2012 EDLD 655 Watch 1, Day 2: Cognitivist/Constructivist
October 2012: Hear teachers and educational leaders discuss observations of learning theories at work. To post, just click on "Post a Comment" below and a screen will come up for typing. (You may be asked to create an account and login.)
Representatives from a local association in Southern Oregon came to talk to me today about a new reading program. The program they are promoting relies heavily on student interest to drive instruction. The key component of their program was to find out what interests students have and build the reading instruction around interest. The association contends that students will learn to read when they are able to make meaning out of what motivates them. The program uses context clues like pictures to help students guess at words and predict what characters might be saying. The association used a lot of “feeling words” and talked about the love of reading. Building on student’s interest and internal meaning making desire… this program is purported to teach reading. I think they might be hitting on some Cognitivist/Constructivist theory to teaching reading?
At the high school age, connecting it to an interest or experience helps high school student feel it is relevant to them. The writing reflection paper that we do in band really helps students write about something they are passioniate about and knowledgable about and they actually really enjoy the assignment.
Tracy, Connecting reading to high school student’s interest or experience is great and writing about what you are passionate about helps in so many ways. I think Daniel also hit on the point in his work at BRT of extending the learning (generalizing) and being provided the freedom to explore and make meaning beyond the routine. Sometimes, I get stuck in one particular approach (behaviorist) because I mostly deal with acquisition of new skills. Too much of one approach, while not giving credence to other philosophies, limits my understanding and narrows my options. I like what Dan said, “We run the risk of developing rote learners who do not know when to apply an existing schema to solve a problem; they just keep applying the schema that they know, unaware or inattentive to the nuances that make the challenge different.” I also see many new learners who don’t have the proper tool kit to solve the problem they are faced with. Often the time crunch to "give them" the tools outweighs the "discovery" option. The montra seems to be... once students learn the skills, then they can discover interest in applying the skill? But, the two don't have to be mutually exclusive.
OK, I'll bite. Well I agree that this appears to approach constructivist philosophy. Kudos to them for using student prior knowledge and interest to motivate them. But I want to scream when I hear people tout guessing words based on contextual clues. Although that may be a helpful supplementary skill, PLEASE let the children learn accurate decoding. Life will be so much easier for them in the long run. Further, constructivism generally is better for higher order thinking skills and constructivists will provide a much more complete package, including modeling, sequencing, scaffolding, and fading, etc.
Today I actually had my annual evaluation at work. Towards the end of the evaluation I started talking with my boss about where I was in my work and what he could do to help support me. It's interesting because, as I mentioned in the previous post, we work primarily from an empiricist framework; yet, his mentorship of me has really fit within the constructivist realm. That is, he allows me considerable freedom to explore the topics I choose, and to stumble on my face at times. Of course, there are times when he assigns me a project and wants it done a certain way, but there is always still some leeway that allows me to attack the project in whatever way I feel is best. We then, of course, have check-ins so I don't go completely off the rails, but overall he provides me with an opportunity to explore topics in my own way, while working with me more as a colleague than a strict, top-down "boss". I feel I've grown an incredible amount professionally while under his watch. So, I suppose I have less of a specific example of constructivism in action than I do an overall experience in a professional setting.
Hi Daniel, This is a great example. I am curious how you felt about that form of guidance in the beginning. I am usually very apprehensive about being under the guidance of someone who provides me with so much "freedom" to explore - but I've found that it is under that guidance where I've grown the most.
Daniel, great example - as I work as your colleague at the same shop!!
For me Meg, though I've had lots of freedom, it was very much a process of scaffolding and fading. Meaning, that around here, as a new person, though there are definitely high expectations around becoming a self-efficacious researcher, there is lots of support initially. Leaders and those with expertise in the shop model and coach around designing and implementing strong research. I should add that these leaders, are not necessarily "directors and associates" all of the time. For instance, in some respects I am becoming the "alignment guy", the person who understands the study design aspects and in-house technologies we use to conduct such studies. Though, I am a research assistant doctoral student and others have far more experience in some areas than I do, I have been asked to both lead alignment studies, but also help others and assist on projects in these areas as well. It was this type of "guided freedom" that has allowed me to meaningfully develop my learning around becoming an educational researcher at BRT.
For me the freedom has been amazing. There were definitely some times of apprehension, like you're talking about, but for the most part it's been really, really good. It was kind of a "sink or swim" approach, but if you sank, you always knew there was a life preserver waiting for you (i.e., one of the directors of the shop would step in to provide the support needed to get you through).
I love Meg's comment because I think it really pushes the idea of Constructivists as an initial means of teaching. I think that many critics of this learning theory would say that initially there is way too much freedom (lack of structure) which too some extent I would agree. I think the critical piece which Shawn touches on is that you are not allowing for free reign off the bat, but there is modeling/coaching/scaffolding and that over time you allow for more independent/personal exploration. I think that people who are not constructivists generally believe it is just a "free-for-all" at the beginning, which it is not, but that you grow towards a more individualized/personalized method.
Daniel. I think this is a great way to learn. I wish that some of my staff could see the benefits in this type of growth. Sometimes I think people are just afraid to let kids go becuase they are worried that they wont figure it out. I think allowing students to make mistakes and figure out how to go about fixing them is powerful. It sounds like you have a good boss.
My example of a cognitivist lens was about my section leaders in my program. As they were warming up their sections today I thought about all the skills/knowledge they use to teach/coach other students. These students apply and then most of them attend a camp during a summer and we do a section leader workshop in August. I and my marching staff coach these students in how to run sectionals with music and model playing in the marching band. We also give them freedom in how they work with their section and plan how they are going to run their sectionals. They learn how to work with students and help all students be successful in playing their part. During band camp and at the end of marching band season everyone in the band writes a reflection around the marching season and if we accomplished our goals set in August and how they felt about the experience. It’s a wonderful way to see problem solving within the sections and lots of cooperative learning going on daily.
During today's math lesson in my fourth grade classroom, students paired up and created a "multiples ladder" using a 5 ft. section of adding machine tape, a ruler, and a pencil. The assignment consisted of partners selecting a factor from the provided list (from simple to more challenging numbers)to begin with and then building up the ladder by finding the consecutive multiples (no calculators allowed at this stage!). I gave minimal directions and only listed a couple of questions on the white board for the students to reference as they worked. As they began, I asked them to make a prediction as to what number they would reach at the top of their ladder. After all students were set up and working, I moved about the room, pausing at each pair to listen in on their thinking, challenges, a-has, and problem solving strategies. As the students created their ladders, I heard comments expressing discoveries of short-cuts, patterns, and questions about the reliability of their numbers. Their sense of discovery and apparent learning gave me a degree of satisfaction with the usefulness of this type of investigation when practicing multiplication and number sense.
This seems like a really good example of exploration. I like how you trusted them to use their own skills and knowledge to figure out how to tackle the problem. That is in my mind one of the best things about the constructivist approach, it does not spoon feed and it honors the learner as the owner of his/her learning. The students earn it, which makes the learning their own. This is HUGE.
In terms of contrast, think about their level of engagement if they sat in their desks by themselves and listened to you explain multiples and then performed a worksheet with calculators like automatons!
You mentioned that you gave the students only a few prompts in this exercise. I am curious, do you have any students that have trouble functioning with few parameters? How do you handle requests for clarification or conflicts when group members have different ideas about they "should" go about the task?
We encourage a lot of exploration in the science workshops I run. Some students seem to do very well with this, but others struggle. Anecdotally, it seems to me that children these days are better equipped to handle constructivist learning than children were when I was a child and even more so than when my parents were children. I know personally, when I was younger that if I was given a task that I was unfamiliar with and set loose with out a lot of guidance I would get frustrated very quickly. Luckily for me, I had teachers who were comfortable letting me struggle a bit and new how to help without giving me the more rigid structure I was looking for.
