Many learning theories have been developed throughout the years that attempt to explain how people modify their behavior based on experiences. Behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism are the three main categories of learning theories. Behaviorism focuses on the learning of observable behaviors or responses and considers learning to be a change in behavior rather than a mental change. Cognitivism looks beyond behavior and focuses on the thought processes involved in learning. Constructivism explains how learning involves building, or constructing, concepts and knowledge rather than just absorbing information from the outside world (Ormrod, 2009).
According to the theory of constructivism, learners are not simply given knowledge by a teacher. Learning is an active, constructive process in which students build knowledge for themselves based on prior experiences. As people take in new information, old ideas are modified and new ideas are created. Each person develops their own rule models to understand what is happening around them. Learners build upon what they already know and add to their prior knowledge, or schema (Gray, 2007). This contrasts the old idea of tabula rasa because learners bring their past knowledge and experiences to each new situation that they encounter (Learning Theories Knowledgebase, 2009). Learners work actively to organize and make sense of new information in a way that modifies their knowledge from previous experiences (Ormrod, 2009).
There are two types of constructivism: individual constructivism and social constructivism. In the first type, the construction process occurs individually within each learner. The latter type focuses on how people work together to combine their knowledge and create a deeper understanding in a way that they could not do on their own. Both of these methods can be useful teaching strategies in the classroom because they encourage students to think creatively and use problem-solving skills (Ormrod, 2009).
The ideas of Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotski formed the origins of constructivism. Vygotski’s Social Development Theory has three main themes that relate to the current view of constructivism. First, he believed that social interaction is important for cognitive development. Children develop first on the social level and then on the individual level. The second aspect of his theory is the zone of proximal development (ZPD). The ZPD, the zone where learning occurs, is defined as the distance between what a child is able to do on their own compared to the tasks a child is capable of completing with the help of a more knowledgeable other. A more knowledgeable other is a person who has a better understanding of a concept than the child. In the classroom, teachers or peers can serve as more knowledgeable others. Vygotsky’s theory promotes interactive learning where teachers and students collaborate to facilitate learning for all students (Social Development Theory, 2009).
Piaget observed his children as they grew and made sense of the world. From his observations, he developed the State Theory of Cognitive Development which explains the four stages of cognitive development: sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete, and formal. In the sensorimotor stage, the infant learns through interactions with his environment. Assimilation occurs in which the infant deals with new objects by absorbing them into existing schema. If the object cannot be assimilated, accommodation occurs when the infant’s schemata are changed to include the new object or event. In the preoperational stage, the child classifies objects by important features because he cannot yet think in abstract ways. The concrete operations stage is when the child begins to think abstractly and logically. By the time they reach the formal operations stage, children are capable of using deductive and hypothetical reasoning to think abstractly (Ormrod, 2009).
Constructivist ideas are working their way into many current classrooms. Teachers act as facilitators and create student centered activities that promote problem solving and group work. Students are encouraged to take risks and create their own hypotheses (Gray, 2007). By formulating their own questions, students are likely to become more interested and motivated in learning. Hands-on experiments are useful because they allow students to try many possible solutions and learn from the ones that do not work as well as the correct one. Students collaborate in order to construct new knowledge from their peers’ previous experiences rather than just their own (Educational Broadcasting Corporation, 2004).
Case-based learning is an instructional method based in constructivism. In case-based learning, the instructor provides a narrative or story of a potential problem to the students. Students then engage in discussion about the case to “analyze, propose solutions, evaluate potential solutions, solve problems or make decisions” (Blackmond, 2007). Cases can be used as the primary method of instruction or they can be used after a lecture to increase students’ deep thinking about the material. A well-written case will focus on an issue that arouses interest, clearly state the problem, and force decision-making. The teacher should ask questions that encourage deeper thinking while trying not to direct the conversation. Case-based learning can be used in a wide variety of settings, from asking second year medical students to diagnose a patient with an unusual list of symptoms to an eighth grade math class in which students are asked to use their geometry skills to design a miniature golf course. A major advantage of case-based learning is that the skills developed in the classroom will transfer more easily to real world settings because they are being applied in a similar way. Case-based learning can be used for student assessment by creating a rubric that states what is expected from each student throughout the discussion. Case-based learning helps learners to improve their thinking abilities and to better understand the course content (Blackmond, 2007).
