Fifty Readings in Philosophy 4th Edition Pdf

Philosophical viewpoint about the nature of cognition; theory of knowledge

This article is nearly the approach to pedagogy. For the art movement, meet Constructivism (fine art).

Constructivism is a theory in didactics which posits that individuals or learners practise non acquire knowledge and understanding by passively perceiving it within a directly process of knowledge transmission, rather they construct new understandings and knowledge through experience and social soapbox, integrating new information with what they already know (prior knowledge). For children, this includes knowledge gained prior to entering school.^[three] It is associated with various philosophical positions, specially in epistemology as well every bit ontology, politics, and ethics.^[4] The origin of the theory is too linked to French developmental psychologist Jean Piaget'south theory of cognitive evolution.

Background [edit]

Constructivism in teaching has roots in epistemology, which - in philosophy - is a theory of noesis, which is concerned with the logical categories of knowledge and its justificational basis.^[5] Epistemology too focuses on both the warranting of the subjective noesis of a unmarried knower and conventional cognition. In constructivism, hence, information technology is recognized that the learner has prior knowledge and experiences, which are often determined by their social and cultural environment. Learning is therefore done by students' "constructing" knowledge out of their experiences. While the Behaviorist school of learning may help understand what students are doing, educators besides need to know what students are thinking, and how to enrich what students are thinking.^[six] There are scholars who country that the constructivist view emerged as a reaction to the so-called "transmission model of didactics", including the realist philosophy that it is based on.^[iii]

Constructivism can be traced back to educational psychology in the work of Jean Piaget (1896–1980) identified with Piaget'southward theory of cognitive evolution. Piaget focused on how humans make meaning in relation to the interaction between their experiences and their ideas. His views tended to focus on human development in relation to what is occurring with an private as distinct from development influenced by other persons.^[7] Lev Vygotsky'southward (1896-1934) theory of social constructivism emphasized the importance of sociocultural learning; how interactions with adults, more capable peers, and cognitive tools are internalized by learners to form mental constructs through the zone of proximal development. Expanding upon Vygotsky's theory Jerome Bruner and other educational psychologists developed the of import concept of instructional scaffolding, whereby the social or informational environs offers supports (or scaffolds) for learning that are gradually withdrawn as they become internalized.^[vi]

Views more focused on human development in the context of the social world include the sociocultural or socio-historical perspective of Lev Vygotsky and the situated cognition perspectives of Mikhail Bakhtin, Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger;^[8] Brown, Collins and Duguid;^[9] Newman, Griffin and Cole,^[10] and Barbara Rogoff.^[11]

The concept of constructivism has influenced a number of disciplines, including psychology, sociology, educational activity and the history of scientific discipline.^[12] During its infancy, constructivism examined the interaction between human experiences and their reflexes or behavior-patterns. Piaget called these systems of knowledge "schemes."

Schemes are non to be confused with schema, a term that comes from schema theory, which is from data-processing perspectives on man knowledge. Whereas Piaget's schemes are content-costless, schemata (the plural of schema) are concepts; for case, well-nigh humans have a schema for "grandmother", "egg", or "magnet."

Constructivism does non refer to a specific pedagogy, although information technology is often confused with constructionism, an educational theory developed by Seymour Papert, inspired by constructivist and experiential learning ideas of Piaget.

Piaget's theory of constructivist learning has had broad-ranging bear upon on learning theories and instruction methods in education, and is an underlying theme of teaching reform movements.^{[ citation needed ]} Research support for constructivist instruction techniques has been mixed, with some studies in support and others contradicting constructivist results.^{[ commendation needed ]}

History [edit]

Earlier educational philosophies did not identify much value on what would get constructivist ideas; children'south play and exploration were seen as bumming and of niggling importance.^{[ citation needed ]} Jean Piaget did non agree with these traditional views; he saw play every bit an important and necessary part of the student'due south cognitive development and provided scientific bear witness for his views. Today, constructivist theories are influential throughout the formal and informal learning sectors. In museum teaching, constructivist theories inform exhibit blueprint. 1 good example of constructivist learning in a non-formal setting is the Investigate Eye at The Natural History Museum, London.^{[ commendation needed ]} Here visitors are encouraged to explore a collection of existent natural history specimens, to practice some scientific skills and brand discoveries for themselves. Writers who influenced constructivism include:

• John Dewey (1859–1952)
• Maria Montessori (1870–1952)
• Władysław Strzemiński (1893–1952)
• Jean Piaget (1896–1980)
• Lev Vygotsky (1896–1934)
• Heinz von Foerster (1911–2002)
• George Kelly (1905–1967)
• Jerome Bruner (1915–2016)
• Herbert Simon (1916–2001)
• Paul Watzlawick (1921–2007)
• Ernst von Glasersfeld (1917–2010)
• Edgar Morin (born 1921)
• Humberto Maturana (1928–2021)

Individual [edit]

The formalization of constructivism from a within-the-human perspective is more often than not attributed to Jean Piaget, who articulated mechanisms by which information from the environment and ideas from the individual collaborate and effect in internalized structures developed by learners. He identified processes of assimilation and adaptation that are fundamental in this interaction as individuals construct new knowledge from their experiences.

When individuals assimilate new information, they incorporate information technology into an already existing framework without changing that framework. This may occur when individuals' experiences are aligned with their internal representations of the world, only may besides occur as a failure to change a faulty understanding; for example, they may not find events, may misunderstand input from others, or may make up one's mind that an event is a fluke and is therefore unimportant as information about the world. In contrast, when individuals' experiences contradict their internal representations, they may change their perceptions of the experiences to fit their internal representations.

Co-ordinate to the theory, accommodation is the process of reframing i's mental representation of the external world to fit new experiences. Adaptation tin be understood as the machinery by which failure leads to learning: when nosotros act on the expectation that the earth operates in one style and it violates our expectations, nosotros often fail, only by accommodating this new experience and reframing our model of the way the world works, we learn from the experience of failure, or others' failure.

It is important to note that constructivism is not a particular pedagogy. In fact, constructivism is a theory describing how learning happens, regardless of whether learners are using their experiences to empathize a lecture or following the instructions for building a model aeroplane. In both cases, the theory of constructivism suggests that learners construct cognition out of their experiences.

Notwithstanding, constructivism is often associated with pedagogic approaches that promote agile learning, or learning by doing. There are many critics of "learning past doing" (a.k.a. "discovery learning") as an instructional strategy (e.g. come across the criticisms below).^{[xiii] [fourteen]} While there is much enthusiasm for constructivism as a design strategy, co-ordinate to Tobias and Duffy "... to us it would appear that constructivism remains more of a philosophical framework than a theory that either allows us to precisely depict instruction or prescribe pattern strategies."^{[14] : four}

Constructivist learning intervention [edit]

The nature of the learner [edit]

Social constructivism non but acknowledges the uniqueness and complexity of the learner, only actually encourages, utilizes and rewards it every bit an integral part of the learning process.^[fifteen]

The importance of the groundwork and culture of the learner [edit]

Social constructivisms or socioculturalism encourage the learner or learners to arrive at his or her version of the truth, influenced by his or her background, civilisation or embedded worldview. Historical developments and symbol systems, such as language, logic, and mathematical systems, are inherited by the learner as a member of a particular civilisation and these are learned throughout the learner's life. This besides stresses the importance of the nature of the learner'southward social interaction with knowledgeable members of the society. Without the social interaction with other more than knowledgeable people, it is incommunicable to larn social meaning of important symbol systems and acquire how to utilize them. Young children develop their thinking abilities by interacting with other children, adults and the physical world. From the social constructivist viewpoint, it is thus important to have into account the background and culture of the learner throughout the learning process, every bit this background also helps to shape the knowledge and truth that the learner creates, discovers and attains in the learning process.^[xv]