Over my time at Behavioral Research and Teaching, I have experienced the cognitivist/constructivist way of teaching and learning routinely. For instance, I am in the final stages of conducting a math measures alignment study, the results of which are, in part, the grounding framework for a new study that I am in the initial stages of designing and implementing. One of our shop’s directors, Julie Alonzo, gave me far more hands-on guidance in the first study that I ran, explaining desired outcomes, how the study should be designed and implemented, etc. After the initial guidance, she purposefully allowed me to conduct the study, identify and work through the problems that were abound to occur (and that did) – though she was also present as a guide, modeling what strong educational research looked like from start to finish. During the initial stages of this second study, on which the first is largely based, I am receiving more hands-off assistance from my colleague Daniel and again Julie in the form of previous files used in similarly designed studies. In my mind, this process is a very deliberate example of scaffolding and fading, whereby I had more direct support and guidance up front and less as appropriate more recently. In meeting with Daniel yesterday and Julie today, though I have previous work to guide my planning and decision-making, I have the autonomy to design and implement the study, knowing that these individuals are there for support as needed.
Hi Shawn, Great example. I think one of the key things you mentioned is that she provided "modeling" to demonstrate the strong educational research process -- but then allows you to create and make meaning independently. It's also great to know they are their as support. I often think about teachers who I think had to goal to provide the scaffolding and constructivist approach, but forgot the modeling and support components that need to be in place as students begin to create meaning (as you mentioned above)
Hi Meg..thanks for replying! Yep, I'm in a pretty great spot because of their style of leadership and support - especially great as I am in so early in my career in education research. Whether I am able to stay at this shop, or move on to another place after my degree, I stay or leave with the tools I'll need to become better as a researcher. You hit it exactly I think, scaffolding, fading, modeling and support are great techniques to bring about meaningful personal/professional growth; they work effectively together, at all levels of teaching and learning.
I was watching my young son Sammy work with my wife carving out pumpkins yesterday evening and noted several cognitive/constructivist strategies at play.
First, she modeled how to cut open a pumpkin and look inside to see all of the seeds. Then, she showed him how to use the special pumpkin seed scooper tool. He said, "That's just like a big spoon!" He was connecting his experience of scooping tools with prior knowledge independently. Throughout the demonstration, she was describing what she was doing and why, such as explaining that you always cut out the lid at an angle so the top does not fall into the pumpkin, etc. This dialogue supported his understanding of what he was observing.
Sammy then got a chance to work on his own jack-o-lantern. He chose a smaller pumpkin because he thought it would be easier. My wife helped him with the cutting activity, as he is only 3 1/2. This is a scaffolding approach. There were not many opportunities to fade this support, but she did let him cut the last little piece out of the mouth without guiding him in a hand-over-hand manner. Sammy noted how they had cut the lid at an angle and used the scooper, "just like mom did". He was reflecting on his knowledge as he worked through the experience. He also had a blast exploring the gooey pumpkin seeds - always a thrill until your dad tells you to watch out for the flesh-eating worms in there! Hah.
Great example Dan! I was actually considering writing about a pumpkin carving experience I had with a group of visiting Chinese professors:) Is your wife a teacher? You should post a picture of the carved pumpkin. It is such a natural approach for parents to take-- how boring it would be for a kid if we took a behaviorist approach to getting ready for Halloween.
This example is great I am amazed at how intuitive kids can be and how they get enjoy learning when it is fun! It is special when kids can take what they have learned from a parent and put their little twist on it.
Don Hood The most interesting example of constructivist learning I have seen occurred in a class I am taking: Creativity and Conformity in the Classroom. I’m not a big fan of the constructivist approaches in general, but mostly because of the inefficiency I experience. However, used well, I see great educational value. What I observed was my creativity class learning about creativity in the classroom by analyzing and coding examples from Youtube, Google Images, and Blogs: examples that a teacher might find when searching for “creativity and teaching”. We will be writing a paper for publication based on our findings. The reading materials for the class have direct relevance to our viewing and coding work necessary for the writing to come.
Jackie Brody Don, I tend to agree with you and be hesitant about using a constructivist approach to helping students learn. I am a special education teacher and find that most students with special needs require very explicit and direct instruction. I love the idea behind a constructivist approach but think it needs to be done very specifically in grade schools. For example, I think students need to be working in heterogeneous groups on tasks using a constructivist approach. Many students need to hear how others are working on the task (modeling) before beginning to construct their own interpretation. However, I wonder if this goes against a constructivist approach. Do you have to be in charge of constructing your own knowledge independently or can you be constructing your knowledge while also having input from others?
Thanks Jackie. If you don't mind bumping over to :social constructivism" then you are spot on. It is only a small stretch between individual and social c.
Jackie, I completely agree with you! I think it's a great approach in moderation. It's so fascinating for me because I came from a very rigid anti-constructivisit district (Philadelphia) to an independent school in Portland that uses the IB curriculum which is completely constructivist and inquiry based. It's been a hard balance for me making the transition to working with the teachers and students. I personally think a balance is nice...
I observed a group of Chinese students, college instructors, who were learning about instructional alignment. The instructor gave a writing prompt at the beginning of the class asking the students to create a personal definition of the term “curriculum.” The students then paired up to share their definitions, and to co-author a new definition through a negotiation process. They shared out what they created. I would describe the learning style employed during this activity as constructionist. The students each drew on their own experiences to craft a definition, and they entered into small group discussions to share their ideas. They also engaged in teaching each other. Finally they created a product together (the new definition) that they shared out with the class, and reflected on the ease or difficulty of this process.
Jackie Brody I observed a constructivist activity during a 4th grade math class. The students were starting a unit on perimeter and area. The previous unit had been on measurement. The teacher wrote a list of 5 rectangular objects that were across school grounds. The students were split into groups and asked to measure the distances around the outside edges of the shapes. When the students were brought back together in the classroom, they were asked to figure out how much ribbon or string it would take to outline the edges of the objects. Most of the students were able to discover that they needed to add the measurements of each side together to find the answer. Therefore, they were constructing their own knowledge about the meaning of perimeter.
Hi Jackie, I love this example! I always find it fascinating how teachers can take a rote curriculum and turn it into endless possibilities by including hands on activities to reinforce learning.
The great thing about their experience with how to figure out perimeter is that they have the practical experience that makes it easier to remember "how" to get the perimeter of objects. This would seem to make it easier to transfer over to other shapes of objects when asking, "now, how would you figure out the perimeter of a hexagon, an octagon, etc. The transfer of knowledge is much more meaningful than simply sitting at a desk and being given a formula that maybe really doesn't make sense.
I work in a school that implements the international baccalaureate curriculum which strictly based on units of inquiry. As I mentioned earlier in response to Jackie, it's fascinating for me to be a part of a school that uses only this method of learning and does not rely on the scripted standards based curriculum I have used in the past. The example I am going to give is based on my interactions with the teachers. The school is an IB school that is a full immersion school; teachers are not native English speakers and spend most of their day speaking in their native language with their students. This has been a hurdle for me since I began working at the school (language and cultural barrier x 4 different languages). This is especially noticeable when leading staff professional developments focusing on technology. I have found that the best way to introduce a concept with the teachers is to use scaffolding and a constructivist approach. This helps provide them modeling and guidance while also allowing them to construct meaning for themselves to make sense of the new technology or program. I do this by first modeling the concept, then guiding the teachers through practice, and then allowing for individual exploration. I have found that this helps to overcome the language barriers while also reinforcing the technology skills and individual practice to gain those skills.
We have a wonderful program called AMP at Springfield High School. AMP stands for the "Afterschool Miller Program" and is about exploring learning through music technology. This program promotes a stronger connection to school through having a more creative outlet with which students can express themselves. Students can come in with little knowledge and just an idea ( some come with more), and take their idea from start to finish. Students work together in groups, as well as independently and are responsible for the direction their learning takes them. It is through ongoing conversation and guidance with the instructor as well as other students in the program that learning takes place. The students were all actively engaged and working on their own projects, while at times having conversations with others to reflect on their experiences and to get feedback and ideas as they continue to move forward. This is an amazing process that involves meaningful learning through student collaboration, formulation of questions, problem-solving, self-reflection, assessment and learning, teacher and student coaching and regularly pushes students to extend their learning and knowledge base.
Hi Dawn, This sounds like an interesting program. I have a question...Do the students need to have any prior music knowledge or skills coming in? Or are the constructs through school and music all gained during the program?
This sounds like a great program. I too feel that this is a cognitive program and I get to witness it every day. To watch kisd go from being shy and introverted to gaining self confidence and being willing to take risks has been incredible. I have witnessed this program change kids lives. Kids don't have to have any knowledge to go into the studio but they gain a lot while in there. Not only do they have adult mentors but they have students who are willing to help guide them through the process.
