Review of Constructivism and Social Constructivism: Related Papers
Review of Constructivism and Social Constructivism: Related Papers
Review of Constructivism and Social Constructivism: Related Papers
An Exposit ion of Const ruct ivism Account t o Const ruct Knowledge and t o Creat e Meaningful Learning …
Fadzilah Abd Rahman
Journal of Social Sciences, Literature and Languages
Available online at jssll.blue-ap.org
©2015 JSSLL Journal. Vol. 1(1), pp. 9-16, 30 April, 2015
ABSTRACT
Although constructivism is a concept that has been embraced recently, a great number of sociologists, psychologists, applied linguists, and teachers
have provided varied definitions of this concept. Also many philosophers and educationalists such as Piaget, Vygotsky, and Perkins suggest that
constructivism and social constructivism try to solve the problems of traditional teaching and learning. This research review represents the meaning and
the origin of constructivism, and then discusses the role of leaning, teaching, learner, and teacher in the first part from constructivist perspective. In the
second part, the paper discusses the same issues, as presented in the first part, from social constructivist perspective. The purpose of this research review
is to make EFL teachers and EFL students more familiar with the importance and guidance of both constructivism and social constructivism perspectives.
Keywords: Constructivism, Social, Constructivism.
©2015 JSSLL Journal All rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION
Kanselaar (2002) stated that there are two major strands of constructivist perspective, (a) constructivist perspective and (b)
social-cultural perspective (Socio-constructivist perspective).
a.Cognitive constructivism, an individualistic perspective is based on the work of Swiss developmental psychologist Jean
Piaget. Piaget's theory includes two major parts, a"ages and stages" component that predicts what children can and cannot
understand at different ages, and a” theory of development” that describes how children develop cognitive abilities. Piaget (1977)
asserts that learning does not occur passively; rather it occurs by active construction of meaning. He explains that when we, as
learners, encounter an experience or a situation that challenges the way we think, a state of disequilibrium or imbalance is created.
We must then alter our thinking to restore equilibrium or balance. For this purpose, we make sense of the new information by
associating it with what we already know, that is, by attempting to assimilate it into our existing knowledge. When we are unable
to do this, we use accommodation by restructuring our present knowledge to a higher level of thinking. b.social-cultural
constructivism (Socio-constructivist perspective)
Lev Vygotsky’s (1986-1934) main relevance to constructivism comes from his theories about language, thought, and their
mediation by society. Vygotsky holds an anti-realist position and states that the process of knowing is affected by other people
and is mediated by community and culture.
An important part of Vygotsky’s work (1986) is critical upon Piaget’s contribution to constructivism. While Piaget believes
that development precedes learning, Vygotsky believes the opposite. On the topic of the development of speech, Piaget said that
the children’s egocentric speech goes away with maturity and is the transformed in to social speech. On the contrary, Vygotsky
stated that the child’s mind is inherently social in nature and so speech moves from communicative social to inner egocentric.
Therefore, since the development of thought follows the development of speech, Vygotsky claims that thought develops from
society to the individual and not the other way.
10 | P a g e
J Soci Sci, Lit & Lang., 1 (1): 9-16, 2015
their current understanding, their current knowledge can change in order to accommodate new experience. Thus learners cannot
be passive and they remain active throughout this process.
Cook (1992) also advocates the use of negotiation in the curriculum .When learners negotiate, ask questions, and try hard
to find the answers themselves, what they learn will be more meaningful to them (Cook,1992).It this curriculum, a sense of
ownership in learners for their work and a commitment to their learning can occur.
Bruner (1992) comments on negotiating the curriculum as Negotiating the curriculum means deliberately planning to invite
students to contribute, and to modify, the educational program, so that they will have a real investment both in the learning
journey and the outcomes. Negotiation also means making explicit, and then confronting, the constraints of the learning context
and the non-negotiable requirements that apply. (p. 14)
Twomey Fosnot (1989) defines constructivism according to four principles: (1) learning depends on what individuals
already know, (2) new ideas occur as individuals adapt and change their old ideas, (3) learning involves inventing ideas rather
than mechanically accumulating a series of facts, (4) meaningful learning occurs through rethinking old ideas and coming to
new conclusions about new ideas which conflict with our old ideas.
In constructivism, learning is represented as a constructive process in which the learner is building an internal illustration
of knowledge, a personal interpretation of experience. This representation is always open to modification, its structure and
linkages forming the ground to which other knowledge structures are attached. Learning is then an active process in which
experience has an important role in understanding and grasping the meaning. This view of knowledge does not necessarily reject
the existence of the real world, instead it agrees that reality places constrains on the existing concepts, and contends that all
individuals’ knowledge of the world is the interpretations of their experiences. Furthermore, conceptual growth is the result of
various perspectives and the simultaneous changing of individuals’ internal representations in response to those perspectives as
well as through their experience (Bednar, Cunnigham, Duffy, Perry, 1995 cited in Duffy and Jonassen,1991).
