User Tools

Site Tools


learning_paradigms:constructivism

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
learning_paradigms:constructivism [2011/07/01 11:05]
jpetrovic [Read more]
learning_paradigms:constructivism [2012/01/12 11:42] (current)
Line 7: Line 7:
   * knowledge cannot (and need not) be transferred to the learner, but rather **constructed by the learner**,   * knowledge cannot (and need not) be transferred to the learner, but rather **constructed by the learner**,
   * the learner constructs his own subjective interpretation and **subjective meaning** of the objective reality by cognizing subject,   * the learner constructs his own subjective interpretation and **subjective meaning** of the objective reality by cognizing subject,
-  * learning occurs through interaction of learner'​s **prior knowledge** (knowledge ​schemes), ideas and experience,+  * learning occurs through interaction of learner'​s **prior knowledge** (knowledge ​schemata), ideas and experience,
   * learning occurs in certain social, cultural and linguistic settings.   * learning occurs in certain social, cultural and linguistic settings.
  
Line 17: Line 17:
 Although constructivist ideas can be tracked back to 18th century and authors like [[http://​en.wikipedia.org/​wiki/​Giambattista_Vico|Giambattista Vico]](([[http://​findarticles.com/​p/​articles/​mi_7026/​is_2_96/​ai_n28125759/​|Giambattista,​ V. De Antiquissima Italorum Sapientia. 1710.]])) it mostly emerged in the 1970s(([[http://​ehlt.flinders.edu.au/​education/​iej/​articles/​v6n3/​liu/​paper.pdf|Liu,​ C. H, and R. Matthews. Vygotsky’s philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal 6, no. 3: 386–399. 2005.]])) and has been recognized as a paradigm, but also as a theory(([[http://​www.amazon.com/​Constructivism-Perspectives-Teachers-College-Press/​dp/​0807734888#​reader_0807734888|Press,​ Teachers College. Constructivism:​ Theory, Perspectives,​ and Practice. Teachers College Press, 1996.]])). Today constructivism usually appears in the literature in a number of variants(([[http://​folk.uio.no/​sveinsj/​Constructivism_and_learning_Sjoberg.pdf|S. Sjoberg et al. Constructivism and learning. In Baker, E., McGaw, B. & Peterson P (Eds). International Encyclopaedia of Education 3rd Edition, Oxford: Elsevier, 2007.]])) with two dominant variants(([[http://​ehlt.flinders.edu.au/​education/​iej/​articles/​v6n3/​liu/​paper.pdf|Liu,​ C. H, and R. Matthews. Vygotsky’s philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal 6, no. 3: 386–399. 2005.]])): Although constructivist ideas can be tracked back to 18th century and authors like [[http://​en.wikipedia.org/​wiki/​Giambattista_Vico|Giambattista Vico]](([[http://​findarticles.com/​p/​articles/​mi_7026/​is_2_96/​ai_n28125759/​|Giambattista,​ V. De Antiquissima Italorum Sapientia. 1710.]])) it mostly emerged in the 1970s(([[http://​ehlt.flinders.edu.au/​education/​iej/​articles/​v6n3/​liu/​paper.pdf|Liu,​ C. H, and R. Matthews. Vygotsky’s philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal 6, no. 3: 386–399. 2005.]])) and has been recognized as a paradigm, but also as a theory(([[http://​www.amazon.com/​Constructivism-Perspectives-Teachers-College-Press/​dp/​0807734888#​reader_0807734888|Press,​ Teachers College. Constructivism:​ Theory, Perspectives,​ and Practice. Teachers College Press, 1996.]])). Today constructivism usually appears in the literature in a number of variants(([[http://​folk.uio.no/​sveinsj/​Constructivism_and_learning_Sjoberg.pdf|S. Sjoberg et al. Constructivism and learning. In Baker, E., McGaw, B. & Peterson P (Eds). International Encyclopaedia of Education 3rd Edition, Oxford: Elsevier, 2007.]])) with two dominant variants(([[http://​ehlt.flinders.edu.au/​education/​iej/​articles/​v6n3/​liu/​paper.pdf|Liu,​ C. H, and R. Matthews. Vygotsky’s philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal 6, no. 3: 386–399. 2005.]])):
  