This week I have been leading some Common Core trainings for COSA and I thought about the constructivist learning theory today with the adult learners in my session. Part of the training focuses on how to help students read difficult text. Instead of giving the teachers a list of reading strategies, I gave them a difficult piece of reading. I didn't provide any context for the reading, I just said that I was going to give 10 minutes for the teachers to read the piece and then they were to write a summary and determine the author's main message. It was fascinating to watch all the different approaches the teachers took to read this difficult text. Some people wrote notes on the text, others were circling and marking up the text, some gave up, others whispered to their neighbors. When the time was up, I asked them to talk to a partner about what strategies they used to understand the text. As a group we discussed the different strategies we employed to make sense of the text. Then, I modeled a think a loud of the text and an annotation of the text. We also built some background before the teachers read the text a second time. Then they reflected on their experience of reading it the first time vs. after we had done the modeling and building background.
In order for teachers to understand how to help their students, I needed them to struggle with a piece of reading so that they could construct their own knowledge of the strategies they use all the time without even noticing it.
Alexa, I liked how you started your lesson for the teachers. It gave teachers an insight into their students' needs and created buy-in for the rest of your lesson. It also gave the teachers a chance to utilize strategies they can share with their students as they worked on your assigment and then share those with each other. I really related to this, because as a school counselor, I take a very solution focused approach in my work. Part of that requires clarification of the student's goal or desired outcome (which one might rephase as buy-in). Then we discuss what the student has already tried, what worked and what didn't, before moving on to new solutions. I hadn't thought about my counseling as being part of a constructivist model, but I think it fits: the student is in control of their learning (social/emotional growth); we are building understanding from prior knowledge; the student and I are identifying problems and then problem solving; I often coach and model how to deliver their message and then the student practices it; and then the student actually goes out and implements the ideas/strategies and refines skills with practice in real life.
Today I was working with a student on math when our auto shop instructor came in and asked me if I wanted to collaborate on the Imagine Tomorrow Challenge sponsored by Washington State University. The challenge involves developing projects around alternative energy. My student took an immediate interest, perked up and said, “Oh, like wind?” And Bill, the shop teacher, said, “Wind is an example, but I was thinking about a transportation project.” Bill and I talked for a few more minutes and when he left, my student, who had his computer open said, “Did you know that grass makes better biofuel than corn?” and “What's a megajoule?” Now this student is all fired up about this topic, wants to do a project for the Challenge and knew more about biofuel than I do in about 20 minutes of inspired research. That's just from overhearing a conversation.
Excellent! I find it interesting that learning from a cognitive approach often happens in this manner, which is why it is good practice to expose our students to as many opportunities as possible. We can never tell what will ignite the desire for learning!
Hi Geoff, I love your example because it shows how much a student's prior knowledge, experiences, and interests can really help develop a love for learning. I hope the other students around that student picked up on that and perhaps became interested because of that one students' response. One of my favorite things to do as a teacher was to convey my passion for learning to my students and developing their love for branches of science and history that I loved.
I was sort of at a loss on this one at first. Most of our students work on their core curriculum asynchronously and though we do have interaction online through forums and chat channels, I was not sure if I would be able to observe something related to this. However, in the afternoons we have an “open lab” when students can come in to get help or to just use the computers. It is technically time that students voluntarily come in to work on their schoolwork, but some students are required by parents to attend and we also have several students from the district high school who come in during their “free period” to work on credit recovery classes. One of the credit recovery students is new, he's been with us for about two weeks and has had difficulty adjusting to the lab environment. Yesterday, he was squirming and tapping out a rhythm on his desk, generally engaging in distracting behavior. Another student who has been with us for about a year, turned around and said, “You know, that's really annoying and distracting.” The new student looked surprised and said, “Oh, sorry. It just helps me concentrate.” The veteran student suggested that he bring headphones and listen to music. As this conversation played out, I recalled that the veteran student had been referred to us the year before as a “behavior” student that they didn't want in the regular high school. They had given him the choice of attending our school or enrolling in a completely segregated environment.
My observation was from the conference I attended this week. During a session regarding RtI tier 2 and tier 3 interventions, there were many suggestions and ideas shared by the speakers. However, this was not represented as “the” way, nor was specifics "must do" guidelines laid out. One teacher was discussing ways in which they had developed their tier 2 interventions, which wasn't even close to anything being presented. For me, this appeared to be a great example of a constructivist approach.
When looking at the topic for this week and looking at some of the other posts I decided to really compare my current job situation within the past year. As an assistant coach here at UO last year I was given some leadership roles from the coach I worked with, but a lot of times I was given an outline (or a training log) to implement in the practices I ran, so although I was in charge I was going completely off of someone else’s structure. This year, however, I have been given similar leadership roles with complete freedom. I’m given a group of athletes and said you run the whole practice. For some reason it has been locked in my head that constructivists links with scaffolding and fading. That you provide a support system/structure to implement skills and get the ball rolling and then over time you start allowing for more individualized/personalized exploration.
As I thought about constructivists theory, I reflected back to my decade teaching chemistry. I had always thought that this approach was tailored for these courses as each new concept built off the last. my colleagues and I would joke that we could write a single question that could serve as a final exam, by requiring the skills gained all year.
However, one piece that I think is missing from that argument i the true connections to prior learning. If my only connections were to the material I had just taught, then the only chance at a real construct would be based on the assumption that the earlier concepts were mastered. While I don't think this was a horrible display of constructivism, I saw a different approach observing a teacher in AZ this week.
This was a co-taught language arts class consisting of a mix of gen and special ed students accessing grade level content. The class was taught by both lang arts and sped teachers simultaneously (hence co-teaching). They were using the Robert Frost Poem, The Road Not Taken to focus on symbolism. Th learning targets for the encompassed both the poem itself, as well as the concept of symbolism. As the anchor for newly constructed learning, the teachers used modern music. in fact the Green Day song, boulevard of Broken Dreams was a great parallel and mot students either already familiar with, or quickly able to see connections.
As the class transitioned back to the Frost poem, may of the students entered the discussion with Green Day, but were able to extend into the desired content.
Is there a Green Day song to go with "Mending Wall" or "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening"? I know of several songs whose rhythm work with many of Emily Dicnkinson's poems. Good strategies to deepen the learning.
As stated before, with little classroom experience I relate everything back to my current situation of coaching. This year we took a new approach to utilizing "Film" on our players. Rather than just show them a replay of everything they are doing both right (and mostly) wrong, I came up with a new system for them to focus more intently on what there doing. Our guys are huge fans of the NBA, as it is the final desitantion point for a basketball player and the mountain top of achievement (both professionally and financially). So what I did was take 3 of our better players who have professional potential and made them analyze NBA players in two parts 1) who they emulate in their position 2) who they would be competing against if they make to the league. Doing more research on constructivist learning I found the definition as " a learning process which allows a student to experience an environment first-hand, thereby, giving the student reliable, trust-worthy knowledge. The student is required to act upon the environment to both acquire and test new knowledge". I'm letting the players decide the content, they are picking who they are deciding to analyze and learn from. From there we get together and view this and see what we can learn, mostly from a hands on approach. Most of the time they players are doing most of the talking and explaining to me what they see and what they can do better from watching someone else.
In my diversity class we have many student that come from very different backgrounds of culture, learning, education, religion etc. It is interesting to see how these affect the interpretation of certain subjects. for example there is a student that is originally from Romania, his believes and thoughts around racism, ethnicity, and culture don't connect the same way many of the american born students do. When we engage in activities that involve sometimes "taboo" conversation it is a great way to provoke creative conversations about theories and learning. This allows each student to use knowledge they have in their memory bank to help construct and or adjust beliefs.
I like your example , Shawn, because I was once in the same situation as your classmates (I took the diversity class last year). I agree that each student has a different point of view or perspective when it comes to specific issues. Coming from a different culture further affects a person's whole structure of learning. To accommodate diversity , a constructivist learning approach might be more suitable. It gives students the freedom to deal with something relevant to them that also makes and is compatible with their beliefs and culture.
I observed a 5th grade math lesson that I thought was inspiring—an example of teaching at it’s best. However, before I talk about the lesson, I have to mention how the room is arranged. Student tables are arranged in three rows, with students sitting on both sides of the tables facing each other. This separates the class into 3 working groups.