Responsibility for learning [edit]

Furthermore, information technology is argued that the responsibility of learning should reside increasingly with the educatee. Social constructivism thus emphasizes the importance of the student being actively involved in the learning procedure, unlike previous educational viewpoints where the responsibleness rested with the instructor to teach and where the learner played a passive, receptive role. Von Glasersfeld (1989) emphasized that learners construct their own understanding and that they do not simply mirror and reverberate what they read. Learners expect for meaning and will endeavour to find regularity and order in the events of the world even in the absenteeism of total or complete information.^[16]

The Harkness discussion method [edit]

It is called the "Harkness" discussion method because it was developed at Phillips Exeter Academy with funds donated in the 1930s by Edward Harkness. This is besides named after the Harkness table and involves students seated in a circle, motivating and controlling their own word. The instructor acts as little every bit possible. Perhaps the teacher'south simply function is to discover, although he/she might begin or shift or fifty-fifty direct a discussion. The students get it rolling, direct information technology, and focus it. They human activity as a team, cooperatively, to make it work. They all participate, just non in a competitive mode. Rather, they all share in the responsibleness and the goals, much as whatsoever members share in whatever squad sport. Although the goals of any discussion will change depending upon what's under give-and-take, some goals will always be the same: to illuminate the subject, to unravel its mysteries, to interpret and share and learn from other points of view, to slice together the puzzle using anybody's contribution. Discussion skills are important. Everyone must be aware of how to get this discussion rolling and proceed it rolling and interesting. Merely equally in whatever sport, a number of skills are necessary to work on and use at appropriate times. Everyone is expected to contribute by using these skills.

The motivation for learning [edit]

Some other crucial assumption regarding the nature of the student concerns the level and source of motivation for learning. According to Von Glasersfeld, sustaining motivation to learn is strongly dependent on the student'due south confidence of potential for learning.^[sixteen] These feelings of competence and belief in potential to solve new problems, are derived from beginning-hand experience of mastery of problems in the past and are much more any external acknowledgment and motivation.^[17] This links up with Vygotsky's "zone of proximal development" where students are challenged in close proximity to, yet slightly to a higher place, their electric current level of development. By experiencing the successful completion of challenging tasks, students gain confidence and motivation to embark on more complex challenges.^[18]

The office of the instructor [edit]

Instructors equally facilitators [edit]

According to the social constructivist approach, instructors have to adapt to the role of facilitators and not teachers.^[nineteen] Whereas a teacher gives a didactic lecture that covers the field of study matter, a facilitator helps the student to get to his or her own understanding of the content. In the onetime scenario the learner plays a passive office and in the latter scenario the educatee plays an agile role in the learning procedure. The accent thus turns away from the instructor and the content, and towards the student.^[20] This dramatic alter of role implies that a facilitator needs to brandish a totally unlike set of skills than that of a teacher.^[21] A teacher tells, a facilitator asks; a teacher lectures from the front, a facilitator supports from the back; a teacher gives answers co-ordinate to a set curriculum, a facilitator provides guidelines and creates the environment for the learner to get in at his or her ain conclusions; a teacher mostly gives a monologue, a facilitator is in continuous dialogue with the learners.^[22] A facilitator should also be able to adapt the learning experience 'in mid-air' by taking the initiative to steer the learning experience to where the learners want to create value.

The learning surroundings should also exist designed to back up and challenge the pupil's thinking.^[23] While information technology is advocated to give the student ownership of the problem and solution procedure, information technology is not the case that any activity or any solution is adequate. The critical goal is to support the student in becoming an constructive thinker. This can exist achieved by assuming multiple roles, such every bit consultant and coach.

A few strategies for cooperative learning include:

• Reciprocal Questioning: students piece of work together to enquire and answer questions
• Jigsaw Classroom: students become "experts" on one part of a group project and teach information technology to the others in their group
• Structured Controversies: Students work together to research a particular controversy^[24]

Learning is an active process [edit]

Social constructivism, strongly influenced past Vygotsky's (1978) work, suggests that knowledge is first synthetic in a social context and is and then appropriated by individuals.^[25] Co-ordinate to social constructivists, the process of sharing individual perspectives — called collaborative elaboration — results in learners constructing understanding together that wouldn't be possible alone.^{[26] [27]}

Social constructivist scholars view learning equally an agile process where students should learn to discover principles, concepts and facts for themselves, hence the importance of encouraging guesswork and intuitive thinking in students.^{[9] [28]}

Other constructivist scholars concord with this and emphasize that individuals make meanings through the interactions with each other and with the environment they live in.^[29] Knowledge is thus a product of humans and is socially and culturally constructed.^{[17] [thirty]} McMahon (1997) agrees that learning is a social procedure. He further stated that learning is not a process that just takes place inside our minds, nor is it a passive development of our behaviors that is shaped by external forces. Rather, meaningful learning occurs when individuals are engaged in social activities.^[31]

Vygotsky (1978) besides highlighted the convergence of the social and practical elements in learning by saying that the well-nigh significant moment in the course of intellectual development occurs when spoken language and practical activity, two previously completely contained lines of evolution, converge. Through practical action a child constructs significant on an intra-personal level, while speech connects this meaning with the interpersonal world shared past the child and her/his civilisation.^[18]

Good relationship between instructor and student [edit]

A further characteristic of the role of the facilitator in the social constructivist viewpoint, is that the instructor and the students are equally involved in learning from each other too.^[32] This means that the learning experience is both subjective and objective and requires that the instructor'south culture, values and background go an essential role of the interplay betwixt students and tasks in the shaping of significant. Students compare their version of thought with that of the instructor and fellow students to get to a new, socially tested version of context. The task or problem is thus the interface between the instructor and the pupil.^[31] This creates a dynamic interaction between task, instructor and student. This entails that students and instructors should develop an sensation of each other'due south viewpoints and and so look to their own beliefs, standards and values, thus beingness both subjective and objective at the same time.^[33]

Some studies argue for the importance of mentoring in the process of learning.^{[9] [34]} The social constructivist model thus emphasizes the importance of the relationship betwixt the student and the instructor in the learning process.

Some learning approaches that could harbour this interactive learning include reciprocal pedagogy, peer collaboration, cerebral apprenticeship, problem-based educational activity, web quests, Anchored Instruction and other approaches that involve learning with others.

Collaboration among learners [edit]

Learners with different skills and backgrounds should collaborate in tasks and discussions to arrive at a shared understanding of the truth in a specific field.^[35]

Some social constructivist models also stress the demand for collaboration amidst learners, in direct contradiction to traditional competitive approaches.^[35] I Vygotskian notion that has significant implications for peer collaboration, is that of the zone of proximal development. Divers as the altitude betwixt the bodily developmental level as determined past contained problem-solving and the level of potential development as adamant through problem-solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers, it differs from the fixed biological nature of Piaget'south stages of development. Through a process of 'scaffolding' a learner tin exist extended beyond the limitations of physical maturation to the extent that the development process lags behind the learning process.^[eighteen]

If students accept to present and railroad train new contents with their classmates, a not-linear process of collective knowledge-construction will be set up.

