Zajda 2011
Zajda 2011
2, 2011
© 2011 James Nicholas Publishers pp. 19-31
Abstract
We acquire, develop, convey, and confer upon others the symbolic cognitive
tools through which we manage our psychological engagement with the
world (Martin & Sugarman, 1999, p. 8).
not already learned the lesson. In other words, the level of instruc-
tion is appropriate when a lesson is neither too difficult nor too easy
for students.
3. Incentive: The degree to which the teacher makes sure that students
are motivated to work on instructional tasks and to learn the ma-
terial being presented.
4. Time: The degree to which students are given enough time to learn
the material being taught (Slavin, 1984).
Do you learn better when someone tells you exactly how to do something,
or do you learn better by doing it yourself? Many people are right in the
middle of those two scenarios. This has led many educators to believe that
the best way to learn is by having students construct their own knowledge
instead of having someone construct it for them.
Source: http://www.ndt-ed.org/TeachingResources/ClassroomTips/
Constructivist%20_Learning.htm
Lecture 5%
Reading 10%
Audiovisual 20%
Demonstartion 30%
Discussion Group 50%
The above suggestions are very useful, but we still need to consider
macro and micro-sociological factors affecting the teaching and learn-
ing process as a whole. There are numerous assumptions here. Specif-
ically, we need to consider teachers, students, classroom environments,
schools, communities, SES, school resources, funding, and school lead-
ers. Together, they influence significantly the quality of teaching and
learning in schools.
Evaluation
One of the problems with understanding and discussing construc-
tivism and classroom application is that this particular construct
draws on many diverse disciplines, philosophy, and pedagogies. This
is noted by Doolittle and Hicks (2003) who stress that constructivism,
as a concept, is a diverse construct that lends itself to numerous inter-
pretations, be they psychological, cultural or pedagogical:
Since knowledge and skills are the most highly valued commodities
in the knowledge society globally, teachers play a significant role in
this process. The quality of teaching and learning will depend, not so
much on the teaching style, as on the quality of its human capital –
teachers, the quality of their professional knowledge, the quality of
their training, and the type of incentives available (salaries, promotion,
job opportunities and rewards for excellence in teaching). These much-
needed incentives would attract quality teachers to the profession, and
increase their effort and improve their capacity to generate and trans-
mit quality knowledge and skills to their students in culturally diverse
classrooms.
Conclusion
Constructivism is only one of the many ways students learn. Students
learn from many different ways of teaching. The constructivist pedagogy,
as described above, is only one way to help students to learn and to im-
prove learning. It can be certainly used in learning and teaching as one
approach, within the multiple pedagogical models and strategies, de-
signed to maximise effective teaching and quality learning for all. Teach-
ers use constructivist pedagogy to improve learning. However, construc-
tivist approach to learning and teaching, by itself, as above shows, is
unlikely to be effective. Major variables impacting on the quality of the
learning process include social, cultural, economic and ideological di-
mensions. We also have to include teachers (and their cultural capital
30 Curriculum and Teaching Vol. 26, No. 2, 2011
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. New York: General Learning Press.
Bartlett, F.C. (1932). Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social
Psychology. . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Accessed 24 January
2012, http://www.ppsis.cam.ac.uk/bartlett/TheoryOfRemembering.htm.
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). In Search of Understanding: The Case for
Constructivist Classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Bruner (1963). The Process of Education. New York: Vintage Books.
Bynum, W.F. and Porter, R. (Eds.) (2005). Oxford Dictionary of Scientific
Quotations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 21:9.
Carnoy, M. (1999). Globalization and Education Reforms: What Planners Need
to Know. Paris: UNESCO, International Institute for Educational Planning.
Doolittle, P. E., & Hicks, D. E. (2003). Constructivism as a theoretical
foundation for the use of technology in social studies. Theory and Research in
Social Education, 31(1), 71-103.
Duffy, T. and Jonassen, D. (1992).Constructivism and the Technology of
Instruction: A Conversation. Hillsdale: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.
Dunn, R., Beaurdy, J & Klavas, A. (1989). Survey of research on learning styles.
Educational Leadership, 46(6), 50-58.
Fontana, D. (1995). Psychology for Teachers. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Fosnot, C. T., & Perry, R. S. (2005). Constructivism: A psychological theory of
learning. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and
Practice. New York: Teacher’s College Press.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New
York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st
Century. New York: Basic Books.
Gredler, M. E. (1997). Learning and Instruction: Theory into Practice (3rd ed).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Gray, A. (1997). Contructivist Teaching and Learning. Master’s thesis.
Saskatchewan: University of Saskatchewan.
Jonassen, D. (1994). Thinking technology. Educational Technology, 34(4), 34-37.
Kanselaar (2002). Constructivism and socio-constructivism. Accessed 26
January 2012 igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/fss/2005-0622-183040/12305.pdf
Kelly, G.A. (1991). The Psychology of Personal Constructs: Volume One - A
Theory of Personality. London: Routledge.
Kolb. D. A. & Fry, R. (1975). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning.
In C. Cooper (ed.) Theories of Group Process, London: John Wiley.
Kukla, A. (2000). Social Constructivism and the Philosophy of Science. London:
Routledge.
Kussrow, P. (2008). The routine of classroom discrimination. In J. Zajda (Ed.),
Learning and Teaching (pp. 93-100). Melbourne: James Nicholas Publishers.
Martin, J & Sugarman, J. (1999). The Psychology of Human Possibility and
Zajda, Constructivist Pedagogy 31