At the start of the lesson, the teacher asked each group to decide what their table group needed to work on. Each of the three tables decided, as a group, what they most needed to address. The teacher noted on the board what each group was working on and then let them loose. The room was noisy and filled with laughter as they worked. I suspiciously listened closely to their conversations, expecting to find them off task. Could they truly be having such fun with math? They were!! What I saw was students actively and collaboratively engaged in their learning, problem solving, and helping each other to learn. While this was going on, the teacher was spending time with each group, giving assistance where needed. Occasionally, she would give a table group a short lesson when they were confused about a concept. The classroom dynamics were inspiring! I’ve never seen such enthusiasm for math!
A lot has been said about constructivism in mathematics. Similar to the whole language/phonics debate, the constructivist/classical math issue has driven districts to adopt curriculum that may wildly swing from one extreme to the next depending on a small group of vocal parents, teachers, or administrators.
My district, Beaverton, has seen this play out the last 8 years. When it came time to adopt a math curriculum, the district initially chose "Investigations," a strongly constructivist program. After only three years, the district abandoned Investigations in favor of "Everyday Math," a compromise between both schools of thought. The change happened because many parents and some teachers thought that Investigations was not rigorous enough and lacked adequate practice to achieve true mastery.
Usually, Everyday Math does a fairly good job blending constructivist and classical theories into each lesson. This last week, however, there was an example of a truly constructivist approach to geometry.
Students were instructed to draw several triangles, measure the angles, add them up, and report the sums to the rest of the class. Some students were wildly off, but the majority of the class found the sum of the interior angles of triangles to be remarkably similar.
The next step was to cut the angles off and arrange them on a straight line. Students had learned this week that a straight angle measures 180 degrees.
Through the two processes, a good number of students were able to deduce that the sum of angles of any triangle were all 180 degrees.
This constructivist lesson probably has more meaning and a greater chance of transfer to the students than just reading from a book about the properties of triangles.
Does this process take more time? You bet. Is it often more difficult to teach? Yes.
Alexa Pearson I think it is worth it because they will remember the concept rather than just memorizing it. I wish I had spent more time "constructing" in math!
I have been watching teachers in my building become more comfortable with constructivist math in the last month or so. It is fascinating to see how engaged the students can be with each other on their math learning. It actually creates conversations that go beyond arithmetic. What I find most encouraging about it is that students stop asking if they have the right answer! The most challenging thing about constructivism in math that I have seen so far is the depth the students can go to solve a problem. This can mean much less time practicing he concept and more time thinking about the concept. Teachers must build in a lot of think time and budget for this collaborative learning. Homework takes on a much different meaning in a math constructivist classroom too.
What a great example with math. Do you find teachers using more questions that pose analytical questions for students? Also, do teachers encourage self directed learning with the math? Perhaps it is more individual autonomy for TAG students in math?
Alexa's commentary on designing a constructivist approach to teacher PD really got me thinking about the professional development my staff design for principals and instructional coaches. The belief is that time is short so we, the designers, should get as much information out as possible, believing they will be able to make sense of it to their staff. The truth is, we need to change our approach to one similar to Alexa's. It is only through experiencing deep learning ourselves that we are able to value and design a constructivist environment in our classrooms. In my Thursday school visits, I visited a Literacy Squared third grade classroom. Lit Squared is an instructional model that builds biliteracy skills in both Spanish and English. While a significant portion of the instruction looks like a SocioCultural approach, in this particular classroom the teacher used a workshop framework to instruct math. Students were working in collaborative work groups solving a fact family problem using manipulatives. They were to summarize their learning in both languages and the summary had to be vetted by all members of the group prior to publishing their summary for the class. Next door, I observed another third grade teacher using the inquiry based framework with a science lesson where students had to determine the life cycle of a pumpkin. The teacher used realia, seeds, pumpkin vines, pumpkins whole and pumpkins with the tops removed but not cleaned. It was fascinating watching the students make guesses, discuss options and finally determine what the cycle should be. Again this was mediated through both Spanish and English.
During my observation of the constructivist theory, I found that a most effective method in teaching my daughter the Arabic language was to make her have some control over her own learning experience, not just rely on traditional methods that I was accustomed to. In the beginning, for example, I used many different (Empiricist) ways to teach her Arabic vowel marks and diacritics. My methods were not as effective as I expected them to be. Three months ago, I bought an electronic educational device designed for children in kindergarten. This toy/device came with a touch screen, a pen attached to it, and an Arabic alphabet book. I taught her how to use the device in the beginning. Now, she can navigate her way around the electronic device and even turn the accompanying book to the correct page number and use the special pen to read the letter with its diacritics. Interestingly, each time she completes a page, she comes to me to tell me about her achievement. She was teaching herself by herself. It is amazing that she can rely on herself and build her own structure of learning at this early age.
I also see a relationship between the second learning theory and one of the four stages of competence. I think my daughter's learning experience (with the interactive educational toy) puts her in the third stage of competence (conscious competence) because she is aware how to use the electronic toy and is able to use it well.
As I do not have easy access to classrooms of children, I have been watching videos by elementary school teacher Tim Bedley on Youtube. For my constructivist watch I viewed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZypqOFKWbw) a read aloud lesson from the book the Junkyard Wonders (Palacco).
Bedley used a number of constructivist approaches to learning in this lesson. Rather than simply reading the whole book to the students and then asking questions, he paused quite frequently to as the students questions and give them time to discuss the book in pairs and then share what they discussed with the group.
One very striking instance was when a child offered a though about the cover art that the other children did not agree with. At first the child deferred to the group, but Bedley encouraged the child to explain why he though the way he did and to discuss whether or not the group is always right. The child was eventually persuaded by another child's argument, however, it was a great teaching moment to encourage children to stand their ground when they have and idea that they have given though to and built evidence for, rather than simply bowing to peer pressure. Throughout the lesson, the students were introduced to new words and encourage to infer their meaning from context. They shared ideas and Bedley polled the group to get a feel for how the group aligned with particular ideas. The entire lesson was very constructivist in its approach.
I watched a 5th grade classroom for the constructivist approach. The teacher had the kids use computers and cooperative learning with math a lesson. The lesson was based on having the students create algorithms and word problems for their partner. The teacher guided and coached the kids as they engaged in the task of finding and creating math problems. Some kids used their oral skills to ask and share their problems. I found this very interesting because they were not told that they could not do so. The strategy used by the students reinforced the problem solving skills the teacher was introducing. The critical thinking skills the kids were using were not implicitly taught. I think this is a critical piece of constructivist learned behaviors.
Last week I participated in a diversity workshop. We participants were guided toward a general goal of becoming more aware of racial issues and challenges that some members had not confronted or were not aware because of their white privilege. Over the course of four days, as we learned a mass of historical evidence of racial injustices in the Americas, we had to construct new ways of regarding ourselves, our society, and our responsibility for our actions and inactions in regard to race and culture. Powerful stuff. Facilitators did not ever tell us what to think, but laid careful group activities atop intentional delivery of historical, political, and psychological information in a way that allowed us to draw our our conclusions. Needless to say, we came away with new perspectives that challenged and redefined our images of ourselves and our culture.
On Thursday I got to observe a great cognitive lesson. I observed a language arts teacher. She had students read a passage in a book. Prior to her having the students read she broke them up into five groups. Each student in the group got a task that had something they should be looking for while reading the passage. One student in each group had the task of summarizing what the passage said and meant. The teacher also gave the students sticky notes so that while they were reading they could identify areas in the book that went with what their particular task was. In groups students took the information and when they were done they collaborated. They asked clarifying questions and together they helped the student who was in charge of summarizing come up with the summary. I felt this was a great way for students to work together, learn from each other, ask clarifying questions and give different opinions. It was a great lesson.
Representatives from a local association in Southern Oregon came to talk to me today about a new reading program. The program they are promoting relies heavily on student interest to drive instruction. The key component of their program was to find out what interests students have and build the reading instruction around interest. The association contends that students will learn to read when they are able to make meaning out of what motivates them. The program uses context clues like pictures to help students guess at words and predict what characters might be saying. The association used a lot of “feeling words” and talked about the love of reading. Building on student’s interest and internal meaning making desire… this program is purported to teach reading.
ReplyDeleteI think they might be hitting on some Cognitivist/Constructivist theory to teaching reading?
At the high school age, connecting it to an interest or experience helps high school student feel it is relevant to them. The writing reflection paper that we do in band really helps students write about something they are passioniate about and knowledgable about and they actually really enjoy the assignment.