The importance of context [edit]

The social constructivist paradigm views the context in which the learning occurs as central to the learning itself.^[31]

Underlying the notion of the learner as an active processor is "the assumption that there is no ane gear up of generalised learning laws with each law applying to all domains".^{[23] : 208} Decontextualised knowledge does not give u.s. the skills to apply our understandings to accurate tasks considering we are not working with the concept in the circuitous environment and experiencing the complex interrelationships in that environment that determine how and when the concept is used.^[35] Ane social constructivist notion is that of accurate or situated learning, where the student takes office in activities directly relevant to the application of learning and that accept place within a culture similar to the practical setting.^[ix] Cognitive apprenticeship has been proposed as an effective constructivist model of learning that attempts to "enculturate students into accurate practices through action and social interaction in a fashion similar to that evident, and evidently successful, in craft apprenticeship".^{[28] : 25}

Holt and Willard-Holt (2000) emphasize the concept of dynamic assessment, which is a way of assessing the true potential of learners that differs significantly from conventional tests. Here, the essentially interactive nature of learning is extended to the procedure of assessment. Rather than viewing cess as a process carried out by one person, such as an instructor, it is seen equally a two-style process involving interaction betwixt both instructor and learner. The function of the assessor becomes 1 of entering into dialogue with the persons beingness assessed to detect out their current level of performance on whatever task and sharing with them possible ways in which that functioning might be improved on a subsequent occasion. Thus, assessment and learning are seen equally inextricably linked and not split processes.^[32]

According to this viewpoint, instructors should see assessment equally a continuous and interactive process that measures the achievement of the learner, the quality of the learning feel and courseware. The feedback created by the cess process serves as a direct foundation for farther development.

The selection, scope, and sequencing of the subject field affair [edit]

Knowledge should be discovered every bit an integrated whole [edit]

Knowledge should non exist divided into different subjects or compartments, simply should be discovered as an integrated whole.^{[23] [31]}

This also over again underlines the importance of the context in which learning is presented.^[9] The world, in which the learner needs to operate, does not arroyo one in the grade of different subjects, but every bit a complex myriad of facts, bug, dimensions, and perceptions.^[28]

Engaging and challenging the educatee [edit]

Learners should constantly be challenged with tasks that refer to skills and knowledge only beyond their current level of mastery. This captures their motivation and builds on previous successes to enhance pupil confidence.^[21] This is in line with Vygotsky'southward zone of proximal development, which tin can be described as the altitude between the actual developmental level (every bit determined past independent trouble-solving) and the level of potential development (as determined through problem-solving nether adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers).^[18]

Vygotsky (1978) further claimed that didactics is good only when it gain ahead of evolution. Then it awakens and rouses to life an entire set of functions in the stage of maturing, which lie in the zone of proximal development. It is in this mode that instruction plays an extremely of import function in development.^[18]

To fully engage and challenge the educatee, the chore and learning surround should reverberate the complication of the environs that the educatee should exist able to part in at the stop of learning. Students must non only take ownership of the learning or problem-solving process, only of the problem itself.^[36]

Where the sequencing of field of study matter is concerned, it is the constructivist viewpoint that the foundations of any bailiwick may be taught to anybody at any phase in some form.^[35] This means that instructors should first introduce the basic ideas that form topics or subject area areas, and then revisit and build upon these repeatedly. This notion has been extensively used in curricula.

It is important for instructors to realize that although a curriculum may exist set down for them, information technology inevitably becomes shaped by them into something personal that reflects their own belief systems, their thoughts and feelings about both the content of their instruction and their students.^[22] Thus, the learning experience becomes a shared enterprise. The emotions and life contexts of those involved in the learning procedure must therefore be considered every bit an integral part of learning. The goal of the educatee is central in because why to acquire.^{[9] [28]}

The structuredness of the learning process [edit]

It is important to achieve the right balance between the degree of structure and flexibility that is built into the learning process. Savery (1994) contends that the more structured the learning environment, the harder it is for the learners to construct pregnant based on their conceptual understandings. A facilitator should construction the learning experience simply enough to brand sure that the students go clear guidance and parameters within which to attain the learning objectives, yet the learning experience should be open up and free enough to allow for the learners to observe, bask, interact and make it at their own, socially verified version of truth.^[33]

In adult learning [edit]

Constructivist ideas have been used to inform adult education. Current trends in higher education push for more than "agile learning" teaching approaches which are frequently based on constructivist views.

Approaches based on constructivism stress the importance of mechanisms for mutual planning, diagnosis of learner needs and interests, cooperative learning climate, sequential activities for achieving the objectives, conception of learning objectives based on the diagnosed needs and interests. While adult learning often stresses the importance of personal relevance of the content, interest of the learner in the process, and deeper agreement of underlying concepts, all of these are principles that may benefit learners of all ages equally even children connect their every day experiences to what they acquire.

Pedagogies based on constructivism [edit]

Various approaches in pedagogy derive from constructivist theory. They unremarkably suggest that learning is achieved best using a hands-on approach. Learners acquire by experimentation, and not by being told what volition happen, and are left to make their own inferences, discoveries and conclusions.

Supportive research and evidence [edit]

Hmelo-Argent, Duncan, & Chinn cite several studies supporting the success of the constructivist problem-based and inquiry learning methods. For example, they describe a project chosen GenScope, an inquiry-based scientific discipline software application. Students using the GenScope software showed meaning gains over the command groups, with the largest gains shown in students from basic courses.^[37]

Hmelo-Silvery et al. also cite a large study by Geier on the effectiveness of enquiry-based science for middle schoolhouse students, as demonstrated by their functioning on high-stakes standardized tests. The improvement was 14% for the first cohort of students and thirteen% for the 2nd cohort. This written report also found that enquiry-based teaching methods greatly reduced the achievement gap for African-American students.^[37]

Guthrie et al. (2004) compared three instructional methods for third-grade reading: a traditional arroyo, a strategies educational activity just arroyo, and an approach with strategies teaching and constructivist motivation techniques including pupil choices, collaboration, and easily-on activities. The constructivist approach, called CORI (Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction), resulted in better pupil reading comprehension, cerebral strategies, and motivation.^[38]

Jong Suk Kim plant that using constructivist education methods for 6th graders resulted in meliorate student achievement than traditional didactics methods. This study as well found that students preferred constructivist methods over traditional ones. However, Kim did not find any departure in student self-concept or learning strategies betwixt those taught by constructivist or traditional methods.^[39]

Doğru and Kalender compared science classrooms using traditional teacher-centered approaches to those using student-centered, constructivist methods. In their initial exam of student performance immediately following the lessons, they institute no significant difference between traditional and constructivist methods. Nevertheless, in the follow-upward cess fifteen days later, students who learned through constructivist methods showed better retention of knowledge than those who learned through traditional methods.^[40]

Criticism [edit]

Several cognitive psychologists and educators accept questioned the primal claims of constructivism. It is argued that constructivist theories are misleading or contradict known findings.^{[thirteen] [41] [42] [43] [44]} Matthews (1993) attempts to sketch the influence of constructivism in current mathematics and science education, aiming to betoken how pervasive Aristotle's empiricist epistemology is within it and what problems constructivism faces on that account.^[45]

