CONSTRUCTIVIST EPISTEMOLOGY Teaching verses Learning Barbara Truitt Beckmeyer Make Up Mini Report

Cognitive and Social Constructivism Under the general heading of the Constructivist Epistemology various types of constructivist theories have emerged: ◦Radical, social, physical, evolutionary, postmodern constructivism, social constructionism, information- processing constructivism and cybernetic systems to name a few (Steffe & Gale, 1995; Prawat, 1996; Heylighen, 1993). This mini report I will be looking at two that are at the forefront of current trends, Cognitive, (also know as individual, rational, and/or psychological constructivism) and Social Constructivism and how they are being used in faculty development.

Social vs Cognitive Constructivism Social/Vygotskian constructivism Knowledge is constructed by the individual and built on prior knowledge. Learning is based on personal but shared interpretation of knowledge Learning is an active process built on the learners personal experience within a social context. Cognitive/Pagietian constructivism Internal constructions of knowledge more individualized. Social interaction is a catalyst for learning.

Cognitive Constructivism learning environment Engage learners in activities authentic to the discipline in which they are learning. Provide for collaboration and the opportunity to engage multiple perspectives on what is being learned. Support learners in setting their own goals and regulating their own learning. Encourage learners to reflect on what and how they are learning. (Reiser & Dempsey, p.42)

Social Constructivism learning environment Reflect “real-world” complexities. Encourage students’ explain their responses through discussion and questioning. Encourages group work and group processing. Socially constructed knowledge is built together by a group and thus fosters multiple ways of understanding.

Combining the two forms of constructivism Working in small groups but with the outcome that each individual instructor will be developing his or her own course it seems a perfect fit to combine the two theories to help produce the desired outcome.

Audience and Setting Audience are faculty members from across curriculums at a state university working to create courses based on Universal Design for Learning as part of a grant project. The setting is one fostering Faculty Learning Communities and incorporates many principles of Constructivism. Faculty members work in small groups and come together several times within the year to share their progress and knowledge with all of the individual groups as a whole.

Using Constructivism for Faculty Development Working in small groups sharing ideas Authentic/Real World problems Questioning new models and techniques Explaining how they intend to implement changes furthers understanding Shared experience builds a sense of community and a body of knowledge Individual instructors will implement their owns separate course materials and delivery model

Benefits Benefits include peer to peer networking and sharing across curriculums Fostering community for the instructors Developing new skill sets for instructors based on different perspectives Creating socially constructed knowledge that is shared not only within the campus but within the extended network of other campuses involved in the grant

Costs Time constraints on group activities and organizing times and places for the entire group to meet together Scalability problems…How can this translate into a larger instructor population Time for development of group interactions and collection of feedback Keeping track of outcomes and collecting quantitative results/data

What We Should Be Doing? Developing more Student-centered active methods of instruction Ask students to be a part of their education Have students contribute to the development and design of instruction by using polls and other feedback mechanisms Shift the focus from teaching to learning

Some Principals we may want to incorporate In their book A Case for Constructivist Classrooms, J.G. and M.G. Brooks state 12 principals essential to constructivist teaching: Encouragement and acceptance of student autonomy and initiative. Utilization of raw data and primary sources along with manipulative, interactive, and physical materials. When planning, teachers use cognitive terminology such as "classify", "analyze", and "create." Allowance of student responses to drive lessons, shift instructional strategies, and alter content. Inquiry concerning students' understanding of concept before sharing their own understanding of those concepts. Encouragement of students to engage in dialogue, both with the teacher and with one another. Encouragement of student inquiry by asking thoughtful, open-ended questions and encouraging students to ask questions of each other. Pursuit of elaboration of students' initial responses. Engagement of students in experiences that might engender contradictions to their initial hypotheses and then encourage discussion. Allowances for wait time after posing questions. Providing time for students to construct relationships and create metaphors. Nurturing students' natural curiosity through frequent use of the learning cycle model.

References Brandon, B. (2004). How do people learn? Some new ideas for e-learning designers. Learning Solutions Magazine. Retrieved June 14, 2010 from learningsolutionsmag.com. do-people-learn-some-new-ideas-for-e-learning-designers do-people-learn-some-new-ideas-for-e-learning-designers Brooks, Jacqueline Grennon., and Martin G. Brooks. In Search of Understanding the Case for Constructivist Classrooms: with a New Introduction by the Authors. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill/Prentice Hall, Print. Ertmer, P.A. & Newby, J.T. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), Reiser, R. & Dempsey, J.V. (2007). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (2nd ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Education/Prentice-Hall, Inc.