DeleteTracy,
DeleteConnecting reading to high school student’s interest or experience is great and writing about what you are passionate about helps in so many ways.
I think Daniel also hit on the point in his work at BRT of extending the learning (generalizing) and being provided the freedom to explore and make meaning beyond the routine.
Sometimes, I get stuck in one particular approach (behaviorist) because I mostly deal with acquisition of new skills. Too much of one approach, while not giving credence to other philosophies, limits my understanding and narrows my options.
I like what Dan said, “We run the risk of developing rote learners who do not know when to apply an existing schema to solve a problem; they just keep applying the schema that they know, unaware or inattentive to the nuances that make the challenge different.”
I also see many new learners who don’t have the proper tool kit to solve the problem they are faced with. Often the time crunch to "give them" the tools outweighs the "discovery" option. The montra seems to be... once students learn the skills, then they can discover interest in applying the skill? But, the two don't have to be mutually exclusive.
Don Hood.
DeleteOK, I'll bite. Well I agree that this appears to approach constructivist philosophy. Kudos to them for using student prior knowledge and interest to motivate them. But I want to scream when I hear people tout guessing words based on contextual clues. Although that may be a helpful supplementary skill, PLEASE let the children learn accurate decoding. Life will be so much easier for them in the long run. Further, constructivism generally is better for higher order thinking skills and constructivists will provide a much more complete package, including modeling, sequencing, scaffolding, and fading, etc.
This reminds me of the work of Dr. Richard Allington from the University of Tennessee.
DeleteEssentially, high interest in books lead to higher performance in reading.
Here is an article describing what Allington sees as the keys to developing successful readers. It's a good read.
http://www.readingrockets.org/article/96/
Today I actually had my annual evaluation at work. Towards the end of the evaluation I started talking with my boss about where I was in my work and what he could do to help support me. It's interesting because, as I mentioned in the previous post, we work primarily from an empiricist framework; yet, his mentorship of me has really fit within the constructivist realm. That is, he allows me considerable freedom to explore the topics I choose, and to stumble on my face at times. Of course, there are times when he assigns me a project and wants it done a certain way, but there is always still some leeway that allows me to attack the project in whatever way I feel is best. We then, of course, have check-ins so I don't go completely off the rails, but overall he provides me with an opportunity to explore topics in my own way, while working with me more as a colleague than a strict, top-down "boss". I feel I've grown an incredible amount professionally while under his watch. So, I suppose I have less of a specific example of constructivism in action than I do an overall experience in a professional setting.
ReplyDeleteHi Daniel,
DeleteThis is a great example. I am curious how you felt about that form of guidance in the beginning. I am usually very apprehensive about being under the guidance of someone who provides me with so much "freedom" to explore - but I've found that it is under that guidance where I've grown the most.
Daniel, great example - as I work as your colleague at the same shop!!
DeleteFor me Meg, though I've had lots of freedom, it was very much a process of scaffolding and fading. Meaning, that around here, as a new person, though there are definitely high expectations around becoming a self-efficacious researcher, there is lots of support initially. Leaders and those with expertise in the shop model and coach around designing and implementing strong research. I should add that these leaders, are not necessarily "directors and associates" all of the time. For instance, in some respects I am becoming the "alignment guy", the person who understands the study design aspects and in-house technologies we use to conduct such studies. Though, I am a research assistant doctoral student and others have far more experience in some areas than I do, I have been asked to both lead alignment studies, but also help others and assist on projects in these areas as well. It was this type of "guided freedom" that has allowed me to meaningfully develop my learning around becoming an educational researcher at BRT.
Hey Meg,
DeleteFor me the freedom has been amazing. There were definitely some times of apprehension, like you're talking about, but for the most part it's been really, really good. It was kind of a "sink or swim" approach, but if you sank, you always knew there was a life preserver waiting for you (i.e., one of the directors of the shop would step in to provide the support needed to get you through).
I love Meg's comment because I think it really pushes the idea of Constructivists as an initial means of teaching. I think that many critics of this learning theory would say that initially there is way too much freedom (lack of structure) which too some extent I would agree. I think the critical piece which Shawn touches on is that you are not allowing for free reign off the bat, but there is modeling/coaching/scaffolding and that over time you allow for more independent/personal exploration. I think that people who are not constructivists generally believe it is just a "free-for-all" at the beginning, which it is not, but that you grow towards a more individualized/personalized method.
DeleteDaniel. I think this is a great way to learn. I wish that some of my staff could see the benefits in this type of growth. Sometimes I think people are just afraid to let kids go becuase they are worried that they wont figure it out. I think allowing students to make mistakes and figure out how to go about fixing them is powerful. It sounds like you have a good boss.
DeleteMy example of a cognitivist lens was about my section leaders in my program. As they were warming up their sections today I thought about all the skills/knowledge they use to teach/coach other students. These students apply and then most of them attend a camp during a summer and we do a section leader workshop in August. I and my marching staff coach these students in how to run sectionals with music and model playing in the marching band. We also give them freedom in how they work with their section and plan how they are going to run their sectionals. They learn how to work with students and help all students be successful in playing their part. During band camp and at the end of marching band season everyone in the band writes a reflection around the marching season and if we accomplished our goals set in August and how they felt about the experience. It’s a wonderful way to see problem solving within the sections and lots of cooperative learning going on daily.
ReplyDeleteDuring today's math lesson in my fourth grade classroom, students paired up and created a "multiples ladder" using a 5 ft. section of adding machine tape, a ruler, and a pencil. The assignment consisted of partners selecting a factor from the provided list (from simple to more challenging numbers)to begin with and then building up the ladder by finding the consecutive multiples (no calculators allowed at this stage!). I gave minimal directions and only listed a couple of questions on the white board for the students to reference as they worked. As they began, I asked them to make a prediction as to what number they would reach at the top of their ladder. After all students were set up and working, I moved about the room, pausing at each pair to listen in on their thinking, challenges, a-has, and problem solving strategies. As the students created their ladders, I heard comments expressing discoveries of short-cuts, patterns, and questions about the reliability of their numbers. Their sense of discovery and apparent learning gave me a degree of satisfaction with the usefulness of this type of investigation when practicing multiplication and number sense.
ReplyDeleteCatherine,
DeleteThis seems like a really good example of exploration. I like how you trusted them to use their own skills and knowledge to figure out how to tackle the problem. That is in my mind one of the best things about the constructivist approach, it does not spoon feed and it honors the learner as the owner of his/her learning. The students earn it, which makes the learning their own. This is HUGE.
In terms of contrast, think about their level of engagement if they sat in their desks by themselves and listened to you explain multiples and then performed a worksheet with calculators like automatons!
Catherine,
DeleteYou mentioned that you gave the students only a few prompts in this exercise. I am curious, do you have any students that have trouble functioning with few parameters? How do you handle requests for clarification or conflicts when group members have different ideas about they "should" go about the task?
We encourage a lot of exploration in the science workshops I run. Some students seem to do very well with this, but others struggle. Anecdotally, it seems to me that children these days are better equipped to handle constructivist learning than children were when I was a child and even more so than when my parents were children. I know personally, when I was younger that if I was given a task that I was unfamiliar with and set loose with out a lot of guidance I would get frustrated very quickly. Luckily for me, I had teachers who were comfortable letting me struggle a bit and new how to help without giving me the more rigid structure I was looking for.
Over my time at Behavioral Research and Teaching, I have experienced the cognitivist/constructivist way of teaching and learning routinely. For instance, I am in the final stages of conducting a math measures alignment study, the results of which are, in part, the grounding framework for a new study that I am in the initial stages of designing and implementing. One of our shop’s directors, Julie Alonzo, gave me far more hands-on guidance in the first study that I ran, explaining desired outcomes, how the study should be designed and implemented, etc. After the initial guidance, she purposefully allowed me to conduct the study, identify and work through the problems that were abound to occur (and that did) – though she was also present as a guide, modeling what strong educational research looked like from start to finish. During the initial stages of this second study, on which the first is largely based, I am receiving more hands-off assistance from my colleague Daniel and again Julie in the form of previous files used in similarly designed studies. In my mind, this process is a very deliberate example of scaffolding and fading, whereby I had more direct support and guidance up front and less as appropriate more recently. In meeting with Daniel yesterday and Julie today, though I have previous work to guide my planning and decision-making, I have the autonomy to design and implement the study, knowing that these individuals are there for support as needed.