Christie (2005) point out that constructivism is a learning theory in which learning is both an active process and a personal
representation of the world. In this theory, knowledge is constructed from the experience and is modified through different
experiences. Problem solving and understanding are emphasized in this theory. Authentic tasks, experiences, collaboration, and
assessment are among other important factors in this view of learning.
Hare , (2005) state that learner-centric instructional classroom methods are emphasized in the constructivist learning
approach. Also Hare , argue that educators who follow this approach must build their school curriculum around the experience
of their students. Hare state that there is a trend for incorporating technology into the classrooms in order to support instructional
learning methods. However recent studies have revealed that technology is not efficiently integrated with the constructivism and
constructivist leaning.
Piaget’s constructivism which is based on his view of children’s psychological development insists that discovery is the
basis of his theory. Piaget (1973) argues that to understand means to discover or reconstruct by means of rediscovery. Piaget
discusses that children go through stages in which they accept ideas they may later change or do not accept. Therefore,
understanding is built up step by step through active participation and involvement and learners cannot be considered as passive
in any of the steps or stages of development.
Contrary to Piaget, Bruner (1973) states that learning is a social process, whereby students construct new concepts and
knowledge based on their current knowledge. In this view of constructivism, the student selects information, constructs
hypotheses, and makes decisions, with the aim of integrating new experiences into his existing knowledge and experience.
Bruner emphasizes the role of cognitive structures for providing meaning and organization of experiences and suggest learners
to transcend the boundaries of the given information. For him, learner independence lies at the heart of effective education and
he argues that this independence can be increased when the students try to discover new principles of their own. Moreover,
curriculum should be organized in a spiral manner so that students can build upon what they have already learned.
11 | P a g e
J Soci Sci, Lit & Lang., 1 (1): 9-16, 2015
between learners challenges the teachers and does not allow them to use the same method or the same materials while teaching
to these students.
Third, since learners’ involvement is emphasized in the constructivism, the teachers must engage students in learning, and
bring their students’ current understanding to the forefront (Hoover, 1996). Constructivist teachers can ensure that learning
experiences include problems that are important to the students, and are not just related to the needs and interests of teachers and
the educational system.
Fourth, Hoover (1996) reminds that sufficient time is needed to build the new knowledge actively. During this time, the
students reflect on their new experiences and try to consider the relationship between these experiences and the previous ones in
order to have an improved (not “correct”) view of the world.
Similar to the effect of negotiation as an important aspect of a constructivist classroom on learning, negotiation also unites
teachers and students in a common purpose. Smith (1993) confirms that negotiating curriculum means "custom-building classes
every day to fit the individuals who attend" (p. 1). Bruner (1992) reminds that teachers must talk openly about the new knowledge
and constraints in the negotiations.
12 | P a g e
J Soci Sci, Lit & Lang., 1 (1): 9-16, 2015
is the purpose of constructivism).Reflection also involves a critique of the assumptions on which the teachers’ beliefs have been
built, and through reflection, their perspectives are transformed
Lester and Onore (1990) propose that genuine learning or change does not comes from ignoring all prior learning in order
to relearn, but "from questioning or reassessing our existing beliefs about the world" (p. 41):
Change can occur through having experiences that present and represent alternative systems of beliefs and trying to find a
place for new experiences to fit into already held beliefs (p. 41).
Giroux (1986) notes that teachers are often trained to use various models of teaching and evaluation, yet are not taught to
be critical of the assumptions that underlie these models. He advises that teachers must be more than technicians but
transformative intellectuals engaging in a critical dialogue among them.
Lester and Onore (1990) note that holding a constructivist view of knowledge can enable a teacher to explore and form new
ideas about teaching and learning. But the teacher’s job in holding this view may need more attention when he or she has to
consider all that impinges on teaching such as the existing school system and its policies, and the school culture.
As one of the instances of the effect of constructivism on teaching, Carpenter and Fennema (1992) in their Cognitively
Guided Instruction (CGI) of mathematic program stated that elementary school teachers were given extensive training in
constructivist methods such as complex problems, modeling, group problem solving, and teaching of metacognitive strategies
and these teachers have improved in higher level thinking skills as well as solid achievements in traditional computational skills.
Neale, Smith,and Johnson (1990) declare that in addition to positive outcomes of constructivism in science (Neale, Smith, &
Johnson,1990), similar successes have been reported in reading (Duffy & Roehler, 1986) and in writing (Bereiter & Scardamalia,
1987).
