2008 Convocation of the National Association of Training Executives

1. 2008 Convocation of the National Association of Training Executives Workshop 3: The Role of Constructivism in the Coming Decade

2. Constructivism: Benefits, Costs, and the Next Step Coordinator – Maria Groves Elaborator – Selwa Alkadhi Explorer – Li Fang Wang Explorer – Yaniv Oded Recorder – Robin McMullen

3. Origins • Some experts trace beginnings of Constructivist thought to classical antiquity and the Socratic method (Brooks, 2004) • The writings of philosopher Immanuel Kant (1997; 1998) and of developmental theorist Jean Piaget (1995) provide theoretical foundations for the Constructivist philosophy • A cornerstone of Constructivism is Vygotsky’s (1997) theory of the ‘zone of proximal development’ National Association of Training Executives

4. Objectivism versus Constructivism (Reiser & Dempsey, 2007) Objectivism/Positivism Constructivism/Relativism Learner constructs own knowledge with guidance Arrange conditions to promote construction of meaning Construct knowledge internally Teacher facilitates; learner controls Learner constructs; assessment contextual • Transfer knowledge from outside to inside the learner • Arrange conditions to promote specific goals • Pre-design knowledge externally • Teacher directs; learner receives • Learner produces; teacher assesses National Association of Training Executives

5. Strengths • Views learning as a social, collaborative endeavor(Phillips, 2006) • Scaffolds learning by building on existing knowledge (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996) • Acknowledges learner as an independent agent (Phillips, 2006) • Focuses on learning process as well as outcomes (Reiser & Dempsy, 2007) • Adapts to learners, cultures, environments, resources (Brooks, 2004) National Association of Training Executives

6. Benefits • Encourages critical thinking (Brooks, 2004) • Sets the stage for development of higher order cognitive skills (Brooks, 2004), i.e., analysis, synthesis, evaluation • Builds collaboration skills (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996), e.g., communication, negotiation • Empowers learners by giving them ownership of their learning (Brooks, 2004) National Association of Training Executives

7. Weaknesses of Constructivism • Learners want and need active guidance • Positioning the teacher as ‘collaborator’ deprives learners of the benefits of the teacher’s superior training and experience • Collaborative learning may suffice for learners within one standard deviation of the mean; it does not well serve learners whose abilities fall in the two tails of the distribution • Faster learners have limited opportunity to acquire new knowledge; they’re too busy teaching classmates what they, themselves have already learned • Slower learners need help from a trained, professional teacher, not a colleague or a collaborator. National Association of Training Executives

8. Weaknesses of Constructivism • Does not facilitate learning what to learn • May be inadequate preparation for the real world, in which what one knows is more important than how one learned it • Psychomotor skills don’t fit the model; learners must not decide for themselves how to fly an airplane or do CPR • Taken to its postmodern conclusion, leaves the existence of objective reality open to question. Nevertheless, 2 + 2 = 4 in all cases; objective reality exists and learners need a certain set of knowledge to cope with it effectively. • Absence of objective assessment guarantees that Constructivism’s shortcomings cannot be empirically evaluated; the Constructivist classroom is a perpetual, undocumented experiment from which only anecdotal evidence can be gleaned National Association of Training Executives

9. Costs – Time Is Money • Enriching the environment to facilitate each individual learner’s personal construction of the knowledge that each chooses to acquire costs money and takes time; nor is it clear that such enrichment is even possible • Evolving and describing context takes time • Collaboration takes time • Experimentation takes time • Compensating for documented shortfall in basic skills (Brooks, 2004) costs money and time • Critical periods for acquiring basic skills may be missed, in which case those skills are never fully developed National Association of Training Executives

10. Next Step – IntegrationDiscard the chaff, retain the wheat National Association of Training Executives

11. References Alesandrini, K., & Larson, L. (2002). Teachers Bridge to Constructivism. Clearing House, 75(3), 118. Brooks, J. G., Matsuoka, B. M., & Doyle, A. (2004). Constructivism as a Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. Concept to Classroom: A Series of Workshops Retrieved July 6, 2008, from http://www.13.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index.html Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. J. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research of Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 170-198). New York: McMillan Library Reference USA. Kant, I. (Ed.). (1997). Critique of Practical Reason. New York: Cambridge University Press. Kant, I. (Ed.). (1998). Critique of Pure Reason. New York: Cambridge University Press. Phillips, D. (2006). The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: The Many Faces of Constructivism. Philosophy of Education: An Anthology. Piaget, J. (Ed.). (1995). Sociological Studies. New York: Routledge. Prefume, Y. (2007). Constructivism in foreign language learning. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 11(1), 5. Reiser, R., & Dempsey, J. (2007). Constructivism and Instructional Design: The Emergence of the Learning Sciences and Design Research. Columbus, OH: Pearson Education. Vygotsky, L. S., Rieber, R. W., & Hall, M. J. (1997). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, Vol. 4: The history of the development of higher mental functions. New York, NY, US: Plenum Press. National Association of Training Executives