-  * **social constructivism** (also known as //personal constructivism//​ or //radical constructivism//​) derived from works of [[http://​www.marxists.org/​archive/​vygotsky/​|Lev Vygotsky]] and extended in works of [[http://​www.ischool.berkeley.edu/​people/​faculty/​jeanlave|Jean Lave]], [[http://​www.sesp.northwestern.edu/​profile/?​p=52&/​AllanCollins/​|Allan Collins]], [[http://​www.johnseelybrown.com/​|John Brown]], and [[http://​en.wikipedia.org/​wiki/​Ernst_von_Glasersfeld|Ernst von Glasersfeld]],​ which suggest knowledge is situation-specific and context-dependent and that social environment has a key role in learning, and+  * **social constructivism** (also known as //personal constructivism//​ or //radical constructivism//​) derived from works of [[http://​www.marxists.org/​archive/​vygotsky/​|Lev Vygotsky]] and extended in works of [[http://​www.ischool.berkeley.edu/​people/​faculty/​jeanlave|Jean Lave]], [[http://​www.sesp.northwestern.edu/​profile/?​p=52&/​AllanCollins/​|Allan Collins]], [[http://​www.johnseelybrown.com/​|John Brown]], and [[http://​en.wikipedia.org/​wiki/​Ernst_von_Glasersfeld|Ernst von Glasersfeld]]((See: [[http://​www.univie.ac.at/​constructivism/​EvG/​papers/​114.pdf|Ernst von Glasersfeld. Constructivism in Education. In The International ​ Encyclopedia of Education, vol. 1, pp162-163. Oxford/New York,  Pergamon Press, 1989]])), which suggest knowledge is situation-specific and context-dependent and that social environment has a key role in learning, and
   * **cognitive constructivism** (also known as //realist constructivism//​) presented in works of authors like [[http://​www.piaget.org/​aboutPiaget.html|Jean Piaget]] or [[http://​www.psych.nyu.edu/​bruner/​|Jerome Bruner]], which, since knowledge cannot be directly transmitted from person to person, focuses on individual'​s knowledge construction and learning through discovery.   * **cognitive constructivism** (also known as //realist constructivism//​) presented in works of authors like [[http://​www.piaget.org/​aboutPiaget.html|Jean Piaget]] or [[http://​www.psych.nyu.edu/​bruner/​|Jerome Bruner]], which, since knowledge cannot be directly transmitted from person to person, focuses on individual'​s knowledge construction and learning through discovery.
  
Line 57: Line 57:
   * that these disadvantages will apply especially to novice learners(([[http://​books.google.hr/​books?​id=iAgmAQAAIAAJ&​dq=Integrating%20Educational%20Technology%20Into%20Teaching%202nd%20edition&​source=gbs_similarbooks|Roblyer,​ M. D., Edwards, J., & Havriluk, M. A. Integrating educational technology into teaching (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 1997.]])).   * that these disadvantages will apply especially to novice learners(([[http://​books.google.hr/​books?​id=iAgmAQAAIAAJ&​dq=Integrating%20Educational%20Technology%20Into%20Teaching%202nd%20edition&​source=gbs_similarbooks|Roblyer,​ M. D., Edwards, J., & Havriluk, M. A. Integrating educational technology into teaching (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 1997.]])).
  
-Although constructivism also includes learning methods with a certain degree of guidance and not just discovery learning and minimally guided instruction,​ critics claim that those methods still ignore proven benefits guidance, worked examples(()), and induce a higher cognitive load  resulting in lower resources available for learning due to orientation on finding a solution to a problem.+Although constructivism also includes learning methods with a certain degree of guidance and not just discovery learning and minimally guided instruction,​ critics claim that those methods still ignore proven benefits guidance, worked examples, and induce a higher cognitive load  resulting in lower resources available for learning due to orientation on finding a solution to a problem.
  
 It is important to notice that these findings do **not indicate** that the initial **assumptions of constructivism** of a learner constructing his own representation of knowledge are **wrong**. The indicate that suggested instructional design consequences described in discovery learning models with minimal guidance do not necessarily follow. Today it is generally considered that advantages of guidance during instructional process begin to fade only when learners possess sufficient amount of prior knowledge to provide guidance by themselves(([[http://​www.cogtech.usc.edu/​publications/​kirschner_Sweller_Clark.pdf|Kirschner,​ P. A, Sweller, J. and Clark, R. E. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist,​ discovery, problem-based,​ experiential,​ and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist 41, no. 2: 75–86. 2006.]])). ​ It is important to notice that these findings do **not indicate** that the initial **assumptions of constructivism** of a learner constructing his own representation of knowledge are **wrong**. The indicate that suggested instructional design consequences described in discovery learning models with minimal guidance do not necessarily follow. Today it is generally considered that advantages of guidance during instructional process begin to fade only when learners possess sufficient amount of prior knowledge to provide guidance by themselves(([[http://​www.cogtech.usc.edu/​publications/​kirschner_Sweller_Clark.pdf|Kirschner,​ P. A, Sweller, J. and Clark, R. E. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist,​ discovery, problem-based,​ experiential,​ and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist 41, no. 2: 75–86. 2006.]])). ​
Line 84: Line 84:
 [[http://​www.zipaquira-cundinamarca.gov.co/​apc-aa-files/​33383564656335333966393533336464/​Constructivism_1.pdf|Phillips,​ D. C. The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational researcher 24, no. 7: 5–12. 1995.]] [[http://​www.zipaquira-cundinamarca.gov.co/​apc-aa-files/​33383564656335333966393533336464/​Constructivism_1.pdf|Phillips,​ D. C. The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational researcher 24, no. 7: 5–12. 1995.]]
  
 +[[http://​www.tandfonline.com/​doi/​abs/​10.1080/​03057260608560222|Keith Taber. Beyond Constructivism:​ the Progressive Research Programme into Learning Science. Studies in Science Education 42, no. 1: 125-184, 2006.]]
  
learning_paradigms/constructivism.1309511115.txt.gz · Last modified: 2012/01/12 11:42 (external edit)