Applying constructivism in a traditional environment.

Abstract

In traditional learning practices whereby students simply receive and consume knowledge, they fail mostly to utilize and develop their potential, and end up typically becoming part of the traditional graduates with limited real life experiences. Constructivism allows students to experience learning and construct knowledge. Critics argue that applying constructivist principles is impractical. However, the theory can be implemented if the learning environment is organized to facilitate the application of constructivist styles without discarding parts of the traditional structure that is helpful. A hybrid of different styles that do not conflict, but instead complement one another, is a significant way to deliver instruction. This paper describes a mid-western university certificate program's application of constructivist learning styles.

Introduction

Instructional styles that promote learning through personal experiences, interaction and collaboration have become appealing in the last few decades. Student-centered learning provides students with opportunities to explore, discover and construct knowledge that is relevant, applicable, and useful instead of passively receiving information from teachers. Students no longer have to receive prepackaged content but actively contribute to the construction of their own knowledge for real world activities. Constructivism has emerged as a significant learning theory that emphasizes student-centered learning (Dalgarno, 2001).

Though traditional teaching and learning styles are still widespread, individual instructors and programs have tried various techniques to meet the learning needs of their students which were not being met by the traditional teaching methods (Jonassen, 1991). A two year certificate program in a Mid-western university implemented a constructivist learning style by creating a curriculum focused around student participation in curriculum and course design, pedagogical planning and practices, and course and program evaluation. The program was a 30 quarter-hour undergraduate certificate program with a strong emphasis on real-world projects and problem-solving skills. This multidisciplinary program was supported and coordinated by the Colleges of Business, Communication, Engineering, and Arts and Sciences. It prepared students for leadership and global issues. Courses were not traditional classes with lectures and tests, but involved project and problem-based learning, peer learning, student-led teaching, field experiences, and group activities. Learning settings included classrooms, the web, student homes, and distant field locations. The program required students to live together in the same residential building. The program, hereinafter refereed to as the Universal Program, applied the constructivist learning techniques by encouraging students to experience real learning that was practical, performance-based, multidisciplinary and global, and which could be connected to contemporary world events. This paper describes the experiences and activities of the Universal Program and application of the constructivist principles in learning.

Constructivism

Perspectives Learning theories and practices have evolved over long periods of time to reflect changes in society. During the first part of the 20th century, learning was modeled after the behaviorist philosophy that emphasized obtaining of automatic and expected responses. In the middle of the century, behaviorism was overtaken by a psychological theory that focused on cognition. The cognitive theory involved transmission of structured knowledge from the teacher to the learner. A decade later, a philosophical orientation rooted in the works of Dewey, Bruner, Piaget and Vygotsky underscored the significance of individuals constructing their own knowledge, and this idea popularized constructivism (Neo & Neo, 2001, Jonassen, 1991). Contrary to the cognitivists' view that teachers play a central role in the learning process and that knowledge is best acquired in a structured, didactic format, the constructivists consider the learner as an active participant in the learning process. Multiple interpretations of constructivism have clouded any specific references to the concept. The different interpretations of the theory have produced radical and moderate constructivists (Dalgarno, 2001), where radical constructivists hold the view that learners should work independently, with limited teacher support, while the moderates believe that learning can occur within a formal and structured environment. Though different interpretations of constructivism have been made, the theory emphasizes the importance of experiences, knowledge construction and learning process that puts students at the center of learning.

Practitioners and scholars put forth the view that constructivism cannot be practiced in a traditional, cognitive environment. They argue that constructivism involves much more than formal learning, as it is about students' earlier experiences. However, Howe & Berv (2000) recognize the futility of evading direct instruction, especially when teaching children, and stress that it is unfeasible to solely rely on constructivist teaching styles. Some may argue that constructivism burdens the child and relieves teachers of their teaching responsibility. However, contrary to this perception, constructivist learning activities places more demands on the teacher than teacher-directed learning. Constructivism differs from other learning practices in that while most other learning styles focus on cognitive knowledge acquisition; the core of constructivism is based upon the individual's personal learning experience and reflection (Kafai & Resnick, 1996). In the learning process, student activities are significant and central to knowledge construction. Meaningful learning occurs when there is collaboration between learners, teachers and specialists in the field.