13 | P a g e
J Soci Sci, Lit & Lang., 1 (1): 9-16, 2015
14 | P a g e
J Soci Sci, Lit & Lang., 1 (1): 9-16, 2015
According to Di Vesta (1987), the designed learning environment should both support and challenge the learner's thinking.
While it is advocated to give the learner ownership of the problem and solution process, the instructors should consider that not
any activity or any solution is adequate. The critical and most important goal is to help the learner in becoming an effective
thinker. This goal can be achieved when instructors have multiple roles, such as consultant and coach.
Conclusion
The research review suggests that the constructivist theory can reveal facts about education which were not represented in
traditional theories. Contrary to rote learning in the past, Merriam and Caffarella(1999) point out that constructivist learning is
a process of constructing meaning and people themselves make sense of their experience. According to Piaget (1977), the role
of learners from passive in the past has changed to active in the constructivist theory.
Social constructivism which assumes that cognitive growth first occurs on a social level and later on individual level
,emphasizes the role of ZPD (Zone of proximal development) (Vygotsky, 1978).Thus instructors who are facilitators in social
constructivism first provide support and help for learners, the little by little this support is decreased and students learn
independently.
Thus in social constructivist classrooms, students are actively involved, the environment is democratic, and interaction
becomes crucial in learning (Gray, 1997).
The researchers suggest that with the importance given to collaboration, knowledge, and creativity through both social
constructivism and constructivism; the learners can start learning in pair work, group work, and teamwork, and later make their
own contributions to the world of knowledge.
Finally, the researcher agrees with Vygotsky (1978) about cognitive growth from social to individual level, and the
researcher proposes that learning can be considered on a continuum from social constructivism to constructivism.
REFERENCES
Applefield JM, Huber R & Moallem M. 2000. Constructivism in theory and practice: Toward a better understanding. The High School
Journal, 35-53.
Bailey F & Pransky K. 2005. Are" Other People's Children" Constructivist Learners Too?. Theory into Practice, 44(1), 19-26.
Bauersfeld H. 1995. “Language Games’ in the Mathematics Classroom: Their Function and Their Effects”, in P. Cobb & H. Bauersfeld
(Eds.), The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures, Hillsdale, US-NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum: 211-292.
Belenky MF, Clinchy BM, Goldberger NR & Tarule JM. 1986. Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New
York: Basic Books.
Bereiter C & Scardamilia M. 1985. Cognitive coping strategies and problems of “inert” knowledge. In S. Chipman, J. Seagal & R. Glaser
(Eds.), Thinking and learning skills. Hillsdale, NY: Erlbaum.
Brown AL. 1994. The advancement of learning. Educational researcher, 4-12.
Brown AL, Ash D, Rutherford M, Nakagawa K, Gordon A & Campione JC. 1995. Distributed expertise in the classroom. In G. Salomon
(Ed.), Distributed cognitions. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Brown JS, Collins A & Duguid P. 1989. Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Brownstein B. 2001. COLLABORATION: THE FOUNDATION OF LEARNING IN THE FUTURE. Education, 122(2).
Bruner JS. 1966b. Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Bruner J. 1973. Going Beyond the Information Given. New York: Norton.
Caffarella RS & Merriam SB. 1999. Perspectives on adult learning: framing our research. In 40th Annual Adult Education Research
Conference Proceedings. Northern Illinois University.
Carpenter T & Fennema E. 1992. Cognitively guided instruction: Building on the knowledge of students and teachers. International Journal
of Educational Research 17: 475-470.
Christie A. 2005. Constructivism and its implications for educators. Retrieved April, 20, 2013.
Clements DH. 1997. (Mis?) Constructing Constructivism. Teaching children mathematics, 4(4), 198-200.
Cobb P. 1994. Constructivism in mathematics and science education. Educational Researcher 23: 4.
Cooper PA. 1993. Paradigm Shifts in Designed Instruction: From Behaviorism to Cognitivism to Constructivism. Educational
technology, 33(5), 12-19.
Cook J. 1992. Negotiating the curriculum: Programming for learning.Negotiating the curriculum: educating for the 21st century, 15-31.
Derry SJ. 1999. A fish called peer learning: Searching for common themes.Cognitive perspectives on peer learning, 197-211.
Di Vesta FJ. 1987. The cognitive movement and education. In J. A. Golver & R.R. Ronning (Eds.), Historical foundations of educational
psychology (pp. 37-63). New York: Plenum Press.
Duffy TM & Jonasse DH. 1991. “New Implications for Instructional Technology”. Educational Technology, May 1991.
Duffy G, Roehler L & Radcliff G. 1986. How teachers’ instructional talk influences students’ understanding of lesson content. Elementary
School Journal 87: 3-16.