In the neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development it is maintained that learning at any age depends upon the processing and representational resources available at this item historic period. That is, it is maintained that if the requirements of the concept to exist understood exceeds the bachelor processing efficiency and working memory resources and then the concept is past definition not learnable. This attitude toward learning impedes the learning from understanding essential theoretical concepts or, in other words, reasoning.^[46] Therefore, no thing how agile a kid is during learning, to larn the child must operate in a learning environment that meets the developmental and private learning constraints that are characteristic for the child's age and this child's possible deviations from her historic period'south norm. If this condition is not met, structure goes off-target.^{[47] [48]}

Several educators take also questioned the effectiveness of this approach toward instructional design, especially as it applies to the development of didactics for novices.^{[13] [49]} While some constructivists contend that "learning past doing" enhances learning, critics of this instructional strategy argue that little empirical evidence exists to back up this statement given novice learners.^{[thirteen] [49]} Sweller and his colleagues argue that novices do not possess the underlying mental models, or "schemas" necessary for "learning past doing".^[50] Indeed, Mayer (2004) reviewed the literature and institute that fifty years of empirical data do not back up using the constructivist teaching technique of pure discovery; in those situations requiring discovery, he argues for the utilize of guided discovery instead.^[49]

Mayer (2004) argues that not all teaching techniques based on constructivism are efficient or effective for all learners, suggesting many educators misapply constructivism to utilize teaching techniques that require learners to exist behaviorally agile. He describes this inappropriate employ of constructivism as the "constructivist teaching fallacy". "I refer to this estimation as the constructivist teaching fallacy because it equates active learning with active teaching."^{[49] : 15} Instead Mayer proposes learners should exist "cognitively active" during learning and that instructors use "guided practice."

In contrast, Kirschner et al. (2006)^[13] describe constructivist teaching methods as "unguided methods of didactics." They suggest more than structured learning activities for learners with piffling to no prior noesis. Slezak states that constructivism "is an example of stylish but thoroughly problematic doctrines that can have little benefit for practical pedagogy or instructor instruction."^[51] Similar views have been stated by Meyer,^[52] Boden, Quale and others.

Kirschner et al. group a number of learning theories together (Discovery, Trouble-Based, Experiential, and Research-Based learning) and stated that highly scaffolded constructivist methods like problem-based learning and inquiry learning are ineffective.^[xiii] Kirschner et al. described several research studies that were favorable to problem-based learning given learners were provided some level of guidance and support.^[13]

A rebuttal to the criticisms of Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark [edit]

While at that place are critics of the Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark^[thirteen] article, Sweller and his associates have written in their manufactures near:

1. instructional designs for producing procedural learning (learning every bit behavior change);^[50]
2. their grouping of seemingly disparate learning theories^[thirteen] and;
3. a continuum of guidance beginning with worked examples that may be followed by exercise, or transitioned to exercise^[53] (Renkl, Atkinson, Maier, and Staley, 2002)

Kirschner et al. (2006) describe worked examples as an instructional design solution for procedural learning.^[13] Clark, Nguyen, and Sweller (2006) describe this equally a very constructive, empirically validated method of teaching learners procedural skill acquisition. Evidence for learning past studying worked-examples, is known equally the worked-example upshot and has been found to be useful in many domains (e.g. music, chess, athletics)^[54] concept mapping,^[55] geometry,^[56] physics, mathematics, or programming.^[57]

Kirschner et al. (2006)^[thirteen] describe why they grouping a series of seemingly disparate learning theories (Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based learning). The reasoning for this group is because each learning theory promotes the aforementioned constructivist education technique—"learning by doing." While they fence "learning by doing" is useful for more than knowledgeable learners, they argue this teaching technique is non useful for novices. Mayer states that information technology promotes behavioral action too early in the learning process, when learners should be cognitively agile.^[49]

In addition, Sweller and his associates describe a continuum of guidance, starting with worked examples to slowly fade guidance. This continuum of faded guidance has been tested empirically to produce a series of learning effects: the worked-instance effect,^[58] the guidance fading issue,^[59] and the expertise-reversal effect.^[53]

Criticism of discovery-based teaching techniques [edit]

After a one-half century of advocacy associated with pedagogy using minimal guidance, there appears no body of research supporting the technique. In so far every bit in that location is any prove from controlled studies, it virtually uniformly supports directly, strong instructional guidance rather constructivist-based minimal guidance during the education of novice to intermediate learners. Even for students with considerable prior knowledge, strong guidance while learning is virtually oftentimes constitute to be as effective as unguided approaches. Non only is unguided instruction normally less effective; in that location is also evidence that it may have negative results when students acquire misconceptions or incomplete or disorganized knowledge

—Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching by Kirschner, Sweller, Clark^[13]

Mayer (2004) argues against discovery-based teaching techniques and provides an extensive review to support this statement. Mayer'southward arguments are against pure discovery, and are not specifically aimed at constructivism: "Zippo in this article should be construed as arguing against the view of learning every bit noesis structure or against using hands-on inquiry or group discussion that promotes the process of knowledge construction in learners. The main conclusion I depict from the iii research literatures I have reviewed is that information technology would exist a mistake to interpret the current constructivist view of learning as a rationale for reviving pure discovery equally a method of instruction."^[49]

Mayer's concern is how one applies discovery-based teaching techniques. He provides empirical enquiry as evidence that discovery-based pedagogy techniques are inadequate. Here he cites this literature and makes his point "For example, a recent replication is research showing that students larn to become ameliorate at solving mathematics problems when they study worked-out examples rather than when they solely engage in hands-on problem solving.^[60] Today'due south proponents of discovery methods, who merits to describe their back up from constructivist philosophy, are making inroads into educational practise. However a dispassionate review of the relevant research literature shows that discovery-based practice is not as effective as guided discovery."^{[49] : 18}

Mayer's bespeak is that people often misuse constructivism to promote pure discovery-based educational activity techniques. He proposes that the instructional design recommendations of constructivism are as well oftentimes aimed at discovery-based practice.^[49] Sweller (1988) found evidence that do by novices during early on schema acquisition, distracts these learners with unnecessary search-based activity, when the learner'south attention should be focused on understanding (acquiring schemas).^[l]

The study past Kirschner et al. from which the quote at the showtime of this section was taken has been widely cited and is of import for showing the limits of minimally-guided instruction.^[61] Hmelo-Silver et al. responded,^[62] pointing out that Kirschner et al. conflated constructivist teaching techniques such as inquiry learning with "discovery learning". (See the preceding ii sections of this commodity.) This would concur with Mayer's viewpoint that fifty-fifty though constructivism as a theory and educational activity techniques incorporating guidance are likely valid applications of this theory, nevertheless a tradition of misunderstanding has led to some question "pure discovery" techniques.

