So what is this Constructive Model of Learning?

If you want to build a model of learning (which we take to be the acquisition of knowledge), then you need to have a theory about what knowledge is. Traditionally knowledge has been taken to be the perception of reality in the human mind. [You can get very bogged down here with philosophical conundrums, so I hope we can take the above as a working definition.]  One school of thought holds that the meaning of reality is external to the human mind (it is an objective reality) but that the human mind can manipulate internal symbols that correspond to real-world entities. Learning means discovering how to manipulate those symbols correctly so as to know the objective truth. [Most of the material in this blog comes from Constructivism versus Objectivism by C. Vrasidas. It is a good read with many more ideas and insights than I’ll be covering here.]

With this objectivist learning model [See George Marsh], the teacher’s job is to figure out how to transfer the truth, bit-by-bit, from the real world into the learner’s mind. This is the 20^th century version of the traditional model of learning and its curriculum development turns out to look rather like the traditional software development waterfall life-cycle.

Software Development	Curriculum Development
Specify Requirements	State the learning objectives – what knowledge (bits of reality) is to be taught.
Design the software	Devise appropriate learning tasks – including course notes, exercises, demonstrations etc.
Implement the code	Deliver the course – by means of lectures, laboratories, seminars, homework.
Testing	Evaluate student attainment – by means of assignments and exams.

The constructivist model of learning is based on another view of reality – that the human mind creates its own symbols by interpreting real-world perceptions. Because the meaning of reality depends on the experiences and interpretations of each individual human mind, knowledge is internal and subjective. So, generally speaking, there is no correct interpretation and no absolute truth. Everyone will have their own personal truth that depends on their particular experiences drawn from their particular environment and circumstances. Learning is about making meaningful interpretations to construct that truth.

This is another place where it is possible to get into deep philosophical waters. The slogan Reality is a social construct was coined by social scientists and tends to annoy natural scientists (and engineers). We are probably more comfortable with the proposition that the mind cannot encompass the whole of reality in the same way that the eye cannot see a whole three-dimensional object. Instead, each mind has a particular perspective on reality and it is to be expected that each person’s perspective (i.e. their truth) will be a little bit different.

On the education front, Piaget [1970] was a proponent of personal constructivism whilst others, notably Vygotsky [1978], favour social constructivism where knowledge is constructed within a community of practice. The rise of social networking in the last decade has brought this theory into a sharper focus, especially in the education field.

So what is the role of the teacher within the constructivist paradigm?  As Vrasidas says 

“The teacher cannot know in advance all the specific knowledge that each student will construct. What (he) can know is the broad area of knowledge and provide for opportunities for learners to develop the skills necessary to explore further in (the) domain.”

Taking the curriculum development steps one at a time…

Learning objectives – since there is no absolute knowledge, there is little point in trying to define precisely what knowledge the learners should acquire. Instead the focus should be on guiding them to think like experts in the field.

Learning tasks (and delivery) – the teacher needs to facilitate experiences that lead to knowledge construction and that develop knowledge construction skills as follows:

(i)           ‘Thinking like an expert’ requires the development of cognitive processes (i.e. thinking skills).

(ii)         Constructivist educators place a lot of emphasis on collaborative learning because learning alongside other learners (i.e. in a community of practice) introduces multiple perspectives and encourages negotiation of shared truths and values. 

(iii)       Because knowledge is internal, constructivist learners need to develop a degree of self-reflection that allows them control over their learning experiences.

Evaluation – since we didn’t define what the learners should have learned, we cannot tell whether or not they have learned it. However, by focusing on the knowledge construction skills, we can tell whether or not they have learned anything and maybe how well.

In the education world whilst there are hard-line objectivists as well as hard-line constructivists, most people seem to subscribe to a mainly objectivist approach but accepting some constructivist elements. For myself, I think the objectivist approach is fine for teaching and learning factual information – so that would make a good preparation for Mastermind. For a Master of Science however, with an emphasis on problem solving, critical awareness and innovation, those ‘knowledge construction skills’ are also really necessary.

Piaget J. (1970) Genetic Epistemology. Columbia University Press, New York.

Vygotsky L. (1978) Mind in Society, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.