I selected this paper because it thoroughly explicated some of the theoretical background of constructivism and then presented a detailed example in which a traditional classroom lesson and a constructivist version of the same lesson were described and analyzed. The paper also discussed several myths and important instructional issues.
People can get a better understanding of the background of the theory. According to the author, the concept “constructivism” most probably comes from Piaget who referred to his views as “constructivist”.
The constructivist view of human knowledge acquisition is knowledge construction rather than knowledge transmission and the recording of information conveyed by others. Learners are building and transforming knowledge. Teachers are guiding and scaffolding students. Endogenous constructivism focuses on internal, individual constructions of knowledge. Dialectical constructivism focuses on the social intersection of people, interactions that involve sharing, comparing and debating among learners and mentors.
There are two concepts from the constructivist point of view: situated cognition and zone of proximal development. The former concept believes that learning is to be born. Knowledge is conceived as being embedded in and connected to the situation where the leaning occurs. The latter one believes that when children work on tasks that cannot be accomplished alone but can be successfully completed with the assistance of an adult/expert, they are working within their zone of proximal development. Constructivism believes that all learning is discovered.
The paper represented Ms Blake’s classroom arrangement and teaching activity which is very traditional. The author analyzed Ms Blake’s classroom arrangement and teaching from a constructivism perspective and made a constructivism version of Ms Blake’s classroom and teaching.
Through the comparison between two versions, a reader may easily get a clear idea about what a constructivism classroom and teaching should be.
The article also pointed out some misconceptions and myths with constructivism instructional practices. The five myths are:
1. there is no focus for learning, no clear goal in constructivist-based instruction.
2. constructivist based instruction is not thoughtfully planned; careful preparation is less important than in traditional instruction.
3. there is an absence of structure for learning in a constructivist learning environment.
4. as long as learners are involved in discussion and other forms of social interactin, learning will take place.
5. since teachers are not primarily engaged in delivering instruction, their role in the classroom is less important.
I do not think that teachers have to be primarily engaged in delivering instruction. Sometimes it is better to let the children learn from each other, such as working in groups. Sometimes they will understand each other better than they will the teacher.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Judith. I also feel that students should have a balance between being taught by a teacher and learning from their peers. I know from personal experience, in school I often remembered more from talking about a subject with my peers over just being talked at by the teacher.
ReplyDeleteI think it depends on the level of students, because though I believe students can also learn a lot from their peers, I don't believe this applies for elementary school level students, and should be highly monitored in middle school. The reason I say this is because students at this age like to believe they know everything, and can share the wrong information with their classmates. I feel my upper level middle school and high school students are mature enough to work together in a successful way.
ReplyDelete