The math wars and discovery-based teaching techniques [edit]

The math wars controversy in the Usa is an instance of the type of heated argue that sometimes follows the implementation of constructivist-inspired curricula in schools. In the 1990s, mathematics textbooks based on new standards largely informed by constructivism were developed and promoted with authorities support. Although constructivist theory does non crave eliminating instruction entirely, some textbooks seemed to recommend this extreme. Some parents and mathematicians protested the blueprint of textbooks that omitted or de-emphasized instruction of standard mathematical methods. Supporters responded that the methods were to exist eventually discovered under direction past the teacher, but since this was missing or unclear, many insisted the textbooks were designed to deliberately eliminate instruction of standard methods. In one commonly adopted text, the standard formula for the surface area of a circle is to be derived in the classroom, but non actually printed in the student textbook as is explained by the developers of CMP: "The student role of formulating, representing, clarifying, communicating, and reflecting on ideas leads to an increase in learning. If the format of the texts included many worked examples, the pupil role would so become merely reproducing these examples with small modifications."^[63]

Similarly, this approach has been practical to reading with whole language and inquiry-based scientific discipline that emphasizes the importance of devising rather than just performing hands-on experiments as early equally the simple grades (traditionally done by research scientists), rather than studying facts. In other areas of curriculum such as social studies and writing are relying more than on "higher social club thinking skills" rather than memorization of dates, grammar or spelling rules or reciting right answers. Advocates of this arroyo counter that the constructivism does non require going to extremes, that in fact teachable moments should regularly infuse the experience with the more traditional educational activity. The primary differentiation from the traditional approach being that the engagement of the students in their learning makes them more receptive to learning things at an appropriate time, rather than on a preset schedule.

Importance of construction in constructivist learning environments [edit]

During the 1990s, several theorists began to written report the cognitive load of novices (those with little or no prior cognition of the discipline affair) during problem solving. Cognitive load theory was applied in several contexts.^{[64] [65] [66] [67] [58] [68]} Based on the results of their research, these authors practice not support the idea of allowing novices to interact with sick-structured learning environments. Ill-structured learning environments rely on the learner to discover problem solutions. Jonassen (1997) likewise suggested that novices be taught with "well-structured" learning environments.^[69]

Jonassen (1997) as well proposed well-designed, well-structured learning environments provide scaffolding for problem-solving. Finally, both Sweller and Jonassen support trouble-solving scenarios for more avant-garde learners.^{[69] [70]}

Sweller and his associates fifty-fifty propose well-structured learning environments, like those provided by worked examples, are not constructive for those with more experience—this was afterwards described as the "expertise reversal effect".^[53] Cerebral load theorists advise worked examples initially, with a gradual introduction of problem solving scenarios; this is described as the "guidance fading effect"^{[59] [71]} Each of these ideas provides more than evidence for Anderson's Human activity-R framework.^[72] This ACT-R framework suggests learning can brainstorm with studying examples.

Finally Mayer states: "Thus, the contribution of psychology is to aid motility educational reform efforts from the fuzzy and unproductive world of educational credo—which sometimes hides under the banner of various versions of constructivism—to the abrupt and productive globe of theory-based enquiry on how people learn."^{[49] : 18}

Defoliation between constructivist and maturationist views [edit]

Many people confuse constructivist with maturationist views. The constructivist (or cerebral-developmental) stream "is based on the idea that the dialectic or interactionist process of development and learning through the student'due south active structure should exist facilitated and promoted by adults".^[73] Whereas, "The romantic maturationist stream is based on the idea that the student's naturally occurring development should be immune to flower without adult interventions in a permissive surroundings."^[73] In other words, adults play an agile function in guiding learning in constructivism, while they are expected to permit children to guide themselves in maturationism.

Radical constructivism [edit]

Ernst von Glasersfeld developed radical constructivism past coupling Piaget'due south theory of learning and philosophical viewpoint about the nature of cognition with Kant'southward rejection of an objective reality independent of human perception or reason. Radical constructivism does not view knowledge as an attempt to generate ideas that lucifer an independent, objective reality.^[74] Instead, theories and knowledge nigh the world, as generated by our senses and reason, either fit inside the constraints of whatever reality may exist and, thus, are viable or do not and are not feasible.^[75] As a theory of instruction, radical constructivism emphasizes the experiences of the learner, differences between learners and the importance of doubt.^[76]

Relational constructivism [edit]

Björn Kraus' relational constructivism tin exist perceived as a relational consequence of radical constructivism. In contrast to social constructivism, it picks upwardly the epistemological threads and maintains the radical constructivist thought that humans cannot overcome their limited conditions of reception. Despite the subjectivity of human being constructions of reality, relational constructivism focuses on the relational conditions that apply to human being perceptional processes.^[77]

[edit]

In recent decades, constructivist theorists have extended the traditional focus on private learning to address collaborative and social dimensions of learning. Information technology is possible to run across social constructivism equally a bringing together of aspects of the piece of work of Piaget with that of Bruner and Vygotsky.^[78]

Communal constructivism [edit]

The concept Communal constructivism was developed by Leask and Younie^[79] in 1995 through their enquiry on the European SchoolNet^[80] which demonstrated the value of experts collaborating to push button the boundaries of knowledge i.eastward. communal construction of new knowledge between experts rather than social construction of knowledge every bit described by Vygotsky where at that place is a learner to teacher scaffolding human relationship. "Communal constructivism" as a concept applies to those situations in which there is currently no expert cognition or inquiry to underpin knowledge in an area. "Communal constructivism" refers specifically to the procedure of experts working together to create, tape and publish new knowledge in emerging areas. In the seminal European SchoolNet inquiry where for the first time academics were testing out how the internet could back up classroom practice and instruction, experts from a number of countries set test situations to generate and empathise new possibilities for educational practice.

Bryn Holmes in 2001 applied this to student learning as described in an early paper, "in this model, students volition not simply laissez passer through a course similar water through a sieve but instead leave their own banner in the learning process."^[81]

Influence on information science and robotics [edit]

Constructivism has influenced the course of programming and information science. Some famous programming languages have been created, wholly or in part, for educational use, to support the constructionist theory of Seymour Papert. These languages accept been dynamically typed, and reflective. Logo and its successor Scratch are the best known of them. Constructivism has also informed the pattern of interactive machine learning systems,^[82] whereas Radical Constructivism has been explored every bit a paradigm to design experiments in rehabilitation robotics, more than precisely in prosthetics.^[83]

Run into besides [edit]

• Autodidactism
• Constructivist epistemology
• Disquisitional pedagogy
• Cultural-historical activeness theory (CHAT)
• Educational psychology
• Learning styles
• Philosophy of teaching
• Reform mathematics
• Situated knowledge
• Socratic method
• Education for social justice
• Vocational instruction

References [edit]

