CONSTRUCTIVISM: A SHORT SUMMARY

“Constructivism is a theory of learning, and it is also a theory of knowing.  It is an epistemological concept that draws from a variety of fields, including philosophy, psychology, and science” (Walker & Lambert, 1995 p. 1).  Constructivism "has become de rigueur in educational circles and ... stems from a long and respected tradition in cognitive psychology, especially the writings of Dewey, Vygotsky, and Piaget" (Danielson, 1996, p. 23).  Ernst von Glasersfeld's basic principles of radical constructivism are the following:

1.  Knowledge is not passively received either through the senses or by way of communication, but it is actively built up by the cognising subject.

2.  The function of cognition is adaptive and serves the subject's organization of the experiential world, not the discovery of an objective ontological reality.  (von Glasersfeld, 1988, p. 83)

His principles are built on the ideas of Jean Piaget, who applied the biological concept of adaptation to epistemology (von Glasersfeld, 1996).  Von Glasersfeld (1993, p. 24) refers to his ideas as "postepistemological" because his radical constructivism posits a different relationship between knowledge and the external world than does traditional epistemology.

Theories about conceptual change have been built on constructivist principles.  Conceptual change can be subdivided into differentiation in which new concepts emerge from more general concepts, class extension in which existing concepts become cases of another subsuming concept, and re-conceptualization in which nature of and relationship between concepts changes significantly (Dykstra, Boyle and Monarch, 1992).  After dissatisfaction with existing conceptions, requirements for conceptual change are that the new conception be intelligible, plausible, and fruitful (Posner, Strike, Hewson, & Gertzog, 1982).  The status of a conception is increased as more of these three conditions are met (Hewson, 1996).

A constructivist view does not lead to a simple, uncontested set of rules for pedagogical practice.  General agreement is that students need interaction with the physical world and with their peers to stimulate meaning-making.  The teacher elicits students’ initial beliefs about the subject to be studied and about the nature of learning.  The teacher sets up situations that will cause dissatisfaction with existing ideas.  Realizing that students' expectations affect their observations and that multiple approaches to problem solving are acceptable, the teacher monitors students' understandings, requests from them evidence and justification, provides constraints for their thinking, and gives them opportunities to represent their knowledge in a variety of ways.  The teacher's role also includes introducing, when necessary, new ways of thinking about phenomena and working with symbols.  Then the teacher guides and supports students as they make sense of these ideas and tools for themselves in cooperation with their classmates (Driver, 1995; Driver, Asoko, Leach, Mortimer, & Scott, 1994; Duit, 1995; Fosnot, 1996; Lewin, 1995; Rubin, 1995; Tobin & Tippins, 1993; von Glasersfeld, 1995).

Constructivist approaches to teaching and cooperative learning techniques can be thought of as having both personal and interpersonal components.  Each person constructs his or her own mental frameworks and conceptions using preferred learning styles.  However, this is seldom done in isolation.  The cognitive developmental perspective emphasizes that participants should engage in discussion in which cognitive conflict is resolved and inadequate reasoning is modified.  Language passing back and forth between individuals in written and oral forms is viewed as indispensable for the development of understanding (Belenky et al, 1986; Driver, 1995; von Glasersfeld, 1995).  The social interdependence perspective has the assumption that the way social interdependence is structured determines how individuals interact.  This, in turn, determines what is accomplished by the group (Johnson & Johnson, 1994).  Intrinsic motivation is generated by interpersonal factors and joint aspirations.  At the same time that students become more aware of and take more responsibility for their own thinking, they increase their understanding and appreciation of other people’s thinking.

REFERENCES

Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M, Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M.  (1986).  Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind.  New York, NY: Basic Books.

Danielson, C.  (1996).  Enhancing professional practice:  A framework for teaching.  Alexandria, VA:  Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Driver, R.  (1995).  Constructivist approaches in science teaching.  In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 385-400).  Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P.  (1994).  Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom.  Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.

Duit, R.  (1995).  The constructivist view: A Fashionable and fruitful paradigm for science education research and practice.  In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 271-285).  Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dykstra, D. I., Boyle, C. F., & Monarch, I. A.  (1992).  Studying conceptual change in learning physics.  Science Education, 76(6), 615-652.

Fosnot, C. T.  (1996).  Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning.  In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 8-33).  New York, NY: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Hewson, P. W.  (1996).  Teaching for conceptual change.  In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit, & B. J. Fraser (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics (pp. 131-140).  New York, NY: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T.  (1994).  Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (4th ed.).  Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Lewin, P.  (1995).  The social already inhabits the epistemic: A discussion of Driver; Wood, Cobb, & Yackel; and von Glasersfeld.  In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 423-432).  Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 271-285.

Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A.  (1982).  Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change.  Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.

Rubin, D.  (1995).  Constructivism, sexual harassment, and presupposition:  A (very) loose response to Duit, Saxe, and Spivey.  In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 355-366).  Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Tobin, K., & Tippins. D.  (1993).  Constructivism as a referent for teaching and learning.  In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 3-21).  Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

von Glasersfeld, E.  (1996).  Introduction: Aspects of constructivism.  In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 3-7).  New York, NY: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

von Glasersfeld, E.  (1995).  Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning.  London: Falmer Press.

von Glasersfeld, E.  (1993).  Questions and answers about radical constructivism.  In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 23-38).  Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

von Glasersfeld, E.  (1988).  The reluctance to change a way of thinking.  The Irish Journal of Psychology, 9(1), 83-90

Walker, D., & Lambert, L.  (1995).  Learning and leading theory: A century in the making.  In L Lambert, D. Walker, D. P. Zimmerman, J. E. Cooper, M. D. Lambert, M. E. Gardner, & P. J. Ford Slack, The constructivist leader (pp. 1-27).  New York, NY: Teachers College Press, Columbia University.