The roots of constructivism could be traced from the fields of philosophy, psychology, sociology, and education. The fundamental idea of constructivism lies in its understanding of human learning. According to the constructivist view, human learning is constructed. Using the foundation of their previous learning, learners build new knowledge. It is sharply contrasted with the notion that learning is just a passive transmission of information from one individual to another (Hoover, 1996). Knowledge is not a stimulus-response phenomenon. Rather, it requires “self-regulation and the building of conceptual structures through reflection and abstraction” (Von Glasersfeld, 1995 cited in Murphy, 1997). Knowledge is acquired by building it from the innate capabilities of an individual and interacting with the environment (Houston, 1995, p. 64, cited in ncrel.org). Constructed knowledge revolves around two important theories. First, “learners construct new understandings using what they already know” (Hoover, 1996).
Learners are placed in learning situations carrying with them prior knowledge from their previous experiences, which influences the new or modified knowledge to be constructed as they learn new things. There is no tabula rasa or empty vessel where new knowledge could be etched upon Hoover, 1996). Second, learning is an active process. As they encounter new learning situations, learners relate their understanding of the new knowledge with what they know. At times when the learners encounter new knowledge that is inconsistent with their current understanding, they could modify their previous understanding to accommodate the new knowledge. Throughout the learning process, the learners remain active. They use what they have learned so far and take note of relevant elements in new learning experiences. Then, they assess the consistency of prior and emerging knowledge, and modify knowledge based on their assessment (Hoover, 1996).
How to translate constructivism into classroom practices is a challenge to all educators. This could be difficult since they need to “build a hypothetical model of the conceptual worlds of students” the nature of which could be very different from what the educators intended (Von Glasersfeld, 1996 cited in Murphy, 1997). To apply constructivism in the classroom, a number of constructivist teaching models and principles were devised. The following is a constructivist teaching model provided by Wilson and Cole (1991, pp.59-61, cited in Murphy, 1997): (1) embed learning in a rich authentic problem-solving environment; (2) provide for authentic versus academic contexts for learning; (3) provide for learner control; and (4) use errors as a mechanism to provide feedback on learners’ understanding. In addition, Honebein (1996, cited in Murphy, 1997) adds that a constructivist learning environment should set learning in social experience and provide activities that would enable students to appreciate multiple perspectives. In thirteen.org (2004), several ways on how to apply constructivism in the classroom are listed. One is to pose problems that are or will be relevant to the students by using examples that directly affect their personal lives. Another way is to structure learning around essential concepts by encouraging students to understand the whole concept by it into parts. The instructor can also apply a subject to various subjects when it emerges across various content areas.
The instructor should also facilitate an open-ended, nonjudgmental discussion so that students would not be threatened to speak up. Modifying the curriculum to address the suppositions and development of the students and development is also important by using a format that would engage students to the lesson. Finally, student learning in the context of teaching should be assessed to determine how much and what kind of help a student needs to be successful. Instead of assessing whether the student knows the material, an authentic assessment should ask the student what he or she knows.
While it seems that a constructivist approach to teaching could be an effective teaching strategy, applying it in real life poses a number of challenges. Constructivism promotes the idea of student autonomy and learner-driven inquiry which are not easily accepted by school boards, principals, parents, and even teachers. There are people who still retain a traditional view of classroom where “teachers transmit information to students while they sit in straight rows reading, working on worksheets, or listening to the teacher” (Haney, 2003).
Hence, it is becoming increasingly important to establish positive school community relationships to promote the advantages of constructivism. However, a teacher who is inspired to adapt a constructivist instruction could incorporate constructivism into the curriculum by starting with little changes. For starters, the teacher could try one or two constructivist explorations first in the regular curriculum. A good way to initiate the change is to listen to the students discussing ideas together, shifting the balance of responsibility to the student. Using primary sources and raw data instead of relying solely on the required text is another step towards a constructivist learning environment (Brooks ; Brooks, 1993 cited in Southwest Educational Development Laboratory, 1995).
The change in the demographics of the classroom is another concern that a teacher has to consider in using a constructivist teaching approach. In the United States, demographic changes in the school-age population resulted in greater cultural and linguistic diversity in the school (Mora, 2001). In a study conducted by McCarty et al (1991 cited in Marlowe, 1999), a pilot curriculum was introduced that emphasized open-ended questioning, collaborative group work, student-directed learning, and the use of cultural and linguistic resources to solve new problems. Results of the study show that the new curriculum enhanced student engagement, content mastery, and analytic reasoning in Navajo youth. This shows that accommodating cultural diversity in the classroom is attainable.
References
Haney, J. (2003). Constructivist beliefs about the science classroom learning environment:
perspectives from teachers, administrators, parents, community members, and students. School, Science, and Mathematics. Retrieved, October 11, 2007 from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3667/is_200312/ai_n9316314/print
Hoover, W. (1996). The practical implications of constructivism. SEDLetter, 9, 6. Retrieved,
October 11, 2007 from http://www.sedl.org/pubs/sedletter/v09n03/practice.html
Mora, J.K. (2001). Responding to the demographic challenge: an internet classroom for
teachers of language-minority students. Reading Online, 4(5). Retrieved, October 11, 2007 from http://www.readingonline.org/electronic/elec_index.asp?HREF=/electronic
/mora/index.html
Marlowe, B. (1999). Making the most of the classroom mosaic: a constructivist perspective.
Multicultural Education, Summer 1999.
Murphy, E. (1997). Constructivist learning theory. Retrieved, October 11, 2007 from
http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/%7Eelmurphy/emurphy/cle2b.html
Sedl.org. (1994). Constructing knowledge in the classroom. Retrieved, October 11, 2007
from http://www.sedl.org/scimath/compass/v01n03/1.html
Thirteen.org. (2004). How do I apply constructivism in my classroom? Retrieved, October 11,
2007 from http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/
exploration.html
