundley (2003).Table II. Improving the Internal Validity of a Research Instrument in a Pilot Studya Administer the pilot in the same way as the main study.Ask subjects for feedback to identify flaws.Record time taken to compete the instrument and decide if it is reasonable.Discard unnecessary, difficult, or ambiguous questions.Assess whether questions give an adequate range of responses.Establish whether responses can be properly interpreted to give information required.Check that all questions are answered.Reword and resale questions as necessary.Shorten and revise the instrument. aAdapted from Van Teilingen and Hundley (2003).View chapterPurchase book Read full chapter URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0123693985004308 Teaching KnowledgeBeverly Park Woolf, in Building Intelligent Interactive Tutors, 2009 4.3.4 Constructivist TheoryThe third example of a tutoring strategy informed by human learning theory is derived from constructivism, which suggests that “learners construct their own reality or at least interpret it based upon their perceptions of experiences” (Jonassen, 1991). This section describes several constructivist approaches and a perspective on how to implement constructivist tutors.
4.3.4.1 Basic Principles of ConstructivismConstructivism is a broad conceptual framework, portions of which build on the notions of cognitive structure or patterns of action that underlie specific acts of intelligence developed by Jean Piaget (Piaget, 1953; Piaget and Inhelder, 1969, 1973). Piaget was a naturalist, scientist, and philosopher whose framework “genetic epistemology” focused on the development of knowledge in humans based on six decades of research in several disciplines. Primary developmental stages corresponded to stages that every human moves through while learning, see Table 4.4 (Piaget and Inhelder, 1969, 1973). Each person goes through each stage and cannot tackle an activity from a later stage until all earlier ones are accomplished. This implies that activities and assistance appropriate to each learning stage should be provided at each stage. Thus, a learner in the concrete operational stage (Table 4.4, third row) studying fractions and decimals should use counting blocks and timelines, not abstract symbols and formulas, which would be appropriate for learners in the formal operational stage (Table 4.4, fourth row). Students in the sensor-motor stage should be provided with rich and stimulating environments with ample play objects. Those in the concrete operational stage might be provided with problems of classification, ordering, location, and conservation. Children provide different explanations of reality at different stages, which vary for every individual. Activities that engage learners and require adaptation facilitate cognitive development through assimilation (interpretation of novel events in terms of existing cognitive structures) and accommodation (modification of cognitive structures to make sense of a novel event). Cognitive development for Piaget included an individual's constant effort to adapt to new events in terms of assimilation and accommodation. Each stage has many detailed structural forms. For example, the concrete operational stage has more than 40 distinct structures covering classification and relations, spatial relationships, time, movement, chance, number, conservation, and measurement. Table 4.4. Piagetian Stages of Growth for Human Knowledge Cognitive StagesYearsCharacterization1. Sensorimotor stage0–2 yearsMotor actions and organizing the senses2. Preoperation period3–7 yearsIntuitive reasoning without the ability to apply it broadly3. Concrete operational stage8–11 yearsConcrete objects are needed to learn; logical intelligence4. Formal operations12–15 yearsAbstract thinking Constructivism was applied to learning mathematics, logic, and moral development. Bruner extended the theory to describe learning as an active process in which learners construct new concepts based on current/past knowledge (Bruner, 1986, 1990). Learners are consistently involved in case-based or inquiry learning, constructing hypotheses based on previous learning. Their cognitive structures (e.g., schema, mental model) constantly attempt to organize novel activities and to “go beyond the information given.” Constructivism promotes an open-ended learning experience where learning methods and results are not easily measured and may not be the same for each learner (Mergel, 1998). Other assumptions include (Merril, 1991): learning is an active process and meaning is developed from experience; conceptual growth comes from negotiating meaning, sharing multiple perspectives, and changing representations through collaborative learning; and learning should be situated in realistic settings and testing integrated with tasks, not treated as a separate activity. 