Constructivist teaching methods

 

  • [9]
    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.

  • Pre-testing: This allows a teacher to determine what knowledge students bring to a new topic and thus will be helpful in directing the course of study.

  • Cooperative learning
    A variety of educational approaches focusing on individuals working together to achieve a specific learning outcome (Hsiung, 2012).

  • Problem-based learning begins with an educator presenting a series of carefully constructed problems or issues to small groups of students (Schmidt & Loyens, 2007).

  • Within the educational setting, problem-based learning has enabled students to actively construct individual understandings of a topic using both prior and newly acquired knowledge (Schmidt & Loyens, 2007).

  • This technique can be used throughout the course of study for a particular topic, but is also a good assessment technique as it shows the teacher the progress of the student throughout the course of study.

  • Teaching methods also emphasize communication and social skills, as well as intellectual collaboration.

  • Field trips: This allows students to put the concepts and ideas discussed in class in a real-world context.

  • The ‘anchor’ acts as a focal point for the entire task, allowing students to identify, define, and explore problems while exploring the topic from a variety of different perspectives (Kariuki & Duran, 2004).

  • 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.

  • Effective essential questions include student thought and research, connect to student’s reality and can be solved in different ways (Crane, 2009).

  • Moreover, students also develop self-directed and group learning skills which ultimately facilitates the comprehension of the problems or issues (Schmidt & Loyens, 2007).

  • Constructivist teaching is based on the belief that learning occurs as learners are actively involved in a process of meaning and knowledge construction as opposed to passively receiving information.

  • 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.

  • “[3] 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.

  • The approach concludes in the fourth stage, integration and evaluation, wherein each of the ‘home’ groups combine the learning of each subtopic together to create the completed piece of work [12]

  • Because existing knowledge schemata are explicitly acknowledged as a starting point for new learning, constructivist approaches tend to validate individual and cultural differences and diversity.

  • [1] There are those who also cite the contribution of John Dewey such as his works on action research, which allows the construction of complex understanding of teaching and learning.

  • The first component of problem-based learning is to discuss prior knowledge and ask questions related to the specific problems or issues (Schmidt & Loyens, 2007).

  • [3] This is different from a traditional classroom where students primarily work alone, learning through repetition and lecture.

  • Following the first meeting, students will independently reflect on the group discussion, specifically in comparing thoughts regarding the problems or issues in question (Schmidt & Loyens, 2007).

  • Following the class discussion, there is typically time in which students individually research or reflect on the newly acquired information and/or seek out areas requiring further exploration (Schmidt & Loyens, 2007).

  • Teachers can use a checklist and observation to assess student success with the particular material.

  • It is in the ‘jigsaw’ group that students will explore the material pertaining to the subtopic and will prepare for teaching it to their ‘home’ group, the reporting and re-shaping stage.

  • Non-traditional constructivist assessment strategies include:

    Oral discussions: The teacher presents students with a “focus” question and allows an open discussion on the topic.

  • Anchored instruction
    An educational approach associated with problem-based learning in which the educator introduces an ‘anchor’ or theme in which students will be able to explore (Kariuki & Duran, 2004).

 

Works Cited

[‘1. Matthews, Michael R. (2014). International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching. Dordrecht: Springer. p. 1024. ISBN 978-94-007-7653-1.
2. ^ Kincheloe, Joe L.; Horn, Raymond A. (2007). The Praeger Handbook of Education and Psychology. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 491. ISBN 978-0-313-33123-7.
3. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning
4. ^ Jump up to:a b Totten, Christopher W. (2014). An Architectural Approach to Level Design. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. p. 167. ISBN 978-1-4665-8541-6.
5. ^ Pelech, James (2010). The Comprehensive Handbook of Constructivist Teaching: From Theory to Practice. Charlotte, NC: IAP. p. 19. ISBN 978-1-60752-375-8.
6. ^ Jump up to:a b Strategies for Constructivist Teaching Archived September 20, 2005, at the Wayback Machine
7. ^ Pascoe, Michael; Monroe, Forrest; Macfarlane, Helen (2018-06-14). “Taking Constructivism One Step Further: Post Hoc Analysis of a Student-Created Wiki”. JMIR Medical Education. 4 (1): e16. doi:10.2196/mededu.9197. ISSN 2369-3762. PMC 6024102. PMID 29903697.
8. ^ Pagán, Brian (2006-02-28). “Positive Contributions of Constructivism to Educational Design”. Europe’s Journal of Psychology. 2 (1). doi:10.5964/ejop.v2i1.318. ISSN 1841-0413.
9. ^ Applications and Misapplications of Cognitive Psychology to Mathematics Education
10. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Should There Be a Three-Strikes Rule Against Pure Discovery Learning? Archived 2015-02-15 at the Wayback Machine, Mayer, 2004, American Psychologist, 59(1), 14–19
11. ^ Fisher, Douglas (2010). Guided instruction : how to develop confident and successful learners. Nancy Frey. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). ISBN 978-1-4166-1173-8. OCLC 693781086.
12. ^ Karacop, Ataman; Doymus, Kemal (April 2013). “Effects of Jigsaw Cooperative Learning and Animation Techniques on Students’ Understanding of Chemical Bonding and Their Conceptions of the Particulate Nature of Matter”. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 22 (2): 186–203. doi:10.1007/s10956-012-9385-9. ISSN 1059-0145.
13. Kirschner, P. A.; Sweller, J. & Clark, R. E. (2006). “Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching”. Educational Psychologist. 41 (2): 75–86. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1. hdl:1820/8951. S2CID 17067829.
14. Mayer, R. (2004). “Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction”. American Psychologist. 59 (1): 14–19. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.372.2476. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14. PMID 14736316. S2CID 1129364.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. Wood, & Middleton, (1975). A study of assisted problem solving. British Journal of Psychology, 66(2), 181–191.
18. Thirteen Ed Online (2004). Constructivism as a paradigm for teaching and learning. http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index.html
19. 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).
20. Cross, K. P. (1987). Teaching for learning. AAHE Bulletin, 39(8).
21. Winkler, T., Kritzenberger, H., & Herczeg, M. (2002). Mixed Reality Environments as Collaborative and Constructive Learning Spaces for Elementary School Children.
Photo credit: https://www.flickr.com/photos/pemberlolly/8742493689/’]