CONSTRUCTIVISM

Constructivism is a philosophical viewpoint about the nature of knowing. Specifically, it

represents an epistemological stance.[1] There are many "flavors" of constructivism, but
one prominent theorist known for his constructivist views is Jean Piaget, who focused on
how humans make meaning in relation to the interaction between their experiences and
their ideas. He considered himself to be a genetic epistemologist, which means he
considered this interaction in relation to how humans are set up by their genetic make up
to develop intellectually. His views tended to focus on human development in relation to
what is occurring with an individual as opposed to development that is influenced by
other humans. Views that are more focused on human development in the context of the
social world are also of many flavors and include the sociocultural or socio-historical
perspective of Lev Vygotsky and the situated cognition perspectives of Jean Lave and
Etienne Wenger;[2] Brown, Collins and Duguid;[3] Newman, Griffin and Cole,[4] and
Barbara Rogoff.[5] The concept of constructivism has influenced a number of disciplines,
including psychology, sociology, education and the history of science. [6] During its
infancy, constructivism examined the interaction between human experiences and their
reflexes or behavior-patterns. Jean Piaget called these systems of knowledge schemes.
These are not to be confused with "schema," a term that comes from schema theory,
which is from information-processing perspectives on human cognition. Whereas Piaget's
schemes are content-free, schemata (the plural of schema) are concepts; for example,
most humans have a schema for "grandmother" or "egg" or "magnet." Constructivism
does not refer to a specific pedagogy, although it 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
wide ranging impact on learning theories and teaching methods in education and is an
underlying theme of many education reform movements.[citation needed] Research support for
constructivist teaching techniques has been mixed, with some research supporting these
techniques and other research contradicting those results.
Constructivism in Philosophy and Teaching
The Philosophy of Constructivism
The philosophy of constructivism can be reduced to one sentence: "everything that is said
is said by an observer" (Maturana 25). As trivial as this sentence might sound at first
the longer you think about it the more profound it turns out to be. Constructivists deal
with how conceptions of reality come into being. Maturana and other constructivists hold
the view that an external reality exists but negate that this external world can be
perceived the way it really is. (Prksen 12) Ernst von Glasersfeld, one of the founders of
constructivism, replaces the concept of truth by the concept of viability. Consequently, a
theory should be useful (Prksen 46). Von Glasersfeld partly bases his concept on the
results of Jean Piaget, a developmental psychologist who in his book Construction of
Reality in the Child explains that children actively acquire knowledge. They learn when
their own actions do not correspond to their expectations, meaning they are not viable
(Prksen 66). When applied to teaching methodology, this assumption has far-reaching
consequences. In the following, two schools of constructivism are introduced.

Radical Constructivism and Social Constructivism

Radical constructivists and social constructivists assume that people cannot directly
perceive the objective reality but that they rather construct their view of the world based
on knowledge they already possess.
Radical constructivists claim that people develop their individual view of the world.
Social constructivists, however, state that people only attain knowledge of their
surroundings by dealing with others, that is, in social discourse. For both schools of
constructivism, the criterion of viability plays the decisive role, which means that it is not
'truth as such' that matters, but usefulness (Douillet 15).
Constructivism in Teaching
Learners do not have direct access to reality because the brain only processes electronic
signals. Reality is constructed on the basis of these signals.
Constructivists have abandoned the concept that knowledge is a kind of substance which
can be transferred from the head of the teacher to the head of the learner. Learning is
regarded as a creative, inventive act performed by the individual. If every learner has
his/her own way of processing learning material, there have to exist 'as many individual
and unpredictable ways of learning as there are learners' (Thissen 8).
Ernst von Glasersfeld demands that each learner should be treated as an intelligent,
independently thinking individual (Prksen 65).
Description of a Constructivistic Classroom Situation
In a class, which is run according to constructivistic guidelines, the teacher does not act
as a pure knowledge transmitter who only accepts ONE true answer to his/her problem
but as a coach or facilitator offering thought provoking suggestions for solving the tasks
given. Students are expected to use their own experiences to solve a problem as a group
using different ways and methods.
In constructivism, there is not a 'one and only true way' to solve a task. The solution of a
problem rather depends upon individual experiences and thoughts. As already mentioned
above, most of the time students work together in groups, exchange their suggestions and
thoughts in discussions to reach one or more solutions. The teacher judges and evaluates
the skills and deficiencies of each individual student, for example, in the course of a
discussion. Teachers are more flexible because they cannot expect only one correct
answer to their questions.
Types of Constructivism
Constructivism is not a unitary theoretical position; rather, it is a continuum. The
assumptions that underlie this continuum vary along several dimensions and have
resulted in the definition and support for multiple types of constructivism. Typically, this
continuum is divided into three broad categories: Cognitive Constructivism, Social
Constructivism, and Radical Constructivism.
Cognitive Constructivism. Cognitive constructivism represents one end, or
extreme, of the constructivist continuum and is typically associated with information

