Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Monday, November 5, 2007
Constructivism
Constructivist theory is the final repudiation of the notion that teachers can somehow ‘feed’ information to students. It deprives teachers of the ready excuse, “I don’t know why students performed badly on the test. I taught them everything they needed to know.” Constructivism recognizes that students build new knowledge through prior knowledge and experience. That knowledge is made meaningful because it springs from student interest.
I tried to develop a constructivist approach when teaching students about Federalism and the ratification of the Constitution. History presents a unique challenge to those who would employ a constructivist approach. Students are asked to build knowledge starting from their own experience, but that knowledge regards the experience of others. Events from hundreds or even thousands of years ago are often remote to today’s students. Meaningful connections are often difficult.
In these lessons I tried to relate the concept of Federalism to the experience of students while at school. I asked students to detail the different social structures in which they participated while at school. Students recognized that they were simultaneously part of a class and the greater school. I then asked students to identify the benefits of belonging to each group, and asked them to consider how the laws for each group might be made. From there the parallels to state and federal government, the separation of powers, and other concepts key to understanding this period in U.S. history were clear. This kind of presentation made these concepts meaningful, and that meaning helped retention.
To use a true constructivist approach I would now give more attention to scaffolding in its many manifestations. Conceptual scaffolds could map key ideas. Metacognitive scaffolds would provide a variety of perspectives on the approach to these problems. Procedural scaffolds would organize resource and help to plan the meaningful use of those resources. Strategic scaffolding would provide a problem solving context and allow students to absorb key concepts within that context.
I tried to develop a constructivist approach when teaching students about Federalism and the ratification of the Constitution. History presents a unique challenge to those who would employ a constructivist approach. Students are asked to build knowledge starting from their own experience, but that knowledge regards the experience of others. Events from hundreds or even thousands of years ago are often remote to today’s students. Meaningful connections are often difficult.
In these lessons I tried to relate the concept of Federalism to the experience of students while at school. I asked students to detail the different social structures in which they participated while at school. Students recognized that they were simultaneously part of a class and the greater school. I then asked students to identify the benefits of belonging to each group, and asked them to consider how the laws for each group might be made. From there the parallels to state and federal government, the separation of powers, and other concepts key to understanding this period in U.S. history were clear. This kind of presentation made these concepts meaningful, and that meaning helped retention.
To use a true constructivist approach I would now give more attention to scaffolding in its many manifestations. Conceptual scaffolds could map key ideas. Metacognitive scaffolds would provide a variety of perspectives on the approach to these problems. Procedural scaffolds would organize resource and help to plan the meaningful use of those resources. Strategic scaffolding would provide a problem solving context and allow students to absorb key concepts within that context.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)