1. ^ White, Fiona Ann; Hayes, Brett Kenneth; Livesey, David James (2016). Developmental Psychology: From Infancy to Machismo (4th ed.). Melbourne, Vic.: Pearson Commonwealth of australia. ISBN9781486018277. OCLC 904034548.
2. ^ Bjorklund, David F. (i Nov 2018). "A Metatheory for Cognitive Development (or "Piaget is Dead" Revisited)". Kid Evolution. 89 (half-dozen): 2288–2302. doi:10.1111/cdev.13019. PMID 29336015. Archived from the original on fourteen August 2021. Retrieved 14 August 2021.
3. ^ ^{a b} Nola, Robert; Irzik, Gürol (2006). Philosophy, Science, Education and Culture. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 175. ISBN978-i-4020-3770-ii.
4. ^ Matthews, Michael (1998). Constructivism in Science Teaching: A Philosophical Test. Dordrecht: Springer Scientific discipline & Business organisation Media. pp. x. ISBN9780792349242.
5. ^ Steffe, Leslie P.; Gale, Jerry (2012). Constructivism in Teaching. Oxon: Routledge. ISBN978-1-136-47608-two.
6. ^ ^{a b} Seifert, Kelvin & Sutton, Rosemary. Educational Psychology: 2nd Edition Archived 2017-08-29 at the Wayback Machine. Global Text Project, 2009, pp. 33–37.
7. ^ Piaget, J., Psychology and Epistemology: Towards a Theory of Cognition (New York: Grossman, 1971).
8. ^ Lave, Jean; Wenger, Etienne (27 September 1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge Academy Press. ISBN978-0-521-42374-eight. ^{[ page needed ]}
9. ^ ^{a b c d e f} Brown, J.S.; Collins, A.; Duguid, P. (1989). "Situated cognition and the culture of learning". Educational Researcher. 18 (1): 32–42. doi:ten.3102/0013189x018001032. hdl:2142/17979. S2CID 9824073.
10. ^ Newman, Denis; Griffin, Peg; Cole, Michael (28 April 1989). The Construction Zone: Working for Cognitive Modify in School. Cambridge University Press. ISBN978-0-521-38942-6. ^{[ page needed ]}
11. ^ Rogoff, Barbara (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: cognitive development in social context. Oxford University Press. ^{[ folio needed ]}
12. ^ Eddy, Matthew Daniel (2004). "Fallible or Inerrant? A Belated review of the "Constructivist Bible"". British Journal for the History of Science. 37: 93–8. doi:10.1017/s0007087403005338. S2CID 141028650. Archived from the original on 2021-08-xiv. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
13. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h i j chiliad l} Kirschner, P. A.; Sweller, J.; Clark, R. Eastward. (2006). "Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an assay of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based educational activity". Educational Psychologist. 41 (2): 75–86. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1. hdl:1820/8951. S2CID 17067829. Archived from the original on 2021-08-xiv. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
14. ^ ^{a b} Tobias, S.; Duffy, T. M. (2009). Constructivist instruction: Success or failure?. New York: Taylor & Francis. ISBN9780415994231.
15. ^ ^{a b} Wertsch, James V. (1997). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Printing. OCLC 489891986.
16. ^ ^{a b} Von Glasersfeld, Ernst (1998). "Cognition, Construction of Noesis, and Educational activity" (PDF). Constructivism in Science Teaching. Springer, Dordrecht. pp. 11–30. ISBN978-0-7923-4924-ii. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2017-05-sixteen. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
17. ^ ^{a b} Prawat, Richard S.; Floden, Robert E. (1 Jan 1994). "Philosophical perspectives on constructivist views of learning". Educational Psychologist. 29 (1): 37–48. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2901_4. ISSN 0046-1520. Archived from the original on 14 August 2021. Retrieved xiv August 2021.
18. ^ ^{a b c d east} Vygotsky, L. Southward.; Cole, Michael (1978). Mind in Society: Evolution of College Psychological Processes . Harvard University Press. ISBN978-0-674-57629-ii.
19. ^ Bauersfeld, 1995^{[ full citation needed ]}
20. ^ Gamoran, Adam; Secada, Walter G.; Marrett, Cora B. (2000). "The Organizational Context of Education and Learning" (PDF). In Hallinan, M.T. (ed.). Handbook of the Sociology of Education. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Inquiry. Springer, Boston, MA. pp. 37–63. ISBN978-0-387-32517-0. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2018-01-31. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
21. ^ ^{a b} Brownstein, Bonnie (22 December 2001). "Collaboration: the foundation of learning in the time to come". Education. 122 (2).
22. ^ ^{a b} Rhodes, Lynn M.; Bellamy, K. Thomas (i January 1999). "Choices and Consequences in the Renewal of Teacher Education". Journal of Instructor Teaching. l (one): 17–26. doi:10.1177/002248719905000103. ISSN 0022-4871. S2CID 143182193.
23. ^ ^{a b c} Di Vesta, Francis J. (1987). "The Cerebral Movement and Pedagogy". Historical Foundations of Educational Psychology. Perspectives on Individual Differences. Boston: Springer. pp. 203–233. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-3620-2_11. ISBN978-ane-4899-3622-6.
24. ^ Woolfolk 2010^{[ total commendation needed ]}
25. ^ Bruning, Roger H.; Schraw, Gregory J.; Ronning, Royce R. (1999). Cognitive Psychology and Teaching (tertiary ed.). Prentice-Hall, Inc. ISBN978-0-thirteen-716606-0.
26. ^ Meter, Peggy Van; Stevens, Robert J. (1 January 2000). "The Role of Theory in the Study of Peer Collaboration". The Periodical of Experimental Pedagogy. 69 (1): 113–127. doi:10.1080/00220970009600652. ISSN 0022-0973. S2CID 143292199.
27. ^ Greeno, James Chiliad; Collins, Allan Yard; Resnick, Lauren B (1996). "Cognition and learning". Handbook of Educational Psychology. 77: fifteen–46.
28. ^ ^{a b c d} Ackerman, Phillip L. (one March 1996). "A theory of adult intellectual development: Procedure, personality, interests, and knowledge". Intelligence. 22 (2): 227–257. doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(96)90016-1. ISSN 0160-2896.
29. ^ Hsu, Liwei (2013). "English as a strange language learners' perception of mobile assisted language learning: a cross-national study". Reckoner Assisted Language Learning. Taylor & Francis online. 26 (3): 197–213. doi:10.1080/09588221.2011.649485. S2CID 62711257.
30. ^ Ernest 1991.^{[ full citation needed ]}
31. ^ ^{a b c d} McMahon 1997.^{[ full citation needed ]}
32. ^ ^{a b} Holt, Dan G.; Willard-Holt, Colleen (1 November 2000). "Let's Go Real™: Students Solving Authentic Corporate Issues". Phi Delta Kappan. 82 (3): 243–246. doi:ten.1177/003172170008200315. ISSN 0031-7217. S2CID 143466659.
33. ^ ^{a b} Savery, Lawson K. (1 June 1994). "The Influence of the Perceived Styles of Leadership on a Group of Workers on their Attitudes to Work". Leadership & Organization Development Journal. fifteen (4): 12–18. doi:10.1108/01437739410059863. ISSN 0143-7739.
34. ^ Archee, Ray; Colina Duin, DA (1995). The World Wide Web and Distance Education: Congergenece or Cacophony?. AUUG Conference Proceedings. AUUG, Inc. pp. 348–356. Archived from the original on 2021-08-xiv. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
35. ^ ^{a b c d} Duffy, Thomas; Jonassen, eds. (1992). Constructivism and the Technology of Education: A Conversation. Hillsdale, New Bailiwick of jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN978-0-8058-1272-5. ^{[ page needed ]}
36. ^ Derry 1999.^{[ total commendation needed ]}
37. ^ ^{a b} Hmelo-Silverish; Duncan; Chinn (2007). "Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based and Enquiry Learning: A Response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006)" (PDF). Educational Psychologist. 42 (2): 99–107. doi:x.1080/00461520701263368. S2CID 1360735. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-12-23. Retrieved 2007-12-27 .
38. ^ Guthrie; et al. (2004). "Increasing Reading Comprehension and Appointment Through Concept-Oriented Reading Education" (PDF). Journal of Educational Psychology. 96 (3): 403–423. doi:x.1037/0022-0663.96.3.403. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2006-05-25. Retrieved 2007-12-29 .
39. ^ Kim (2005). "The Effects of a Constructivist Teaching Approach on Student Academic Accomplishment, Self-Concept, and Learning Strategies" (PDF). Asia Pacific Education Review. 6 (1): 7–19. doi:10.1007/bf03024963. S2CID 13864166. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2009-03-06. Retrieved 2007-12-16 .
40. ^ Doğru; Kalender (2007). "Applying the Subject 'Jail cell' Through Constructivist Approach during Science Lessons and the Teacher's View" (PDF). Journal of Environmental & Science Education. 2 (1): three–13. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2009-03-06. Retrieved 2007-12-sixteen .
41. ^ Anderson, John R.; Reder, Lynne Thousand.; Simon, Herbert A. (1998). Applications and misapplications of cognitive psychology in mathematics education. Archived from the original on 2011-09-08. Retrieved 2007-02-04 .
42. ^ Constructivism in Science and Mathematics Instruction Archived 2009-11-18 at the Wayback Machine, Michael R. Matthews
43. ^ Research Link / Circumspection: Constructivism Ahead Archived 2006-04-27 at the Wayback Auto Holloway, Educational Leadership, 57 (3). November 1999.
44. ^ Vygotsky'due south philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined Archived 2021-08-09 at the Wayback Auto Liu & Matthews, International Didactics Journal, 2005, half-dozen (3), 386–99.
45. ^ "Periodical of Science Education and Technology". doi:x.1007/BF00694598. S2CID 144764423. Archived from the original on 2021-08-14. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