Constructivist classroom According to Gould (1996) and Jonassen (1991), constructivist classrooms and programs display the following characteristics: Learning focuses on ideas rather than facts; the learning process involves interactions between students and teachers; focus is on knowledge construction rather than replication; dialogue and discourse are promoted and encouraged in a complex world where there are multiple representations of knowledge; students' interests determine learning; and learning experiences accentuate authentic activities. In describing a typical constructivist classroom, Sandholtz, Ringstaff, & Dweyer (1997), state that, "teacher-student interactions are less didactic, more collaborative. Students work together. Learning environments feel more like real work places where problems are solved through conversations, inquiry, trial and error ..." (p. 13). Classroom collaboration and interaction promote real learning and teachers should encourage negotiation in a classroom environment where the curriculum is discussed. In order to help the child grow, teachers should limit their own control of instructional methods and begin using such measures as scaffolding and peer collaboration (Gould, 1996). In a constructivist's classroom, learning originates and ends with students. Constructivists believe that the teacher and the learning environment facilitate processing and attainment of knowledge, and that the process of learning is important.

Student-centered Learning Practices

The learning process in a constructivist environment focuses more on activities and less on the goals. Student's experiences and active participation in classroom activities are important. Although teachers have goals to accomplish, they are flexible and accommodate unplanned activities for learning. Teachers may make choices and decisions, but their influence is limited. Learning is not about transmission of information but analysis of information to construct knowledge (Dunlap & Grabinger, 1996). The Universal Program encouraged learning in contexts where students had the freedom to experience learning and reflect on their development. The flexible structure of the program was meant to break with the traditional teaching and learning styles where students were merely passing through the institution without gaining valuable real life experiences. The learning processes and practices, as described below, reflected implementation of constructivist learning styles.

Changing learning practices Multiple learning styles are employed in a constructivist environment to promote and individualize learning with students contributing towards decisions about their learning practices. Unlike the traditional pedagogical practices, constructivism allows students to engage in learning that befits students' interests and abilities. This, however, is not to refute the important role played by teachers in a constructivist setting, it only stresses that students have more independence and are active participants in the learning process (Howe & Berv, 2000). The nature of learning in the Universal Program extensively applied the learning principles of constructivism. Students worked independently in groups, initiated and implemented their own projects with teachers serving as guides and advisors. Consisting of students from different majors, the Universal Program provided students with alternative learning environments and styles to build on their previous experiences. Learning involved a combination of face-to-face, web-based classroom, and distance learning. Teaching and learning changed from the didactic transmission of content, to an interactive dialogue and discourse. Learning settings were not restricted to one environment but change according to needs and suitability. Adopted learning styles included problem-based- and project-base learning, collaborative, independent and individualized learning.

Performance-based assessment In a constructivist environment, students are prepared and educated to demonstrate their knowledge and learning not through rote recitation of content but by performance-based practices (Dunlap & Grabinger, 1996). By sharing and reflecting on what they have learned, evaluation moves from recalling transmitted information to accounting for learning. In the Universal Program, students not only were evaluated by outside reviewers, they reviewed each others work. Peer assessment was conducted during the middle and at the end of the term. Teachers' evaluations were not confined to tests and exams. Instead there was ongoing, quarter-long evaluation based on class participation, contribution to online forums, leadership, team roles and responsibilities, and research. Students constructed portfolios to document their work and reflect on their learning and achievements. Evaluation and assessment of student work was not the teachers' sole responsibility. Unlike the traditional assessment techniques where teachers evaluated students' learning from class work perspectives, external evaluators reviewed student learning as it should be applied in real life. Multiplying evaluation techniques provided students multiple feedbacks and this increased potential to improve learning.

Multidisciplinary curriculum Students can discover and exploit their potential when presented with opportunities that allow them to take different subjects and courses of study. Learning is viewed as a lifelong activity. Though students are not expected to possess expert knowledge of all courses, facilitating access and acquisition of different contents is useful. Teachers can direct students to internet resources, organize field excursions, invite subject matter experts, and make video presentations to widen students' scope of knowledge. Students in the Universal Program were from different disciplines, including telecommunication, history, information media, education, engineering, and journalism, and students were required to complete courses in different disciplines. Teachers grouped students across disciplines to share knowledge. By interacting with students with skills and experiences in different fields, students were not confined to their specializations or cognate areas. Such learning styles broaden student's learning. For example, an education major who understands the Second World War well (history), designs a website (information media), can operate a video (telecommunication) and who possesses an understanding of basic engineering concepts (engineering) is better than the traditional education major who normally has limited experience and skills outside of his major.

Access to information In a break with the traditional teaching and learning practices where the teacher and the textbook were the common sources of information, students in a constructivist environment have input in making decisions about sources of information. One source of information which has been increasing in popularity is the internet. The interact allows students to have access to current information (Tucker & Bathhelder, 2000). Students in the Universal Program were provided with lap top computers and had access to a computer lab with internet connection. Internet resources were in text, audio, or video, and they catered to individual styles and interests of students. Guest presentations in class and field visits were valuable sources of information.