The Adventures of Jasper Woodbury series is a good example of case-based learning. Students watch a 20 minute video that presents a believable story and ends with a math problem-solving challenge. Students then work in groups to come up with a solution based on the information provided in the video. Teachers encourage thought and problem-solving in each group but do not direct the conversation. These videos are useful because they show students that information learned in school is useful when applied to real life problems.
The constructivist learning theory can be applied outside of the classroom when teaching an activity such as horseback riding. The instructor can explain what the rider needs to do, but the rider will have a difficult time understanding the directions until they are given the opportunity to attempt it their own. Riding skills build upon one another. For example, a rider must be able to balance at a walk before they can begin trotting or jumping. Social constructivism can be applied in group lessons by asking one rider to stand in the center of the arena and be the instructor. This gives them the opportunity to observe for themselves what mistakes actually look like while giving corrective feedback to improve the skills of the other riders.
Ayn Rand’s learning theory of objectivism opposes the theory of constructivism. In support of her theory, Rand said, “Reality, the external world, exists…independent of any observer’s knowledge, beliefs, feelings, desires or fears. This means that A is A, that facts are facts, that things are what they are – and that the task of man’s consciousness is to perceive reality, not to create or invent it” (Hoehnke, 2003). Objectivists believe that experiences only play a small role in creating models of the world because knowledge exists independently from the learner. According to the theory, meaning and experience are separate from one another. The aim of objectivist learning is to “acquire knowledge of objects, their characteristics, and interactions” (Hoehnke, 2003).
Objectivist learning principles can be observed in traditional classrooms. The knowledgeable teacher stands in front of the less knowledgeable class and presents information, usually in the form of a lecture. The teacher is active while the students sit passively and do not interact with one another to construct meaning from the information being presented. Learning happens through repetition. Material is presented one by one in units of increasing difficulty. Students are periodically tested on information the teacher believes they should know. A major problem with traditional teaching methods is that students are using mechanical skills such as “imitation, obedience, repetition, and control,” rather than using their creative abilities that allows them to incorporate new information into their current knowledge base (Hoehnke,2003).
In contrast to traditional classrooms, constructivist classrooms are more productive learning environments because students are more engaged in the material. Learners are allowed to define the goals within the lesson rather than having content defined by the teacher. In a constructivist classroom, students are intrinsically motivated to learn instead of being extrinsically motivated by the teacher as they would be in a traditional classroom. This makes students more likely to learn for long-term success rather than simply storing it in short-term memory to pass a test. Since not all students are able to learn at the same speed, constructivist teachers allow learners to construct their own methods to break down and process the lesson content. Constructivist classrooms also allow students to work in groups in which they work together to discuss and interpret material that they may not have been able to understand on their own. The problem solving skills that are learned in one class transfer to the rest of the students’ classes (Burr, 2003). While traditional teaching methods are effective for the first four levels of Bloom’s taxonomy (knowledge, comprehension, application, and analysis), constructivism is better suited to the higher levels of learning: synthesis and evaluation (Ormrod, 2009).
References
Blackmon, M. (2007). Case-Based Learning. Retrieved October 17, 2009, from Emerging Perspectives on learning, Teaching, and Technology: http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Case-Based_Learning
Burr, N. (2003, January 30). Traditional Classroom vs. Constructivist Classroom. Retrieved October 17, 2009, from Johannes Gutenburg Universitat: http://www.fask.uni-mainz.de/user/kiraly/English/gruppe1/grundlagen_comparison.html
Educational Broadcasting Corporation (2004). What does constructivism have to do with my classroom? Retrieved October 17, 2009, from Thirteen Ed Online: http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/constructivism/index_sub2.html
Gray, A. (2007). Contructivist Teaching and Learning . Retrieved October 17, 2009, from Saskatchewan School Boards Association: http://saskschoolboards.ca/research/instruction/97-07.htm
Hoehnke, K. (2003, January 30). Objectivism in Philosophy and Teaching Methodology. Retrieved October 17, 2009, from Johannes Gutenburg Universitat: http://www.fask.uni-mainz.de/user/kiraly/English/gruppe1/grundlagen_objektivismus.html
Learning Theories Knowledgebase (2009, October). Constructivism at Learning-Theories.com. Retrieved October 19th, 2009, from http://www.learning-theories.com/constructivism.html
Learning Theories Knowledgebase (2009, October). Social Development Theory (Vygotsky) at Learning-Theories.com. Retrieved October 19th, 2009, from http://www.learning-theories.com/vygotskys-social-learning-theory.html
Ormrod, J. (2009). Human Learning. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.
