What is a constructivist approach?
As you can tell from many of my posts, constructivism is something that is of interest to me. There are a few reasons: When I was teaching, my classroom was very much like what is described as constructivist, although I’m sure I didn’t realize it at the time; I believe technology integration happens most effectively in a constructivist environment.
So when I read things that reinforce what I believe, I find that exciting. I started reading Seven Constructivist Methods for the Secondary Classroom: A Planning Guide for Invisible Teaching today. In the opening the writers lay out the following foundations of a constructivist environment:
*Learners of any age make sense of new experiences by relating them to their own previous experiences. Making ideas understandable from a learner’s point of view is not merely a motivational ploy or nice when possible, but essential for deep learning.
Teachers are naturally expert in their content area. Many are so wrapped up in WHAT they teach, that they do not think about WHO they are teaching and how they can relate their content to their students. Often this is the case because teachers really have not delved into the WHY of their subject? Why do my student have to know this information?
*Memorization of facts and reproducing information on tests is not the path to developing deep, flexible understanding of any subject. Although it may be necessary to memorize certain facts as part of a learning experience, deeper learning involves cognitive restructuring on the part of the student. We believe that a teacher’s most important role is as a “stage setter” and facilitator of this active learning environment.
Because content is king to many teachers, the focus is on the factual content.
*Learning is something that a learner does, not something that is done to the learner. Because meaningful learning involves active cognitive restructuring, students must be involved in the learning process, making their own inferences and experiencing and resolving cognitive dissonance.
In too many classrooms, students don’t have the chance to experience that cognitive dissonance. It’s a world of fact-test-fact-test. Fill me with the facts, and ask me to spit them out on your test.
*Effective teaching involves continual probing of the nature of student understanding, “getting into students’ heads” to the greatest possible extent.
This requires the development of good questions.
*Deeper understanding includes gaining insight into the connections between disciplines and knowledge of the way of thinking within them.
Content must not be taught in isolation, because then it has no meaning. Teach it in context, in relation to other disciplines like in the real world, and the content takes on meaning and relevancy to students.
*Superficial, encapsulated information is the result of teaching that emphasizes covering content rather than buliding student understanding through active student experiences both within the classroom and in the world at large.
How often do you hear, “Can’t teach that way, because we have the exam to deal with”? Is that because we are slaves to the exam? Why are we doing this anyway?
*Continual reflection on practice is a vital part of effective teaching, an activity that promotes the learning of students and the empowerment of teachers as professionals.
New ways of teaching require teachers to have the time to think about what is different, why it is different, and if they believe it is an improvement over what they currently use in their practice of teaching.
Later in the chapter, the following features of a constructivist classroom are outlined:
*assessment through performance
*curricula that emphasize depth over breadth
*teacher as guide/facilitator coach; student as worker/independent thinker
*interaction between student-teacher as well as student-student
*variety of teaching methods
*engagement of students with subject matter, with students becoming scientists, historians, writers, etc.
Next entry: Technology Integration
Previous entry: Copyright