ReplyDeleteHi Shawn,
DeleteGreat example. I think one of the key things you mentioned is that she provided "modeling" to demonstrate the strong educational research process -- but then allows you to create and make meaning independently. It's also great to know they are their as support. I often think about teachers who I think had to goal to provide the scaffolding and constructivist approach, but forgot the modeling and support components that need to be in place as students begin to create meaning (as you mentioned above)
Hi Meg..thanks for replying! Yep, I'm in a pretty great spot because of their style of leadership and support - especially great as I am in so early in my career in education research. Whether I am able to stay at this shop, or move on to another place after my degree, I stay or leave with the tools I'll need to become better as a researcher. You hit it exactly I think, scaffolding, fading, modeling and support are great techniques to bring about meaningful personal/professional growth; they work effectively together, at all levels of teaching and learning.
DeleteI was watching my young son Sammy work with my wife carving out pumpkins yesterday evening and noted several cognitive/constructivist strategies at play.
ReplyDeleteFirst, she modeled how to cut open a pumpkin and look inside to see all of the seeds. Then, she showed him how to use the special pumpkin seed scooper tool. He said, "That's just like a big spoon!" He was connecting his experience of scooping tools with prior knowledge independently. Throughout the demonstration, she was describing what she was doing and why, such as explaining that you always cut out the lid at an angle so the top does not fall into the pumpkin, etc. This dialogue supported his understanding of what he was observing.
Sammy then got a chance to work on his own jack-o-lantern. He chose a smaller pumpkin because he thought it would be easier. My wife helped him with the cutting activity, as he is only 3 1/2. This is a scaffolding approach. There were not many opportunities to fade this support, but she did let him cut the last little piece out of the mouth without guiding him in a hand-over-hand manner. Sammy noted how they had cut the lid at an angle and used the scooper, "just like mom did". He was reflecting on his knowledge as he worked through the experience. He also had a blast exploring the gooey pumpkin seeds - always a thrill until your dad tells you to watch out for the flesh-eating worms in there! Hah.
Great example Dan! I was actually considering writing about a pumpkin carving experience I had with a group of visiting Chinese professors:) Is your wife a teacher? You should post a picture of the carved pumpkin. It is such a natural approach for parents to take-- how boring it would be for a kid if we took a behaviorist approach to getting ready for Halloween.
DeleteBrian,
DeleteThis example is great I am amazed at how intuitive kids can be and how they get enjoy learning when it is fun! It is special when kids can take what they have learned from a parent and put their little twist on it.
Don Hood
ReplyDeleteThe most interesting example of constructivist learning I have seen occurred in a class I am taking: Creativity and Conformity in the Classroom. I’m not a big fan of the constructivist approaches in general, but mostly because of the inefficiency I experience. However, used well, I see great educational value. What I observed was my creativity class learning about creativity in the classroom by analyzing and coding examples from Youtube, Google Images, and Blogs: examples that a teacher might find when searching for “creativity and teaching”. We will be writing a paper for publication based on our findings. The reading materials for the class have direct relevance to our viewing and coding work necessary for the writing to come.
Jackie Brody
DeleteDon, I tend to agree with you and be hesitant about using a constructivist approach to helping students learn. I am a special education teacher and find that most students with special needs require very explicit and direct instruction. I love the idea behind a constructivist approach but think it needs to be done very specifically in grade schools. For example, I think students need to be working in heterogeneous groups on tasks using a constructivist approach. Many students need to hear how others are working on the task (modeling) before beginning to construct their own interpretation. However, I wonder if this goes against a constructivist approach. Do you have to be in charge of constructing your own knowledge independently or can you be constructing your knowledge while also having input from others?
Thanks Jackie. If you don't mind bumping over to :social constructivism" then you are spot on. It is only a small stretch between individual and social c.
DeleteDon
Jackie,
DeleteI completely agree with you! I think it's a great approach in moderation. It's so fascinating for me because I came from a very rigid anti-constructivisit district (Philadelphia) to an independent school in Portland that uses the IB curriculum which is completely constructivist and inquiry based. It's been a hard balance for me making the transition to working with the teachers and students. I personally think a balance is nice...
I observed a group of Chinese students, college instructors, who were learning about instructional alignment. The instructor gave a writing prompt at the beginning of the class asking the students to create a personal definition of the term “curriculum.” The students then paired up to share their definitions, and to co-author a new definition through a negotiation process. They shared out what they created. I would describe the learning style employed during this activity as constructionist. The students each drew on their own experiences to craft a definition, and they entered into small group discussions to share their ideas. They also engaged in teaching each other. Finally they created a product together (the new definition) that they shared out with the class, and reflected on the ease or difficulty of this process.
ReplyDeleteJackie Brody
ReplyDeleteI observed a constructivist activity during a 4th grade math class. The students were starting a unit on perimeter and area. The previous unit had been on measurement. The teacher wrote a list of 5 rectangular objects that were across school grounds. The students were split into groups and asked to measure the distances around the outside edges of the shapes. When the students were brought back together in the classroom, they were asked to figure out how much ribbon or string it would take to outline the edges of the objects. Most of the students were able to discover that they needed to add the measurements of each side together to find the answer. Therefore, they were constructing their own knowledge about the meaning of perimeter.
Hi Jackie,
DeleteI love this example! I always find it fascinating how teachers can take a rote curriculum and turn it into endless possibilities by including hands on activities to reinforce learning.
The great thing about their experience with how to figure out perimeter is that they have the practical experience that makes it easier to remember "how" to get the perimeter of objects. This would seem to make it easier to transfer over to other shapes of objects when asking, "now, how would you figure out the perimeter of a hexagon, an octagon, etc. The transfer of knowledge is much more meaningful than simply sitting at a desk and being given a formula that maybe really doesn't make sense.
DeleteI work in a school that implements the international baccalaureate curriculum which strictly based on units of inquiry. As I mentioned earlier in response to Jackie, it's fascinating for me to be a part of a school that uses only this method of learning and does not rely on the scripted standards based curriculum I have used in the past.
ReplyDeleteThe example I am going to give is based on my interactions with the teachers. The school is an IB school that is a full immersion school; teachers are not native English speakers and spend most of their day speaking in their native language with their students. This has been a hurdle for me since I began working at the school (language and cultural barrier x 4 different languages). This is especially noticeable when leading staff professional developments focusing on technology. I have found that the best way to introduce a concept with the teachers is to use scaffolding and a constructivist approach. This helps provide them modeling and guidance while also allowing them to construct meaning for themselves to make sense of the new technology or program. I do this by first modeling the concept, then guiding the teachers through practice, and then allowing for individual exploration. I have found that this helps to overcome the language barriers while also reinforcing the technology skills and individual practice to gain those skills.
We have a wonderful program called AMP at Springfield High School. AMP stands for the "Afterschool Miller Program" and is about exploring learning through music technology. This program promotes a stronger connection to school through having a more creative outlet with which students can express themselves. Students can come in with little knowledge and just an idea ( some come with more), and take their idea from start to finish. Students work together in groups, as well as independently and are responsible for the direction their learning takes them. It is through ongoing conversation and guidance with the instructor as well as other students in the program that learning takes place. The students were all actively engaged and working on their own projects, while at times having conversations with others to reflect on their experiences and to get feedback and ideas as they continue to move forward. This is an amazing process that involves meaningful learning through student collaboration, formulation of questions, problem-solving, self-reflection, assessment and learning, teacher and student coaching and regularly pushes students to extend their learning and knowledge base.
ReplyDeleteHi Dawn, This sounds like an interesting program. I have a question...Do the students need to have any prior music knowledge or skills coming in? Or are the constructs through school and music all gained during the program?
DeleteBrian Sica
This sounds like a great program. I too feel that this is a cognitive program and I get to witness it every day. To watch kisd go from being shy and introverted to gaining self confidence and being willing to take risks has been incredible. I have witnessed this program change kids lives. Kids don't have to have any knowledge to go into the studio but they gain a lot while in there. Not only do they have adult mentors but they have students who are willing to help guide them through the process.
