Math 183

Principles and Strategies in Teaching Mathematics

Session 4 - Various Constructivism Strategies

Introduction

After understanding the principles of constructivism, teaching for understanding, and the cone of
experiences and their relationships, you are now ready to discuss and present various constructivist
strategies. This is the focus of this session.

Learning Outcomes

At the end of this session, the student must have

1. Explained the constructivism strategies in teaching mathematics

2. Collect at least activity that demonstrates constructivist strategy
3. Examine one activity and explain why it is considered as constructivist

Content Input

Attached is a reading material on constructivist methods. It discusses principles of constructivist

teaching, Characteristics of constructivist teaching, roles of teachers, examples of constructivist activities.
YOu are not however limited to this material.

Get a partner. Study the material attached and your other references and do activity 4.

Deepening of the Activity

In your own words, how do you describe the impact of constructivist learning on effective
teaching.

Agreements

Submit output to the google drive

 MARIANO MARCOS STATE UNIVERSITY
College of Teacher
Education
Name: __________________________________ Date of Submission: ___________________

Activity 4. Sample Constructivist Activity

1. Make a summary of the key points that your learn in any form. YOu can use any graphic organizer
to summarize. Share your Graphic Organizer here.

2. Find at least one specific activity that demonstrates constructivist activity. It may be copied,
downloaded or modified or original. It must have the following basic parts.

Title of the Activity.

Topic:
Objectives:
Description of the Activity: Make it specific

3. Why do you say that this is a constructivist Activity?

4. Get the activity of one group and explain if it also employs a constructivist activity.

5. Submit this output in the MVLE. While it is a partner activity, each of you will still submit/upload
individually in the MVLE
 Constructivist teaching methods
https://psychology.wikia.org/wiki/
Constructivist_teaching_methods

History

Constructivist teaching methods are based on the constructivist learning theory developed by a variety of
philosophers. Along with John Dewey, Piaget researched childhood development and education. Their
theories are now encompassed in the broader movement of progressive education.
The constructivist learning theory says that children learn best when they construct a personal
understanding based on experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences.[2]

Constructivist teaching strategies

Characteristics of Constructivist Teaching

One of the primary goals of using constructivist teaching is that students learn how to learn by giving
them the training to take initiative for their own learning experiences.
According to Audrey Gray, the characteristics of a constructivist classroom are as follows:
the learners are actively involved the environment is democratic the activities are interactive and student-
centered the teacher facilitates a process of learning in which students are encouraged to be responsible
and autonomous
Furthermore, in the constructivist classroom, students work primarily in groups and learning and
knowledge are interactive and dynamic. There is a great focus and emphasis on social and communication
skills, as well as collaboration and exchange of ideas [2]. This is contrary to the traditional classroom in
which students work primarily alone, learning is achieved through repetition, and the subjects are strictly
adhered to and are guided by a textbook.

Examples of constructivist activities

Some activities encouraged in constructivist classrooms are:

A) Experimentation: students individually perform an experiment and then come together as a class
to discuss the results.
B) Research projects: students research a topic and can present their findings to the class.
C) Field trips. This allows students to put the concepts and ideas discussed in class in a real-world
context. Field trips would often be followed by class discussions.
D) Films. These provide visual context and thus bring another sense into the learning experience.
E) Class discussions. This technique is used in all of the methods described above. It is one of the
most important distinctions of constructivist teaching methods.[3]

Role of teachers

In the constructivist classroom, the teacher’s role is to prompt and facilitate discussion. Thus, the
teacher’s main focus should be on guiding students by asking questions that will lead them to develop
their own conclusions on the subject.
David Jonassen identified three major roles for facilitators to support students in constructivist
learning environments:
Modeling
Coaching
Scaffolding[4]

Constructivist Learning Environments (CLEs)

Jonassen has proposed a model for developing constructivist learning environments (CLEs) around a
specific learning goal. This goal may take one of several forms, from least to most complex:
Question or issue
Case study
Long-term Project
Problem (multiple cases and projects integrated at the curriculum level)
Jonassen recommends making the learning goals engaging and relevant but not overly structured.
Learning is driven in CLEs by the problem to be solved; students learn content and theory in order to solve
the problem. This is different from traditional objectivist teaching where the theory would be presented
first and problems would be used afterwards to practice theory.
Depending on students' prior experiences, related cases and scaffolding may be necessary for support.
Instructors also need to provide an authentic context for tasks, plus information resources, cognitive
tools, and collaborative tools.[4]

