Content deleted Content added
m →Arguments against constructivist teaching techniques: Main article link does not get redirected now |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Altered title. Add: authors 1-1. Removed URL that duplicated identifier. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | #UCB_CommandLine |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 5:
}}
'''Constructivist teaching''' is based on [[
==History==
Constructivist approach teaching methods are based on
Dewey and Piaget researched [[childhood development]] and education; both were very influential in the development of informal education. Dewey's idea of influential education suggests that education must engage with and enlarge exploration of thinking and reflection associated with the role of educators. Contrary to this, Piaget argued that we learn by expanding our knowledge by experiences which are generated through play from infancy to adulthood which are necessary for learning. Both theories are now encompassed by the broader movement of [[progressive education]]. Constructivist learning theory states that all knowledge is constructed from a base of prior knowledge. As such, children are not to be treated as a blank slate, and make sense of classroom material in the context of his or her current knowledge.<ref name="thirteenorg">[http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index_sub5.html Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning]</ref>
The development of constructivist models of teaching are specifically attributed to the works of [[Maria Montessori]], which were further developed by more recent by theorists such as [[David A. Kolb]]
==Activities==
Line 43:
* One possible deterrent for this teaching method is that, due to the emphasis on group work, the ideas of the more active students may dominate the group's conclusions.<ref name="thirteenorg"/>
While proponents of constructivism argue that constructivist students perform better than their peers when tested on higher-order reasoning, the critics of constructivism argue that this teaching technique forces students to "[[Reinventing the wheel|reinvent the wheel]]". Supporters counter that "Students do not reinvent the wheel but, rather, attempt to understand how it turns, how it functions."<ref name="thirteenorg"/> Proponents argue that students — especially [[elementary school]]-aged children — are naturally curious about the world, and giving them the tools to explore it in a guided manner will serve to give them a stronger understanding of it.<ref name="thirteenorg"/>
Mayer (2004)<ref name="Mayer">[http://projects.ict.usc.edu/itw/vtt/MayerThreeStrikesAP04.pdf Should There Be a Three-Strikes Rule Against Pure Discovery Learning?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150215142158/http://projects.ict.usc.edu/itw/vtt/MayerThreeStrikesAP04.pdf |date=2015-02-15 }}, Mayer, 2004, ''American Psychologist, 59''(1), 14–19</ref> developed a literature review spanning fifty years and concluded "The research in this brief review shows that the formula constructivism = hands-on activity is a formula for educational disaster." His argument is that [[active learning]] is often suggested by those subscribing to this philosophy. In developing this instruction these educators produce materials that require learning to be behaviorally active and not be "cognitively active".<ref name="Mayer" /> That is, although they are engaged in activity, they may not be learning (Sweller, 1988). Mayer recommends using guided discovery, a mix of direct instruction and hands-on activity, rather than pure discovery: "In many ways, guided discovery appears to offer the best method for promoting constructivist learning."<ref name="Mayer" />
Line 58:
=== Guided instruction ===
A learning approach in which the educator uses strategically placed prompts, cues, questions, direct explanations, and modeling to guide student thinking and facilitate an increased responsibility for the completion of a task.
=== Problem-based learning ===
Line 79:
==== Jigsaw ====
{{main article|Jigsaw (teaching technique)}}
A highly structured cooperative learning approach which is implemented in four stages: introduction, focused exploration, reporting and re-shaping, and integration and evaluation. In the introduction stage, the class is divided into heterogeneous 'home' groups consisting of between three and seven students
==See also==
Line 97:
issue=2|
pages=75–86|
doi= 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1|hdl=1820/8951 |s2cid=17067829 |url=http://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/16899 |hdl-access=free}}
* {{cite journal|
author=Mayer, R.|
Line 114:
* Laffey, J., Tupper, T., Musser, D., & Wedman, J. (1997). A computer-mediated support system for project-based learning. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
* Taber, K. S. (2011). Constructivism as educational theory: Contingency in learning, and optimally guided instruction. In J. Hassaskhah (Ed.), Educational Theory (pp. 39–61). New York: Nova. Available from https://camtools.cam.ac.uk/wiki/eclipse/Constructivism.html.
* Wood, & Middleton, (1975). A study of assisted problem solving. British Journal of Psychology, 66(2),
* Thirteen Ed Online (2004). Constructivism as a paradigm for teaching and learning. http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index.html
* Durmus, Y. T. (2016). Effective Learning Environment Characteristics as a requirement of Constructivist Curricula: Teachers' Needs and School Principals' Views . International Journal of Instruction, 9(2).
| |||