46. ^ Raymond Hubbard; J. Scott Armstrong (2005). "Why We Don't Really Know What "Statistical Significance" Means: A Major Educational Failure*" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-06-20.
47. ^ Demetriou, A. (1998). Cognitive evolution. In A. Demetriou, Due west. Doise, K. F. M. van Lieshout (Eds.), Life-bridge developmental psychology (pp. 179–269). London: Wiley.
48. ^ Demetriou, A., Shayer, M., & Efklides, A. (1992). Neo-Piagetian theories of cerebral development: Implications and applications to education. London: Routledge
49. ^ ^{a b c d east f g h i} Mayer (2004). "Should There Be a Three-Strikes Rule Against Pure Discovery Learning?" (PDF). American Psychologist. 59 (i): 14–xix. CiteSeerXx.1.1.372.2476. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.59.1.14. PMID 14736316. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-02-15. Retrieved 2007-12-29 .
50. ^ ^{a b c} Sweller, J (June 1988). "Cognitive load during trouble solving: Effects on learning". Cognitive Science. 12 (2): 257–285. doi:x.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7. ISSN 0364-0213.
51. ^ Slezak, Peter (2010). "Radical Constructivism: Epistemology, Education and Dynamite". Constructivist Foundations. vi (one). ISSN 1782-348X.
52. ^ Meyer, D. 50. (2009). "The Poverty of Constructivism". Educational Philosophy and Theory. 41 (3): 332–341. doi:ten.1111/j.1469-5812.2008.00457.x. S2CID 144604333.
53. ^ ^{a b c} Kalyuga, S.; Ayres, P.; Chandler, P.; Sweller, J. (2003). "The expertise reversal effect". Educational Psychologist. 38 (1): 23–31. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4. S2CID 10519654. Archived from the original on 2015-11-10. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
54. ^ Atkinson, R. K.; Derry, South. J.; Renkl, A.; Wortham, D. W. (2000). "Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research". Review of Educational Enquiry. 70 (two): 181–214. CiteSeerX10.1.one.115.1348. doi:x.3102/00346543070002181. S2CID 2956761.
55. ^ Hilbert, T. South.; Renkl, A. (2007). "Learning how to Larn by Concept Mapping: A Worked-Example Effect". Paper Presentation at the 12th Biennial Briefing EARLI 2007 in Budapest, Hungary.
56. ^ Tarmizi, R. A.; Sweller, J. (1988). "Guidance during mathematical trouble solving". Journal of Educational Psychology. 80 (four): 424–436. doi:x.1037/0022-0663.80.4.424. Archived from the original on 2020-11-04. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
57. ^ Gerjets, P.; Scheiter, 1000.; Catrambone, R. (2004). "Designing instructional examples to reduce intrinsic cognitive load: molar versus modular presentation of solution procedures" (PDF). Instructional Science. 32 (1): 33–58. doi:10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021809.10236.71. S2CID 16755228. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2021-02-27. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
58. ^ ^{a b} Sweller, J.; Cooper, 1000. A. (1985). "The employ of worked examples as a substitute for trouble solving in learning algebra". Cognition and Instruction. 2 (i): 59–89. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0201_3.
59. ^ ^{a b} Renkl, A.; Atkinson, R. G.; Maier, U. H.; Staley, R. (2002). "From case study to problem solving: Smooth transitions help learning". Journal of Experimental Instruction. 70 (4): 293–315. CiteSeerX10.1.1.464.2351. doi:10.1080/00220970209599510. S2CID 21032460.
60. ^ Sweller, John (1999). Instructional Design in Technical Areas. Australian education review. Camberwell: ACER Press. ISBN978-0-86431-312-half-dozen.
61. ^ Nilson, Linda Burzotta (2010). Teaching at Its All-time: A Research-Based Resource for College Instructors. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons. p. 176. ISBN9780470401040.
62. ^ Hmelo-Silver, Cindy E.; Ravit Golan Duncan; Clark A. Chinn (2007). "Scaffolding and Accomplishment in Problem-Based and Enquiry Learning: A Response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006)". Educational Psychologist. 42 (2): 99–107. doi:10.1080/00461520701263368. S2CID 1360735.
63. ^ "CMP2 Parent Website FAQ". Archived from the original on 2009-06-22. Retrieved 2009-01-08 .
64. ^ Paas, Fred 1000. (1992). "Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cerebral-load approach". Journal of Educational Psychology. 84 (4): 429–434. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429. ISSN 1939-2176.
65. ^ Moreno, Roxana; Mayer, Richard E. (1999). "Cerebral principles of multimedia learning: The function of modality and contiguity" (PDF). Journal of Educational Psychology. 91 (2): 358–368. CiteSeerX10.1.1.458.4719. doi:ten.1037/0022-0663.91.2.358. ISSN 0022-0663. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-08-09. Retrieved 2020-02-13 .
66. ^ Mousavi, Seyed Yaghoub; Low, Renae; Sweller, John (1995). "Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes". Journal of Educational Psychology. 87 (two): 319–334. CiteSeerX10.ane.1.471.2089. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.87.2.319. ISSN 0022-0663.
67. ^ Chandler, Paul; Sweller, John (June 1992). "The dissever-attention effect as a gene in the design of education". British Periodical of Educational Psychology. 62 (ii): 233–246. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1992.tb01017.x. ISSN 0007-0998. S2CID 40723362.
68. ^ Cooper, Graham; Sweller, John (1987). "Effects of schema acquisition and rule automation on mathematical trouble-solving transfer". Journal of Educational Psychology. 79 (4): 347–362. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.79.four.347. ISSN 0022-0663.
69. ^ ^{a b} Jonassen, David H. (March 1997). "Instructional design models for well-structured and 3-structured problem-solving learning outcomes". Educational Technology Enquiry and Development. 45 (one): 65–94. doi:10.1007/BF02299613. ISSN 1042-1629. S2CID 18701133.
70. ^ Luga, Ayres, Chandler, and Sweller, 2003.^{[ full citation needed ]}
71. ^ Sweller, J (2003). "Evolution of human cognitive architecture". In Ross, Brian (ed.). Psychology of Learning and Motivation. San Diego: Academic Press. ISBN978-0-12-543343-iii. Archived from the original on 2017-08-14. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
72. ^ Clark, R. Due east. & Elen, J., (2006). When less is more: Research and theory insights about education for complex learning. In R. East. Clark & J. Elen (Eds.) Treatment Complexity in Learning Environments: Enquiry and Theory. London: Elsevier. 283-295.
73. ^ ^{a b} DeVries, Rheta, ed. (2002). Developing constructivist early on childhood curriculum: practical principles and activities. Early babyhood education serial. New York: Teachers College Press. ISBN978-0-8077-4121-4.
74. ^ Glasersfeld, East. v. (1995). Radical constructivism : a way of knowing and learning. London ; Washington, D.C. : Falmer Printing
75. ^ Ernst von Glasersfeld, a. (1990). Chapter ii: An Exposition of Constructivism: Why Some Similar It Radical. Periodical For Research In Mathematics Education. Monograph, 19. doi:10.2307/749910
76. ^ Gash, H. (2014). Amalgam Constructivism. Constructivist Foundations, 9(3), 302-310.
77. ^ Run into Björn Kraus: The Life We Live and the Life Nosotros Experience: Introducing the Epistemological Deviation between "Lifeworld" (Lebenswelt) and "Life Weather condition" (Lebenslage) Social Piece of work and Lodge. International Online Journal. Vol. thirteen, No. ii 2015, http://www.socwork.net/sws/article/view/438 Archived 2019-04-13 at the Wayback Automobile; Björn Kraus: Plädoyer für den Relationalen Konstruktivismus und eine Relationale Soziale Arbeit. in Forum Sozial (2017) 1 pp. 29-35, http://world wide web.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/51948 Archived 2020-08-01 at the Wayback Car
78. ^ Forest, David (1998). How Children Call back and Learn. Agreement children'due south worlds (second ed.). Oxford, Uk: Blackwell. pp. 39. ISBN978-0-631-20007-nine.
79. ^ Leask, Thou., and Younie, Due south. (2001a) 'Communal Constructivist Theory: instruction of data and communications engineering science & internationalisation of the curriculum', Journal of It for Teacher Pedagogy, Vol. x, Nos one & two, pp117 –134
80. ^ Younie, S.; Leask, Grand. (2001b). "The European SchoolNet: An online community for European teachers? A valuable professional resource?". Teacher Development. 5 (2): 157–172. doi:x.1080/13664530100200140. S2CID 145109452. Archived from the original on 2016-08-15. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
81. ^ Holmes, Bryan; Tangney, Brendan; FitzGibbon, Ann; Savage, Tim; Mehan, Siobhan. "Communal Constructivism: Students constructing learning for as well as with others" (PDF). Trinity College. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2021-02-27. Retrieved 2021-08-fourteen .
82. ^ Sarkar, Advait (2016-01-01). "Constructivist Pattern for Interactive Automobile Learning". Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Man Factors in Computing Systems - CHI EA 'xvi. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Homo Factors in Computing Systems. CHI EA 'sixteen. New York, NY, Usa: ACM. pp. 1467–1475. doi:10.1145/2851581.2892547. ISBN9781450340823. S2CID 1949678.
83. ^ Nowak, Markus; Castellini, Claudio; Massironi, Carlo (2018). "Applying Radical Constructivism to machine learning: a pilot report in assistive robotics". Constructivist Foundations. thirteen (2): 250–262. Archived from the original on 21 February 2019. Retrieved xx Feb 2019.