Constructivist assessment

Traditionally, assessment in the classrooms is based on testing. In this style, it is important for the
student to produce the correct answers. However, in constructivist teaching, the process of gaining
knowledge is viewed as being just as important as the product. Thus, assessment is based not only on
tests, but also on observation of the student, the student’s work, and the student’s points of view [2].
Some assessment strategies include:
Oral discussions. The teacher presents students with a “focus” question and allows an open
discussion on the topic.
KWL(H) Chart (What we know, What we want to know, What we have learned, How we know
it). This technique can be used throughout the course of study for a particular topic, but is also a
good assessment technique as it shows the teacher the progress of the student throughout the
course of study.
Mind Mapping. In this activity, students list and categorize the concepts and ideas relating to a
topic.
Hands-on activities. These encourage students to manipulate their environments or a particular
learning tool. Teachers can use a checklist and observation to assess student success with the
particular material.
Pre-testing. This allows a teacher to determine what knowledge students bring to a new topic
and thus will be helpful in directing the course of study.[3]

An example of a Lesson Taught with a Constructivist background

A good example of a lesson being taught in a constructivist way, with the teacher mediating learning
rather than directly teaching the class is shown by the example of Faraday's candle. There are various
forms of this lesson, but all are developed from the Christmas lectures Faraday gave on the the
functioning of candles. In open constructivist lessons using these lectures as a basis, students are
encouraged to discover for themselves how candles work. They do this first by making simple
observations, from which they later build ideas and hypotheses which they then go on to test. The
teachers acts to encourage this learning. If successful students can use this lesson to understand the
components of combustion—an important chemical topic.

Arguments against constructivist teaching techniques

Main article: Constructivism (learning theory)

A wide variety of authors from many fields have voiced the following arguments against
constructivist based teaching instruction:
A group of cognitive scientists has also questioned the central claims of constructivism, saying that
they are either misleading or contradict known findings.[5]
One possible deterrent for this teaching method is that, due to the emphasis on group work, the
ideas of the more active students may dominate the group’s conclusions.[2]

Zhu and Simon (1987) state that because the emphasis is not based on acquiring and practicing
basic skills, students in constructivist classrooms tend to lag behind those in traditional classrooms in
these areas.
While proponents of constructivism argue that constructivist students perform better than their
peers when tested on higher-order reasoning, the critics of constructivism argue that this teaching
technique forces students to "reinvent the wheel." Supporters counter that "Students do not reinvent the
wheel but, rather, attempt to understand how it turns, how it functions."[2] Proponents argue that
students — especially elementary school-aged children — are naturally curious about the world, and
giving them the tools to explore it in a guided manner will serve to give them a stronger understanding of
it[2].
Mayer (2004)[6] developed an literature review spanning fifty years and concluded "The
research in this brief review shows that the formula constructivism = hands-on activity is a formula for
educational disaster." His argument is that active learning is often suggested by those subscribing to this
philosophy. In developing this instruction these educators produce materials that require learning to be
behaviorally active and not be "cognitively active."[6] That is, although they are engaged in activity, they
may not be learning (Sweller, 1988). Mayer recommends using guided discovery, a mix of direct
instruction and hands-on activity, rather than pure discovery: "In many ways, guided discovery appears to
offer the best method for promoting constructivist learning."[6]
Kirchner et al (2006) agree with the basic premise of constructivism, that learners construct
knowledge, but are concerned with the instructional design recommendations of this theoretical
framework. "The constructivist description of learning is accurate, but the instructional consequences
suggested by constructivists do not necessarily follow." (Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark, 2006, p. 78).
Specifically, they say instructors often design unguided instruction that that relies on the learner to
"discover or construct essential information for themselves" (Kirchner et al, 2006, p75).
For this reason they state that it "is easy to agree with Mayer’s (2004)[6] recommendation that
we “move educational reform efforts from the fuzzy and nonproductive world of ideology—which
sometimes hides under the various banners of constructivism—to the sharp and productive world of
theory- based research on how people learn” (p. 18). Finally Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) cite
Mayer[6] to conclude fifty years of empirical results do not support unguided instruction.