4.3.4.2 Building Constructivist TutorsConstructivism has been applied to teaching and curriculum design (e.g., Bybee and Sund, 1982; Wadsworth, 1978). Certain features of intelligent tutors facilitate purposeful knowledge construction; however, few intelligent tutors fully implement this perspective; in the extreme, such tutors would encourage students to discover principles on their own and to reach unique conclusions. Because each learner is responsible for her own knowledge, tutor designers are challenged to implement constructivist environments that can also ensure a common set of learning outcomes ( Jonasson, 1991).Constructivists believe that much of reality is shared through a process of social negotiation. A person's knowledge is a function of his prior experiences, mental structures and beliefs ( Jonassen, 1991). Several constructivist tutors have been built for military training. One tutor trained analysts to determine the level of threat to an installation on any given day (Ramachandran et al., 2006). In the past, when faced with conventional and known enemies, analysts relied on indicators and templates to predict outcomes. Traditional didactic techniques are of limited use, however, when analysts must manage ill-structured threats based on the dynamics of a global, information age culture. Current techniques in counterterrorism involve compiling and analyzing open source information, criminal information sources, local information, and government intelligence. The Intelligence for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) tutor, built by Stottler Henke, a company that provides intelligent software solutions for a variety of enterprises including education and training, relied heavily on realistic simulation exercises with automated assessment to prepare trainees for unknown threats (Carpenter et al., 2005). Trainees were aided in pinpointing content contained within a large body of unformatted “messages” using information analysis tools. They explored empty copies of the analysis tools and “messages” that contained raw intelligence. They were free to read (or not read) messages and to access the available help resources, including textbooks and standard system help. Trainees learned in context in this “virtual” environment. Links between objects and between messages and tools were an explicit representation of their thought processes (Ramachandran et al., 2006). Contextual learning in an authentic environment facilitated creation of individual constructs that were then applied to new, unfamiliar situations once trainees left the environment. Trainees listed relevant entities (people and organizations) along with known or suspected associations (events, groups, places, governments) in an association matrix, which supported the specification of pair-wise association between entities. They learned to distinguish between potentially relevant and irrelevant information and to differentiate between confirmed and unconfirmed associations. Once trainees were satisfied with the association matrix, they generated threat analysis based on this data. Various other constructivist tutors supported students to think critically and use inquiry reasoning (van Joolingen and de Jong, 1996; White et al., 1999). Learners worked in real-world environments using tools for gathering, organizing, visualizing, and analyzing information during inquiry (Alloway et al., 1996; Lajoie et al., 1995; Suthers and Weiner, 1995). The Rashi tutor invited students to diagnose patients’ illnesses and to interview them about their symptoms (Dragon et al., 2006; Woolf et al., 2003, 2005). It imposed no constraints concerning the order of student activities. Students explored images, asked questions, and collected evidence in support of their hypotheses (see Section 8.2.2.3.2). Hypertext and hypermedia also support constructivist learning by allowing students to explore various pathways rather than follow linearly formatted instruction (see Section 9.4.1.3) (Mergel, 1998). However, a novice learner might become lost in a sea of hypermedia; if learners are unable to establish an anchor, they may wander aimlessly about becoming disoriented. Constructivist design suggests that learners should not simply be let loose in such environments but rather should be placed in a mix of old and new (objective and constructive) instructional design environments. Comparison of learning theories. Commonalties among constructivist approaches apply to development of both intelligent tutors and classroom activities (Bruner, 1986, 1990): Classroom environments should support experiences and contexts that encourage learning (readiness), are easily grasped by students (e.g., spiral organization in which topics are studied several times at an increasing levels of complexity), and challenge student extrapolation to fill in gaps (going beyond the information given). Constructivist learning does not focus on finding a correct answer; rather it involves participants in discovery through active participation. Constructivist tutors share many principles with situated tutors (Section 4.3.5). Constructivist learning is often situated in realistic settings, and evaluation is integrated with the task, not presented as a separate activity. Environments provide meaningful contexts supported by case-based authentic problems derived from and situated in the real world ( Jonasson, 1991). Multiple representations of reality are often provided (to avoid oversimplification), and tasks are regulated by each individual's needs and expectations. Constructivist strategies are distinguished from objectivist (behavioral and cognitive) strategies, which have predetermined outcomes and map predetermined concepts of reality into the learner's mind (Jonasson, 1991). Constructivism maintains that because learning outcomes are not always predictable, instruction should foster rather than control learning and be regulated by each individual's intentions, needs, or expectations. View chapterPurchase book Read full chapter URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123735942000046 Perceptual Constancy: Direct versus Constructivist TheoriesJ. Norman, in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2001 Our ability to perceive our environment veridically and the stability of perception are noted. These occur in spite of the continuously varying stimulation impinging upon our senses, and are ascribed to what is labeled perceptual constancy. Two very contrasting theoretical approaches to explaining constancy have been put forth. The constructivist approach explains veridical perception by means of an inference-like process where an ‘intelligent’ perceptual system utilizes high-level mental processes in order to supplement the variable and/or insufficient sensory stimulation. The direct approach, on the other hand, maintains that the sensory information picked up by our perceptual system suffices to enable veridical perception and there is no need for positing the involvement of higher mental processes. The two theoretical approaches are described in some detail with Rock's The Logic of Perception (1983) serving as the model of a constructivist approach, and Gibson's The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (1979) as the central exposition of the direct approach. The final section consists of a brief account of an attempt to reconcile the two theoretical approaches based on recent research pointing to the existence of two parallel visual systems. View chapterPurchase book Read full chapter URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0080430767014522 Social ConstructivismW. Detel, in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2001 The crucial claim of social constructivism is that a sociological analysis of science and scientific knowledge is fruitful and reveals the social nature of science. The development of scientific knowledge is seen to be determined by social forces, essentially contingent and independent of rational methods, and analyzable in terms of causal processes of belief formation. There are three main social constructivist approaches. The Edinburgh school of the sociology of science maintains that it is not only the development but also the content of scientific theories that is determined by social factors. The leading idea of the actor-network theory is that scientific knowledge is an effect of established relations between objects, animals, and humans engaged in scientific practices. Social constructivism about the social is an intentionalist program of social ontology trying to clarify how social entities like social groups and institutions are constructed. The article discusses the historical background of social constructivism and the three approaches mentioned above in some detail. View chapterPurchase book Read full chapter URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B008043076701086X Are we sharing our toys in the sandpit? Issues surrounding the design, creation, reuse re-purposing of learning objects to support information skills teachingNancy Graham, in Information Literacy: Infiltrating the Agenda, Challenging Minds, 2011 PedagogyPedagogical considerations are crucial when developing IL RLOs, as this can affect take up and effectiveness of the RLO. The experience of librarians at Southampton Solent University is outlined in two articles (Browne and Dixon, 2010; Apps, 2009) both looking at their development of IL RLOs using a constructivist approach. They changed their approach from purely subject-based RLOs to also providing generic material for some topics (referencing). Norwegian librarians (Skagen et al., 2008) describe how they used a didactic relation model as a framework to create an online IL tutorial, which focused on learning goals, learning process, learning conditions, settings and assessment to develop material. At the 2010 LILAC conference Cathy Palmer from the University of California, Irvine (Palmer and Canaday, 2010) ran a workshop on developing an online IL tutorial which included a checklist of key factors to consider in the planning stages. She emphasises the use of a sound pedagogical structure before embarking on using technology. View chapterPurchase book Read full chapter URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9781843346104500069 Person Perception, Accuracy ofD.C. Funder, in International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2001 4 Conceptualizations of AccuracyThe accuracy of person perception