processing and its reliance on the component processes of cognition. While emerging
from the four, previously mentioned, epistemological tenets, cognitive constructivism
only emphasizes the first two tenets, that is, that knowledge acquisition is an adaptive
process and results from active cognizing by the individual learner. These particular
epistemological emphases lead to defining principles that maintain the external nature of
knowledge and the belief that an independent reality exists and is knowable to the
individual. Knowledge then, from the cognitive constructivist position, is the result of
the accurate internalization and (re)construction of external reality. The results of this
internalization process are cognitive processes and structures that accurately correspond
to processes and structures that exist in the real world.
Cognitive constructivism, as a learning theory, is often considered a "weak" form
of constructivism, within the constructivist community, since it only embraces two of the
four epistemological tenets. "Weak" in this case is not a value judgement, such as better
or worse, but rather merely an indication of adherence to foundational assumptions. Thus
, knowledge construction is considered primarily a technical process of creating mental
structures, but has little bearing on the nature of the subjective knowledge within the
mind. However, cognitive constructivism, and its historical association with information
processing, has led to a multitude of significant empirical findings regarding learning,
memory, and cognition, including schema theory, working memory models,
computational models of learning and memory, and neurological models of brain
function. In addition, each of these theoretical advances has led to successful
instructional applications, such as the use of advanced organizers, concept maps, teaching
for transfer, elaborative practice, teaching for automaticity, and the use reading strategies
(e.g., SQ3R; Survey, Question, Read, Recite, Review) and problem solving strategies
(e.g., IDEAL; Identify problems, Define goals, Explore strategies, Act, Learn). Thus,
while the cognitive constructivist perspective has proved to be quite beneficial to the
understanding of learning and instruction, it remains the "black sheep" of the
constructivist community since its focus does not include the subjective nature of
knowledge.
Radical constructivism. Radical constructivism represents the opposite end of the
constructivist continuum from cognitive constructivism. Radical constructivism fully
embraces the first three epistemological tenets, that is, that knowledge acquisition is an
adaptive process that results from active cognizing by the individual learner, rendering an
experientially based mind, not a mind that reflects some external reality. In addition,
there is a current movement within radical constructivism to more fully accept the fourth
epistemological tenet, thus recognizing social interactions as a source of knowledge (see
Larochelle, Bednarz, & Garrison, 1998). These particular epistemological emphases
leads to defining principles that maintain the internal nature of knowledge and the idea
that while an external reality may exist, it is unknowable to the individual (von
Glasersfeld, 1990, 1996). Reality is unknowable since our experience with external
forms is mediated by our senses, and our senses are not adept at rendering an accurate
representation of these external forms (e.g., objects, social interactions). Therefore, while
knowledge is constructed from experience, that which is constructed is not, in any
discernible way, an accurate representation of the external world or reality (von
Glasersfeld, 1990, 1995).
Social constructivism. Social constructivism lies somewhere between the
transmission of knowable reality of the cognitive constructivists, and the construction of
a personal and coherent reality of the radical constructivists. Social constructivism,
unlike cognitive and radical constructivism, emphasizes all four of the previously
mentioned epistemological tenets. These particular epistemological emphases lead to

defining principles that maintain the social nature of knowledge, and the belief that
knowledge is the result of social interaction and language usage, and thus is a shared,
rather than an individual, experience (Prawatt & Floden, 1994). In addition, this social
interaction always occurs within a socio-cultural context, resulting in knowledge that is
bound to a specific time and place (Gergen, 1995; Vygotsky, 1978). This position is
exemplified by Bakhtin (1984), "truth is not to be found inside the head of an individual
person, it is born between people collectively searching for truth, in the process of their
dialogic interaction" (p. 110). Truth, in this case, is neither the objective reality of the
cognitive constructivists nor the experiential reality of the radical constructivist, but
rather is a socially constructed and agreed upon truth resulting from "co-participation in
cultural practices" (Cobb & Yackel, 1996, p. 37).