DeleteAlexa Pearson
ReplyDeleteThis week I have been leading some Common Core trainings for COSA and I thought about the constructivist learning theory today with the adult learners in my session. Part of the training focuses on how to help students read difficult text. Instead of giving the teachers a list of reading strategies, I gave them a difficult piece of reading. I didn't provide any context for the reading, I just said that I was going to give 10 minutes for the teachers to read the piece and then they were to write a summary and determine the author's main message. It was fascinating to watch all the different approaches the teachers took to read this difficult text. Some people wrote notes on the text, others were circling and marking up the text, some gave up, others whispered to their neighbors. When the time was up, I asked them to talk to a partner about what strategies they used to understand the text. As a group we discussed the different strategies we employed to make sense of the text. Then, I modeled a think a loud of the text and an annotation of the text. We also built some background before the teachers read the text a second time. Then they reflected on their experience of reading it the first time vs. after we had done the modeling and building background.
In order for teachers to understand how to help their students, I needed them to struggle with a piece of reading so that they could construct their own knowledge of the strategies they use all the time without even noticing it.
Alexa, I liked how you started your lesson for the teachers. It gave teachers an insight into their students' needs and created buy-in for the rest of your lesson. It also gave the teachers a chance to utilize strategies they can share with their students as they worked on your assigment and then share those with each other. I really related to this, because as a school counselor, I take a very solution focused approach in my work. Part of that requires clarification of the student's goal or desired outcome (which one might rephase as buy-in). Then we discuss what the student has already tried, what worked and what didn't, before moving on to new solutions. I hadn't thought about my counseling as being part of a constructivist model, but I think it fits: the student is in control of their learning (social/emotional growth); we are building understanding from prior knowledge; the student and I are identifying problems and then problem solving; I often coach and model how to deliver their message and then the student practices it; and then the student actually goes out and implements the ideas/strategies and refines skills with practice in real life.
DeleteToday I was working with a student on math when our auto shop instructor came in and asked me if I wanted to collaborate on the Imagine Tomorrow Challenge sponsored by Washington State University. The challenge involves developing projects around alternative energy. My student took an immediate interest, perked up and said, “Oh, like wind?” And Bill, the shop teacher, said, “Wind is an example, but I was thinking about a transportation project.” Bill and I talked for a few more minutes and when he left, my student, who had his computer open said, “Did you know that grass makes better biofuel than corn?” and “What's a megajoule?” Now this student is all fired up about this topic, wants to do a project for the Challenge and knew more about biofuel than I do in about 20 minutes of inspired research. That's just from overhearing a conversation.
ReplyDeleteExcellent! I find it interesting that learning from a cognitive approach often happens in this manner, which is why it is good practice to expose our students to as many opportunities as possible. We can never tell what will ignite the desire for learning!
DeleteHi Geoff,
DeleteI love your example because it shows how much a student's prior knowledge, experiences, and interests can really help develop a love for learning. I hope the other students around that student picked up on that and perhaps became interested because of that one students' response. One of my favorite things to do as a teacher was to convey my passion for learning to my students and developing their love for branches of science and history that I loved.
Sometimes it's not the intended consequences of a lesson that have the most impact on students.
DeleteYou just never know when and how a student might get inspired.
I was sort of at a loss on this one at first. Most of our students work on their core curriculum asynchronously and though we do have interaction online through forums and chat channels, I was not sure if I would be able to observe something related to this. However, in the afternoons we have an “open lab” when students can come in to get help or to just use the computers. It is technically time that students voluntarily come in to work on their schoolwork, but some students are required by parents to attend and we also have several students from the district high school who come in during their “free period” to work on credit recovery classes. One of the credit recovery students is new, he's been with us for about two weeks and has had difficulty adjusting to the lab environment. Yesterday, he was squirming and tapping out a rhythm on his desk, generally engaging in distracting behavior. Another student who has been with us for about a year, turned around and said, “You know, that's really annoying and distracting.” The new student looked surprised and said, “Oh, sorry. It just helps me concentrate.” The veteran student suggested that he bring headphones and listen to music. As this conversation played out, I recalled that the veteran student had been referred to us the year before as a “behavior” student that they didn't want in the regular high school. They had given him the choice of attending our school or enrolling in a completely segregated environment.
ReplyDeleteMy observation was from the conference I attended this week. During a session regarding RtI tier 2 and tier 3 interventions, there were many suggestions and ideas shared by the speakers. However, this was not represented as “the” way, nor was specifics "must do" guidelines laid out. One teacher was discussing ways in which they had developed their tier 2 interventions, which wasn't even close to anything being presented. For me, this appeared to be a great example of a constructivist approach.
ReplyDeleteDavid Klech
ReplyDeleteWhen looking at the topic for this week and looking at some of the other posts I decided to really compare my current job situation within the past year. As an assistant coach here at UO last year I was given some leadership roles from the coach I worked with, but a lot of times I was given an outline (or a training log) to implement in the practices I ran, so although I was in charge I was going completely off of someone else’s structure. This year, however, I have been given similar leadership roles with complete freedom. I’m given a group of athletes and said you run the whole practice. For some reason it has been locked in my head that constructivists links with scaffolding and fading. That you provide a support system/structure to implement skills and get the ball rolling and then over time you start allowing for more individualized/personalized exploration.
Brian Sica
ReplyDeleteAs I thought about constructivists theory, I reflected back to my decade teaching chemistry. I had always thought that this approach was tailored for these courses as each new concept built off the last. my colleagues and I would joke that we could write a single question that could serve as a final exam, by requiring the skills gained all year.
However, one piece that I think is missing from that argument i the true connections to prior learning. If my only connections were to the material I had just taught, then the only chance at a real construct would be based on the assumption that the earlier concepts were mastered. While I don't think this was a horrible display of constructivism, I saw a different approach observing a teacher in AZ this week.
This was a co-taught language arts class consisting of a mix of gen and special ed students accessing grade level content. The class was taught by both lang arts and sped teachers simultaneously (hence co-teaching). They were using the Robert Frost Poem, The Road Not Taken to focus on symbolism. Th learning targets for the encompassed both the poem itself, as well as the concept of symbolism. As the anchor for newly constructed learning, the teachers used modern music. in fact the Green Day song, boulevard of Broken Dreams was a great parallel and mot students either already familiar with, or quickly able to see connections.
As the class transitioned back to the Frost poem, may of the students entered the discussion with Green Day, but were able to extend into the desired content.
Brian Sica
Many of those students will forever think of the Frost poem every time they hear that Green Day song.
DeleteIs there a Green Day song to go with "Mending Wall" or "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening"? I know of several songs whose rhythm work with many of Emily Dicnkinson's poems. Good strategies to deepen the learning.
DeleteAs stated before, with little classroom experience I relate everything back to my current situation of coaching. This year we took a new approach to utilizing "Film" on our players. Rather than just show them a replay of everything they are doing both right (and mostly) wrong, I came up with a new system for them to focus more intently on what there doing.
ReplyDeleteOur guys are huge fans of the NBA, as it is the final desitantion point for a basketball player and the mountain top of achievement (both professionally and financially). So what I did was take 3 of our better players who have professional potential and made them analyze NBA players in two parts 1) who they emulate in their position 2) who they would be competing against if they make to the league.
Doing more research on constructivist learning I found the definition as " a learning process which allows a student to experience an environment first-hand, thereby, giving the student reliable, trust-worthy knowledge. The student is required to act upon the environment to both acquire and test new knowledge". I'm letting the players decide the content, they are picking who they are deciding to analyze and learn from. From there we get together and view this and see what we can learn, mostly from a hands on approach. Most of the time they players are doing most of the talking and explaining to me what they see and what they can do better from watching someone else.
Sounds like that might work for the coaches as well.
DeleteIn my diversity class we have many student that come from very different backgrounds of culture, learning, education, religion etc. It is interesting to see how these affect the interpretation of certain subjects. for example there is a student that is originally from Romania, his believes and thoughts around racism, ethnicity, and culture don't connect the same way many of the american born students do. When we engage in activities that involve sometimes "taboo" conversation it is a great way to provoke creative conversations about theories and learning. This allows each student to use knowledge they have in their memory bank to help construct and or adjust beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI like your example , Shawn, because I was once in the same situation as your classmates (I took the diversity class last year). I agree that each student has a different point of view or perspective when it comes to specific issues. Coming from a different culture further affects a person's whole structure of learning. To accommodate diversity , a constructivist learning approach might be more suitable. It gives students the freedom to deal with something relevant to them that also makes and is compatible with their beliefs and culture.