Simulation When real world activities cannot be undertaken by students, simulating such activities creates in students the intuition of being involved in real activities. When students learn by simulations, they will have few problems understanding, analyzing, transferring, and dealing with real events and activities. Students are more likely to relate to things that they have replicated compared to just listening to lectures and presentations. Dalgarno (2001) argues that constructivists prefer to use simulation because simulations provide an environment where learners can explore, experiment, and construct models of real environments. In creating models and experimenting with theories, simulations provide immediate outcomes. In the Universal Program, students applied simulations, physical representations, and models. For example, students modeled the United Nations General Assembly to understand international relations and conflict resolutions. With every student representing a country, students engaged in debates and discussions. In simulating world tour and adventure, students made virtual trips using the internet and visited various countries and reported on their findings. Students found simulations are entertaining and interesting ways to learn.

Contemporary learning In an age of information explosion where students are aware of world events, content can best be presented and analyzed if such content is tied to current events. Learning cannot be divorced from the students' real world surroundings, and teachers try to link knowledge to experiences to which students can relate to. A combination of lectures, videos, online forums, group learning, and field experiences can be an important strategy to motivate students and give them avenues for utilizing information. Presenting students with challenging and real world scenarios as part of learning activities fosters critical thinking skills. In the Universal Program, students were provided with resources such as the internet and television to keep them up-to-date with current events. Students also had access to professional journals and magazines. Teaching and learning styles were flexible to accommodate students' day-to-day learning experiences. For example, in a Business Education course, students changed plans and activities for one lesson, and discussed the impact of the biggest media merger (AOL-Time Warner) that was announced within the same week.

Experiencing knowledge Students value teaching and learning styles that accord them opportunities for experiencing learning. Through interaction, dialogue, and collaboration, students engage in real activities and learn by doing. Knowledge that brings immediate gratification, is relevant, and is applicable to real life activities enhances interest in learning. Learning and applying knowledge concurrently motivates and encourages students to reflect on the relevance and usefulness of knowledge (Solomon, 1998).

In the Universal Program, learning by doing was emphasized. Active participation and hand-on approach were employed in project-based learning styles that were widely practiced. In completing projects, students coordinated with people in the field using email and telephones, and had practical experiences in real settings. For example, in studying about foreign culture, students enrolled in a cross-cultural alliance course and collaborated and interacted with international students. Students attended international student group meetings and cultural activities to learn about people's culture. Such activities encouraged students to reflect on their learning in relation to its significance and application. Learning becomes meaningful if students can experience it. Teachers provide information by engaging in "personal interactions drawing from their experiences to fill in gaps between a student's existing framework and new ideas" (Tucker & Bathhelder, 2000, p. 82). Constructivism in problem-based learning allows students to incorporate their experiences into their learning. Further, students' past experiences becomes the basis upon which new learning experiences begin.

Conclusion

The traditional learning styles provided students with limited practical, real life experiences. As a student-centered theory, constructivism allows students to experience learning and reflect on their experiences. Some people may argue that applying constructivist principles is impractical. This may be true if we follow the radical constructivists' views that constructivism cannot work in structured learning environments. However, the theory can be implemented if the learning environment is organized to facilitate the application of constructivist styles without discarding parts of the formal structure that are helpful. The program described in this paper utilized the traditional formal structure to support the implementation and application of constructivist teaching and learning styles. Experience from the Universal Program exhibited that a hybrid of different styles that do not conflict, but instead complement one another, is a significant way to deliver effective instruction.

References

Dalgarno, B. (2001). Interpretations of constructivism and consequences for computer assisted learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(2), 183-194

Dunlap, J. C. & Grabinger, R. S (1996). Rich environments for active learning in the higher education curriculum. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design. Englewood cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications

Gould, J. S. (1996). A constructivist perspective on teaching and learning in the language arts. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives and practices. New York: Teacher College Press

Howe, K. R. & Berv, J. (2000). Constructing constructivism, epistemological and pedagogical. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press 

Jonassen, D. (1991). Evaluating constructivist learning. Educational Technology, 31(9), 28-33

Kafai, Y. & Resnick, M. (1996). Introduction. In Y. Kafai & M. Resnick (Eds.), Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking and learning in a digital world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates

Neo, K. T & Neo, M. (2001). A constructivist learning experience: Reconstructing a website using multimedia authoring tools. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 17(3), 330-350

Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dweyer, D. C. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.

Solomon, P. G. (1998). The curriculum bridge: From standard to actual classroom practice. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.

Tucker, G. R & Bathhelder, A. (2000). The integration of technology into a constructivist curriculum: Beyond PowerPoint. Proceedings of Site 2000, Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International conference. Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education

Ahmed Ali, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse 

Ahmed Ali, Ph.D, is an Assistant Professor of Instructional Technology. Ali's teaching and research interests focus on technology and pedagogy and instructional design.