Ernest P. 1999. Social Constructivism as a Philosophy of Mathematics: Radical Constructivism
Erdem E. 2001. Program gelistirmede yapilandirmacilik yaklasum. (Constructivist approach in curriculum development). Unpublished
master thesis. Hacettepe Univerisity, Ankara.
15 | P a g e
J Soci Sci, Lit & Lang., 1 (1): 9-16, 2015
Gamoran A, Secada WG & Marrett CB. 2000. The organizational context of teaching and learning. In Handbook of the sociology of
education(pp. 37-63). Springer US.
Giroux H. 1986. The politics of schooling and culture. Orbit, 17(4),10-11.
Gray A. 1997. Contructivist teaching and learning. SSTA Research Centre Report, 97-07.
Gredler ME. 1997. Learning and instruction: Theory into practice (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Gruber HE & Voneche JJ. 1977. The essential Piaget. New York: Basic Books.
est donc le vrai Piaget Q & Papert S. 1982. An interpretation of Piaget’s constructivism. Revue internationale de philosophie, 36(4), 612-
635.
Hare D, Howard E & Pope M. 2005. Enhancing technology use in student teaching: A case study. Journal of Technology and Teacher
Education, 13(4), p. 573+.
Hoover WA. 1996. The practice implications of constructivism. SEDL Letter, 9(3), 1-2.
Kanselaar G. 2002. Constructivism and socio-constructivism. Article published on July, 16, 2002.
Kim B. 2001. Social constructivism. Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology, 1-8.
Kukla A. 2000. Social constructivism and the philosophy of science. Psychology Press.
Lave J & Wenger E. 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press.
Leeds-Hurwitz W. 2009. Social construction of reality. Encyclopedia of communication theory, 892-895.
Lester NB & Onore CS. 1990. Learning Change: One school district meets language across the curriculum. Portsmith, NH: Boynton/Cook
Publishers.
McMahon M. 1997. Social Constructivism and the World Wide Web - A Paradigm for Learning. Paper presented at the ASCILITE
conference. Perth, Australia.
Mezirow J. 1990. How critical reflection triggers transformative learning. Fostering critical reflection in adulthood, 1-20.
Moshman D. 1982. Exogenous, endogenous, and dialectical constructivism. Developmental Review 2:371-384.
Mvududu NH & Thiel-Burgess J. 2012. Constructivism in Practice: The Case for English Language Learners. International Journal of
Education, 4(3), p108-p118.
Neale D, Smith D & Johnson V. 1990. Implementing conceptional change teaching in primary science. Elementary School Journal 91: 109-
132.
Perkins DN. 1992. Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage. Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A
conversation, 45-55.
Piaget J & Inhelder B. 1969. The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books.
Piaget J. 1970. Structuralism. New York: Basic Books.
Piaget J. 1973. To understand is to invent: The future of education.
Piaget J. 1977. The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures. (A. Rosin, Trans). New York: The Viking Press.
Phillips DC. 2000. Constructivism in Education: Opinions and Second Opinions on Controversial Issues. Ninety-Ninth Yearbook of the
National Society for the Study of Education. University of Chicago Press, Order Dept., 11030 South Langley Avenue, Chicago, IL
60628.
Prawat RS. 1992. Teachers' beliefs about teaching and learning: A constructivist perspective. American journal of education, 354-395.
Leeds-Hurwitz W. 2009. Social construction of reality. Encyclopedia of communication theory, 892-895.
Rhodes LK & Belly GT. 1999. Choices and Consequences in the Renewal of Teacher Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 50(1), 17.
Rogoff B. 1998. Cognition as a collaborative process. In W. Damon, D. Kuhn& R.S. Seigler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (5th ed.,
Vol.2).New York: Wiley.
Roth WM. 2000. in McCormick, R. and Paechter, C. (eds), “Authentic School Science: Intellectual Traditions”, Learning & Knowledge,
London, UK: Paul Chapman Publishing: 6-20.
Searle JR. 1995. The construction of social reality. Simon and Schuster.
Shunk DH. 2000. Learning theories: An educational perspective (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Smith C. 2010. What is a person?: Rethinking humanity, social life, and the moral good from the person up. University of Chicago Press.
Twomey Fosnot C. 1989. Enquiring teachers, enquiring learners: A constructivist approach for teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.
Vygotsky LS. 1978. Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky L. 1986. Thought and Language. Transl. and ed. A. Kozulin. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. (Originally published in Russian in
1934.)
Wadsworth BJ. 1996. Piaget's theory of cognitive and affective development: Foundations of constructivism . Longman Publishing.
Wertsch JV. 1997. Vygotsky and the formation of the mind. Cambridge, MA.
16 | P a g e