Social constructivism considers that knowledge is socially constructed. Students socially build, share,and agree upon knowledge. By exchanging and sharing with others, ideas are formed and learning occurs. Learning is dialog. Dialog is learning. The basic principles of social constructivism include:
· Social interaction plays a central role in human development.
· Tool mediates between social and individual functioning.
· Internal activities (internalisation) and external activities (externalisation) mutually transform one another.
Social constructivism emphasizes that learning is an active process mediated by social interaction. Conceptual growth comes from the sharing of multiple perspectives and negotiation of those perspectives through individual and collective experiences.
Lev Vygotsky thought that human development occurs on two planes. First it appears on social plane, and then on individual plane. Social interaction is the cornerstone in human development. In knowledge construction, social and individual processes are intertwined and interdependent. “Individual consciousness is built from the outside through relations with others” (Kozulin, 1986, p. xxiii-xxiv).
Internal activity (internalisation) and external activity (externalisation) are mutually transformed. The dual concept of internalization and externalization is used to explain the mutual transformation between the social world and the personal world. Human mind functions as both a social and a personal system.
Piaget insisted that development concepts should not be taught to children until children reach the appropriate development stage. Opposite of Piaget’s theory, Vygotsky believed that children can do more with the help of an adult or of capable peers than they can do by themselves (Zone of Proximal Development). Piaget believed that the most important source of cognition is located within the children themselves. Vygotsky argued that the social environment plays an essential role in the child's cognitive development.
All of you have experiences in online discussions. Online discussions provide a social environment for knowledge negotiation. You are exposed to multiple perspectives on an issue.
In the process of discussions, there is constant mutual transformation between individual cognition (internalization) to social cognition (externalization) and back to individual cognition (internalization). You think through the issue and externalize your thoughts. Through negotiation, the group reaches the consensus (social cognition). You then engage in individual reflection of the knowledge transacted and internalize the knowledge.
Discussions move you closer and closer to social cognition – the negotiated knowledge. Remember the story Six Men and the Elephant? Each of the men constructs his own knowledge. However, their knowledge representation is not complete. Without meaningful negotiation, intellectual chaos occurs.
Online discussion forums are the tool that mediates your discussions. Online discussion differs from fleeting oral discussions. In face to face discussions, mistakes tend to get away and escape the notice. There is no record left about the discussion for anybody to study and examine.
Text-based discussions leave a permanent record about what one has written. You have time to read, think, compose, examine and reflect upon what one has said. Does the online discussion tool alter your flow of thinking? It is the question that you should be able to answer now.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Thoughts on Constructivism
Constructivism has three basic principles: (1) Knowledge is constructed by the learner; (2) Cognitive development can occur only after certain genetically controlled neurological changes occur; (3) Teacher’ role is to guide and scaffold student learning.
The major difference between cognitivism and constructivism is that cognitivism is teacher-centered, emphasizing teachers’ roles, while constructivism is student-centered, emphasizing students’ roles.
In my previous blog entry, I cited examples of cognitivist teaching strategies. This blog entry presents an example of the contructivist teaching approach, posted by a student in the previous class.
The teaching experience I would like to describe comes from my chemistry class. The concept I was addressing with the class was Boyle's Law, which states that "the volume of a given amount of gas is inversely proportional to the pressure at a constant temperature". The class starts with all the students at the demonstration table looking at a balloon in a pressure chamber. As a student pumps a handle with a tube leading to the chamber, they all observed the balloon getting larger. My question to the group was why. It normally did not take long for the students to associate what was happening with the concept of Boyle's Law, even if they could not recall the name. As a group, we all came to the conclusion that when you increase the pressure on a volume of gas, the volume of gas should get smaller, or decrease.
Now the problem: As the student pump the handle to the pressure chamber, the gauge indicated the pressure was increasing. According to Boyle's Law, by increasing pressure on a volume of gas, the volume of gas should decrease or get smaller. However, as the pressure gauge showed the pressure increasing, the balloon in the pressure chamber was also increasing. THE STUDENTS JOB WAS TO DETERMINE WHY.
I then had them to work in groups to determine their answer using their prior knowledge and each group reported their explanation.
This approach used some of Dewey's, Piaget's and Bruners ideas by using things commonly understood and familiar to the students, relating it to everyday things and allowing students to discovery or determine an explanation based on their prior experiences and knowledge.
Once the explanations were presented, I came back and did more directed instruction to make sure all the students understood the concept and how it is applied. The pros in doing this was all students have had some experience with balloons and there behavior and as a result could all add something to the group discussion. It also allow those who may have had a better grasp of the Law to share that understanding with others and by doing so increase the understanding in them. I could not see any real disadvantages to this approach.
Although I did not use a computer, I could have allowed the students to go to the computer and use computer stimulations of Boyle's Law.
Finally, as with most things, determining when a certain approach would be most effective is the job of the teacher. As a professional, the main task should be preparing yourself to take advantage of whatever method based on the need and situation of the child.
The major difference between cognitivism and constructivism is that cognitivism is teacher-centered, emphasizing teachers’ roles, while constructivism is student-centered, emphasizing students’ roles.
In my previous blog entry, I cited examples of cognitivist teaching strategies. This blog entry presents an example of the contructivist teaching approach, posted by a student in the previous class.
The teaching experience I would like to describe comes from my chemistry class. The concept I was addressing with the class was Boyle's Law, which states that "the volume of a given amount of gas is inversely proportional to the pressure at a constant temperature". The class starts with all the students at the demonstration table looking at a balloon in a pressure chamber. As a student pumps a handle with a tube leading to the chamber, they all observed the balloon getting larger. My question to the group was why. It normally did not take long for the students to associate what was happening with the concept of Boyle's Law, even if they could not recall the name. As a group, we all came to the conclusion that when you increase the pressure on a volume of gas, the volume of gas should get smaller, or decrease.
Now the problem: As the student pump the handle to the pressure chamber, the gauge indicated the pressure was increasing. According to Boyle's Law, by increasing pressure on a volume of gas, the volume of gas should decrease or get smaller. However, as the pressure gauge showed the pressure increasing, the balloon in the pressure chamber was also increasing. THE STUDENTS JOB WAS TO DETERMINE WHY.
I then had them to work in groups to determine their answer using their prior knowledge and each group reported their explanation.
This approach used some of Dewey's, Piaget's and Bruners ideas by using things commonly understood and familiar to the students, relating it to everyday things and allowing students to discovery or determine an explanation based on their prior experiences and knowledge.
Once the explanations were presented, I came back and did more directed instruction to make sure all the students understood the concept and how it is applied. The pros in doing this was all students have had some experience with balloons and there behavior and as a result could all add something to the group discussion. It also allow those who may have had a better grasp of the Law to share that understanding with others and by doing so increase the understanding in them. I could not see any real disadvantages to this approach.
Although I did not use a computer, I could have allowed the students to go to the computer and use computer stimulations of Boyle's Law.
Finally, as with most things, determining when a certain approach would be most effective is the job of the teacher. As a professional, the main task should be preparing yourself to take advantage of whatever method based on the need and situation of the child.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)