Farther reading [edit]

• Anderson, John R.; Reder, Lynne M.; Simon, Herbert A.; Ericsson, Grand. Anders; Glaser, Robert (1998). "Radical Constructivism and Cognitive Psychology". Brookings Papers on Education Policy (1): 227–278. ISSN 1096-2719. JSTOR 20067198. Archived from the original on 2018-02-05. Retrieved 2020-02-13 .
• Bruner, J. S. (1961). "The human action of discovery". Harvard Educational Review. 31 (1): 21–32.
• Bransford, J.; Dark-brown, A. Fifty.; Cocking, R. R. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: The National Academies Printing. doi:10.17226/6160. ISBN978-0-309-06557-3.
• Clark, R. C.; Zuckerman, P. (1999). "Multimedia Learning Systems: Design Principles". In Stolovitch, H. D.; Keeps, E. J. (eds.). Handbook of Homo Performance Engineering (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Pfeiffer. pp. 564–588). ISBN978-0787911089.
• Clark, R.C.; Nguyen, F. & Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in Learning: Prove-Based Guidelines to Manage Cognitive Load. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. ISBN978-0-7879-7728-3.
• de Jong, T. (2005). The guided discovery principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 215-229) . Cambridge, Uk: Cambridge Academy Press. ISBN978-0521547512.
• de Jong, T.; van Joolingen, Westward. R. (1998). "Scientific discovery learning with estimator simulations of conceptual Domains" (PDF). Review of Educational Enquiry. 68 (2): 179–201. doi:10.3102/00346543068002179. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2021-02-27. Retrieved 2021-08-14 .
• Dalgarno, B. (1996) Constructivist computer assisted learning: theory and technique, ASCILITE Conference, ii–4 December 1996, retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20140902003411/http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/adelaide96/papers/21.html
• Hilbert, T. South., & Renkl, A. (2007). Learning how to Learn by Concept Mapping: A Worked-Example Effect. Oral presentation at the twelfth Biennial Briefing EARLI 2007 in Budapest, Hungary
• Jeffery, G. (ed) (2005) The creative college: building a successful learning culture in the arts, Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.
• Jonassen, D., Mayes, T., & McAleese, R. (1993). A manifesto for a constructivist approach to uses of technology in college education. In T.Grand. Duffy, J. Lowyck, & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Designing environments for constructive learning (pp. 231–247). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
• Leutner, D. (1993). "Guided discovery learning with computer-based simulation games: effects of adaptive and non-adaptive instructional support". Learning and Instruction. three (ii): 113–132. doi:10.1016/0959-4752(93)90011-N.
• Piaget, Jean. (1950). The Psychology of Intelligence. New York: Routledge.
• Jean Piaget (1967). Logique et Connaissance scientifique, Encyclopédie de la Pléiade.
• Tuovinen, J. East. & Sweller, J. (1999). "A comparison of cerebral load associated with discovery learning and worked examples". Periodical of Educational Psychology. 91 (ii): 334–341. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.334. S2CID 54592195.
• Rivers, R. H.; Vockell, East. (1987). "Computer simulations to Simulate scientific problems solving". Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 24 (5): 403–416. Bibcode:1987JRScT..24..403R. doi:10.1002/tea.3660240504.

External links [edit]

• A journeying into Constructivism by Martin Dougiamas, 1998-xi.
• Cognitively Guided Instruction reviewed on the Promising Practices Network
• Sample Online Activity Objects Designed with Constructivist Approach (2007)
• Liberal Exchange learning resource offer a constructivist approach to learning English equally a second/foreign language (2009)
• Lutz, S., & Huitt, Westward. (2018). "Connecting cerebral development and constructivism." In Westward. Huitt (Ed.), Becoming a Vivid Star: Twelve cadre ideas supporting holistic education (pp. 45-63). IngramSpark.
• Definition of Constructivism past Martin Ryder (a footnote to the book chapter The Cyborg and the Noble Vicious where Ryder discusses One Laptop Per Child'southward XO laptop from a constructivist educator's indicate of view)

wrennboodgme.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(philosophy_of_education)

Share this post