is conceptualized somewhat differently by three major approaches that developed during the 1980s and 1990s. The pragmatic approach, based on some early ideas by William James, has been espoused by William Swann (1984). This approach defines accuracy as the ability to make judgments that allow for success in life. The index of whether a judgment is accurate, in this view, is whether it is adaptively useful. The constructivist approach, based on postmodernist viewpoints that have become widespread in academia, has been espoused by Arie Kruglanski (1989) and others. This approach either states or implies that no criterion for a person's judgmental accuracy exists beyond other judgments by other people. For example, Kenny (1994) has sometimes conceptualized accuracy as the mean judgment of all possible observers of a person. The index of whether a judgment is accurate, in this view, is whether it agrees with the judgments of others. The realistic approach is consistent with the writings of Egon Brunswik (1956) and has been espoused more recently by Funder (1995). This approach assumes that psychological attributes of people really exist, though they are only probabilistically knowable through cues of uncertain validity. The real nature of a person must then be ascertained, as well as possible but always with less-than-certain validity, through multiple sources of evidence including the person's self-judgment, judgments by others, and his or her relevant behavior. The index of whether a judgment is accurate, in this view, is the degree to which it converges with these multiple criteria. View chapterPurchase book Read full chapter URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0080430767017526 Preparing teaching librarians for practice: focusing on the basicsClaire McGuinness, in Becoming Confident Teachers, 2011 Applying theory to practiceAs teaching librarians, the classroom activities you set up determine how the students will act, and therefore how they will learn. Based on what you have learned (and what you believe) about student learning, you can see how different methods activate learning in particular ways. Learning activities which encourage a behaviourist approach: ■quizzes and standardised tests, where rapid feedback is provided; ■modularised e-tutorials or e-practicums, where students receive feedback at each stage; ■guided step-by-step demonstrations and exercises, where each ‘step’ is mastered before moving on; ■‘trial and error’ activities, where students approach a problem from different angles until the best solution is found; ■using a classroom response system (CRS) in lectures. Learning activities which encourage a cognitivist/constructivist approach: ■problem-solving, either individually or in groups; ■projects based on ‘real life’ scenarios; ■group discussion and debate; brainstorming; ■‘treasure hunts’ (scavenger hunts) or webquests; ■reflective journals/portfolios; ■creating information resources – e.g. wikis, bibliographies, subject guides. Learning activities which encourage a social learning approach: ■live interactive resource demonstrations, in computer labs with large- screen display; ■one-to-one demonstrations; ■animated or video demonstrations (e.g. YouTube); ■peer-learning: students demonstrate resources to each other and discuss approaches; ■group presentations. Learning activities which encourage a relational approach: ■group discussion and analysis of the different ways of approaching a task or problem; ■exploration and discussion of existing models and perspectives (e.g. ‘expert searcher’, ‘novice searcher’), and application to the task at hand; Which one of the following is a constructivist approach of teaching and learning?A productive, constructivist classroom, then, consists of learner-centered, active instruction. In such a classroom, the teacher provides students with experiences that allow them to hypothesize, predict, manipulate objects, pose questions, research, investigate, imagine, and invent.
What are the 4 types of constructivism?A) TRIVIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM. It is one of the most basic and most straightforward forms of constructivism. ... . B) RADICAL CONSTRUCTIVISM. Radical constructivism also emphasizes the construction of knowledge and states that textbook knowledge is not that meaningful. ... . C) SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM. ... . D) CULTURAL CONSTRUCTIVISM.. What is an example of constructivist approach?Example: An elementary school teacher presents a class problem to measure the length of the "Mayflower." Rather than starting the problem by introducing the ruler, the teacher allows students to reflect and to construct their own methods of measurement.
What are the 6 constructivist teaching and learning principles?Constructivist classrooms focus on student questions and interests, they build on what students already know, they focus on interactive learning and are student-centered, teachers have a dialogue with students to help them construct their own knowledge, they root in negotiation, and students work primarily in groups.
|
