The Application of Constructivist/Constructionist Theories in Education

Students learn by doing.  That is the basic belief in Constructionist Learning Theory. Constructionism is the belief that children learn best by building an artifact and then sharing it with others (Laureate Education Inc., 2015).  It is the process of creating that allows students to either assimilate or accommodate their new knowledge with their previously held schemas to regain the equilibrium that the incorporation of new information had unbalanced (Laureate, 2015).  In order for students to truly learn the content being taught they need to be actively engaged in the learning process not passive receptors of information (Orey, 2010).  They do this by either changing the interpretation of experiences to fit what they already know or by developing new ways of thinking or looking at things (Laureate, 2015).  As educators it is our role to provide the opportunities for students to have these experiences. 

In the Constructivism Learning Theory it is the belief that students work to construct their own learning, based on their own unique background and experiences.  Constructionism focuses on the actual process of creation.  Orey (Laureate, 2015) stated that it is the Constructionist Theory of Learning that is most important for teachers. In both of these learning theories, students use their own background knowledge and abilities to engage in learning.  An important component of Constructionist Theory is problem based learning (PBL).   Because in PBL students are expected to create their own learning by solving a problem they gain a deeper understanding of the content.  This content then becomes part of the student’s new reality.  In her blog, Regina Waddell (2017) reminds teachers that in constructivist classrooms the teacher must let the students do the work.  The teacher needs to step back and allow the students to take charge of their own learning.  In the scholarly source I found however, Krahenbuhl (2016) urges teachers to take an active role in ensuring their students are learning the right information; he argued that even incorrect discoveries will be remembered by students sometimes in place of the correct information.  The popular source I found (David, 2015) agreed with this belief, that it is appropriate for teachers to provide background information to students.

 There are many great technology tools to support student learning in constructionist theory.  These can include; organizing and brainstorming software to help students build their base of knowledge, data collection and analysis tools that allow students to organize their information, test theories and interact with data, and finally simulations and games that provide students with the opportunity to test their predictions and receive immediate feedback (Pitler, Hubbell, & Kuhn, 2012).  I chose to implement an Hour of Code (HoC) lesson with my students, in which they were responsible for “Coding the News” (2015).  What I liked about the HoC lesson was that I was able to use it more for learning how to follow a step-by-step process using coding as the medium, than actual coding.  In Constructionism/constructivism, students need to be problem solvers, HoC is a great tool them helps them develop those skills.   

Constructionist/constructivist theories most closely align with the teacher I want to become.  As I transform my classroom into a blended learning space I hope to provide my students with critical thinking and problem solving opportunities.  I want my students to become eager and active learners, not passive receptors of information.  The blog I found reminded teachers that many of the strategies they use in their classrooms use constructivist principles; we just need to flip the process.  Instead of students completing a project at the end of a unit to demonstrate their learning, instead they can complete the project to actually learn the content (Waddell, 2017).  When students work to solve a problem or create an artifact they are working to meet the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE, 2016) Standards for Students, Standard 3, Knowledge Constructor, which states that “students use a variety of resources and digital tools to construct knowledge, produce creative artifacts and make meaningful learning experiences for themselves and others”.  Also the problem based learning approach meets the International Society for Technology in Education Standards for Teachers 2b, where teachers develop technology-rich learning experiences that allow students to become active participants in the learning process in a way that promotes their own unique interests and backgrounds (ISTE, 2008). 

The sources I found this week provided deeper insight into how to effectively incorporate constructivist strategies into my teaching.  The blog by Regina Waddell showed me that I am already using some of these strategies and others can be modified with little effort so that students complete their projects as part of the learning process, not as a summative assessment (Waddell, 2017).  The popular source (David, 2015), demonstrated how a lesson could be taught in a way that engaged and motivated students and also provided the opportunity for them to construct their own knowledge based on their individual needs and interests.  It provided some excellent practical tips that could be utilized in any classroom.  The scholarly source by Krahenbuhl (2016), explained the pitfalls of applying constructivist strategies without fully supporting students or having a working understanding of how to implement constructivist strategies.  It reminded me that it is acceptable to provide students with necessary foundational information from which to build their knowledge.  This article stressed how teacher involvement in the learning process of the students is important so that students do not construct the wrong information, which will overshadow the point of the lesson.  

In order to give my students the opportunity to build their own knowledge I implemented a lesson from Hour of Code into my unit of study.  As my students completed the Hour of Code assignment it became clear that the lesson became more about how to effectively communicate with each other and how to follow directions, than the content of the unit or even coding itself.  While I found the tutorials to be rather simple, my students struggled because they are always eager to rush ahead and not follow all the steps of the assignment, something they have a habit of doing with regular classroom lessons and projects.  Their frustration level was high but they had to work with each other to figure out where mistakes were made, rather than relying on me to give the answers or fix their mistakes.  Although this lesson did not turn out as I wanted I feel it was an important learning experience for them.  As students complete more projects and take charge of their own learning, they are going to have to be vigilant in following directions as well as problem solving through various issues that might arise.  Even though this lesson did not go exactly according to my plan, it provided my students with a valuable learning experience and me with further insight into my students’ strengths and weaknesses. 

            I am working on implementing more constructionist and constructivist strategies in my classroom.  In the past I have tended to follow a more behaviorist methodology, and I still feel that those strategies are valid. However, in order to bring my teaching into the 21st century and ensure my students have the collaboration and problem solving skills needed for success in the future it is time to begin allowing them to become the constructors of their own knowledge and become active participants in the learning process.  It is important to remember that we must have a variety of tools in our toolbox to best meet the needs of all of our students. 

References

David L, "Constructivism," in Learning Theories, June 20, 2015. Retrieved April 12, 2018 from https://www.learning-theories.com/constructivism.html.

Hour of Code. (2015). Retrieved from https://hourofcode.com/us

International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). ISTE standards for students. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/iste-standards/standards-forstudents

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). ISTE standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/iste-standards/standards-forteachers

Krahenbuhl, K. S. (2016). Student-centered education and constructivism: challenges, concerns, and clarity for teachers. Clearing House, 89(3), 97-105. doi:10.1080/00098655.2016.1191311

Laureate Education (Producer). (2015e). Constructionist and constructivist learning theories [Video file]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Orey, M. (Ed.). (2010). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Retrieved April 10, 2018 from http://textbookequity.org/Textbooks/Orey_Emergin_Perspectives_Learning.pdf

Pitler, H., Hubbell, E. R., & Kuhn, M. (2012). Using technology with classroom instruction that works (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Waddell, R. (2017, September, 22). Constructivist learning: Applying a student-centered approach in your classroom [Blog Post].  Retrieved April 12, 2018 from http://blog.edmentum.com/constructivist-learning-applying-student-centered-approach-your-classroom