DeleteI observed a 5th grade math lesson that I thought was inspiring—an example of teaching at it’s best. However, before I talk about the lesson, I have to mention how the room is arranged. Student tables are arranged in three rows, with students sitting on both sides of the tables facing each other. This separates the class into 3 working groups.
ReplyDeleteAt the start of the lesson, the teacher asked each group to decide what their table group needed to work on. Each of the three tables decided, as a group, what they most needed to address. The teacher noted on the board what each group was working on and then let them loose. The room was noisy and filled with laughter as they worked. I suspiciously listened closely to their conversations, expecting to find them off task. Could they truly be having such fun with math? They were!! What I saw was students actively and collaboratively engaged in their learning, problem solving, and helping each other to learn. While this was going on, the teacher was spending time with each group, giving assistance where needed. Occasionally, she would give a table group a short lesson when they were confused about a concept. The classroom dynamics were inspiring! I’ve never seen such enthusiasm for math!
It's interesting that you mentioned "teaching at it's best" when the teacher wasn't even in front of the class.
DeleteA lot has been said about constructivism in mathematics. Similar to the whole language/phonics debate, the constructivist/classical math issue has driven districts to adopt curriculum that may wildly swing from one extreme to the next depending on a small group of vocal parents, teachers, or administrators.
ReplyDeleteMy district, Beaverton, has seen this play out the last 8 years. When it came time to adopt a math curriculum, the district initially chose "Investigations," a strongly constructivist program. After only three years, the district abandoned Investigations in favor of "Everyday Math," a compromise between both schools of thought. The change happened because many parents and some teachers thought that Investigations was not rigorous enough and lacked adequate practice to achieve true mastery.
Usually, Everyday Math does a fairly good job blending constructivist and classical theories into each lesson. This last week, however, there was an example of a truly constructivist approach to geometry.
Students were instructed to draw several triangles, measure the angles, add them up, and report the sums to the rest of the class. Some students were wildly off, but the majority of the class found the sum of the interior angles of triangles to be remarkably similar.
The next step was to cut the angles off and arrange them on a straight line. Students had learned this week that a straight angle measures 180 degrees.
Through the two processes, a good number of students were able to deduce that the sum of angles of any triangle were all 180 degrees.
This constructivist lesson probably has more meaning and a greater chance of transfer to the students than just reading from a book about the properties of triangles.
Does this process take more time? You bet. Is it often more difficult to teach? Yes.
Is it worth it?
Alexa Pearson
DeleteI think it is worth it because they will remember the concept rather than just memorizing it. I wish I had spent more time "constructing" in math!
I have been watching teachers in my building become more comfortable with constructivist math in the last month or so. It is fascinating to see how engaged the students can be with each other on their math learning. It actually creates conversations that go beyond arithmetic. What I find most encouraging about it is that students stop asking if they have the right answer! The most challenging thing about constructivism in math that I have seen so far is the depth the students can go to solve a problem. This can mean much less time practicing he concept and more time thinking about the concept. Teachers must build in a lot of think time and budget for this collaborative learning. Homework takes on a much different meaning in a math constructivist classroom too.
DeleteJoel,
DeleteWhat a great example with math. Do you find teachers using more questions that pose analytical questions for students? Also, do teachers encourage self directed learning with the math? Perhaps it is more individual autonomy for TAG students in math?
Alexa's commentary on designing a constructivist approach to teacher PD really got me thinking about the professional development my staff design for principals and instructional coaches. The belief is that time is short so we, the designers, should get as much information out as possible, believing they will be able to make sense of it to their staff. The truth is, we need to change our approach to one similar to Alexa's. It is only through experiencing deep learning ourselves that we are able to value and design a constructivist environment in our classrooms.
ReplyDeleteIn my Thursday school visits, I visited a Literacy Squared third grade classroom. Lit Squared is an instructional model that builds biliteracy skills in both Spanish and English. While a significant portion of the instruction looks like a SocioCultural approach, in this particular classroom the teacher used a workshop framework to instruct math. Students were working in collaborative work groups solving a fact family problem using manipulatives. They were to summarize their learning in both languages and the summary had to be vetted by all members of the group prior to publishing their summary for the class.
Next door, I observed another third grade teacher using the inquiry based framework with a science lesson where students had to determine the life cycle of a pumpkin. The teacher used realia, seeds, pumpkin vines, pumpkins whole and pumpkins with the tops removed but not cleaned. It was fascinating watching the students make guesses, discuss options and finally determine what the cycle should be. Again this was mediated through both Spanish and English.
During my observation of the constructivist theory, I found that a most effective method in teaching my daughter the Arabic language was to make her have some control over her own learning experience, not just rely on traditional methods that I was accustomed to. In the beginning, for example, I used many different (Empiricist) ways to teach her Arabic vowel marks and diacritics. My methods were not as effective as I expected them to be. Three months ago, I bought an electronic educational device designed for children in kindergarten. This toy/device came with a touch screen, a pen attached to it, and an Arabic alphabet book. I taught her how to use the device in the beginning. Now, she can navigate her way around the electronic device and even turn the accompanying book to the correct page number and use the special pen to read the letter with its diacritics. Interestingly, each time she completes a page, she comes to me to tell me about her achievement. She was teaching herself by herself. It is amazing that she can rely on herself and build her own structure of learning at this early age.
ReplyDeleteI also see a relationship between the second learning theory and one of the four stages of competence. I think my daughter's learning experience (with the interactive educational toy) puts her in the third stage of competence (conscious competence) because she is aware how to use the electronic toy and is able to use it well.
As I do not have easy access to classrooms of children, I have been watching videos by elementary school teacher Tim Bedley on Youtube. For my constructivist watch I viewed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZypqOFKWbw) a read aloud lesson from the book the Junkyard Wonders (Palacco).
ReplyDeleteBedley used a number of constructivist approaches to learning in this lesson. Rather than simply reading the whole book to the students and then asking questions, he paused quite frequently to as the students questions and give them time to discuss the book in pairs and then share what they discussed with the group.
One very striking instance was when a child offered a though about the cover art that the other children did not agree with. At first the child deferred to the group, but Bedley encouraged the child to explain why he though the way he did and to discuss whether or not the group is always right. The child was eventually persuaded by another child's argument, however, it was a great teaching moment to encourage children to stand their ground when they have and idea that they have given though to and built evidence for, rather than simply bowing to peer pressure.
Throughout the lesson, the students were introduced to new words and encourage to infer their meaning from context. They shared ideas and Bedley polled the group to get a feel for how the group aligned with particular ideas. The entire lesson was very constructivist in its approach.
I watched a 5th grade classroom for the constructivist approach. The teacher had the kids use computers and cooperative learning with math a lesson. The lesson was based on having the students create algorithms and word problems for their partner. The teacher guided and coached the kids as they engaged in the task of finding and creating math problems. Some kids used their oral skills to ask and share their problems. I found this very interesting because they were not told that they could not do so. The strategy used by the students reinforced the problem solving skills the teacher was introducing. The critical thinking skills the kids were using were not implicitly taught. I think this is a critical piece of constructivist learned behaviors.
ReplyDeleteLast week I participated in a diversity workshop. We participants were guided toward a general goal of becoming more aware of racial issues and challenges that some members had not confronted or were not aware because of their white privilege. Over the course of four days, as we learned a mass of historical evidence of racial injustices in the Americas, we had to construct new ways of regarding ourselves, our society, and our responsibility for our actions and inactions in regard to race and culture. Powerful stuff. Facilitators did not ever tell us what to think, but laid careful group activities atop intentional delivery of historical, political, and psychological information in a way that allowed us to draw our our conclusions. Needless to say, we came away with new perspectives that challenged and redefined our images of ourselves and our culture.
ReplyDeleteOn Thursday I got to observe a great cognitive lesson. I observed a language arts teacher. She had students read a passage in a book. Prior to her having the students read she broke them up into five groups. Each student in the group got a task that had something they should be looking for while reading the passage. One student in each group had the task of summarizing what the passage said and meant. The teacher also gave the students sticky notes so that while they were reading they could identify areas in the book that went with what their particular task was. In groups students took the information and when they were done they collaborated. They asked clarifying questions and together they helped the student who was in charge of summarizing come up with the summary. I felt this was a great way for students to work together, learn from each other, ask clarifying questions and give different opinions. It was a great lesson.
ReplyDelete