Constructivist Learning: Building Knowledge Through Experience

Understanding Constructivism

Constructivist Learning theory posits that individuals actively construct knowledge rather than passively absorbing information. This perspective emphasizes that learning is a process where people build their own understanding of the world through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences. Learners integrate new information into their existing knowledge framework, known as schemas.

Two key processes within constructivism are assimilation and accommodation.

Assimilation is the process of fitting new information into an existing schema. It’s like adding a new piece to a puzzle where it readily fits into the pre-existing picture.
Accommodation involves modifying or creating new schemas in response to new information that doesn’t fit existing frameworks. This is like realizing the puzzle piece doesn’t fit and reshaping the puzzle itself to accommodate the new piece.

For instance, a child might initially develop a schema for “birds” as flying creatures with feathers. Seeing a robin (assimilation) reinforces this schema. However, encountering a penguin, which is also a bird but doesn’t fly (accommodation), might require the child to revise their “bird” schema to include flightless birds or create a more nuanced understanding of bird categories.

The implications of constructivist theory for education are profound:

Active Learning is Crucial: Students learn most effectively when they are actively involved in learning experiences, rather than passively listening to lectures or reading textbooks. Engagement and interaction are key.
Learning is Social: Learning is inherently a social activity. It is deeply rooted in social contexts where students and teachers collaborate to build understanding and share perspectives.
Facilitating Knowledge Construction: Since knowledge cannot be directly transferred from teacher to student, the primary goal of teaching shifts from information delivery to designing and facilitating experiences that enable students to construct their own knowledge.

This last point is critical. Moving away from traditional teaching methods that focus on information transmission, constructivism advocates for creating rich learning experiences. Effective teaching, therefore, becomes about designing environments and activities that stimulate students to build their own understanding and construct knowledge actively.

Insights from Educational Blogs

Constructivism in the Classroom: Practical Applications

Adopting constructivist principles has significant implications for classroom practices. The table below, adapted from educational resources, highlights the differences between traditional and constructivist classrooms across various dimensions:

Feature	Traditional Classroom	Constructivist Classroom
Curriculum Design	Starts with parts, emphasizes basic skills.	Emphasizes big concepts, starts with the whole and expands to parts.
Curriculum Flexibility	Strict adherence to a fixed curriculum is valued.	Values student questions and interests, allowing for curriculum flexibility.
Learning Materials	Primarily textbooks and workbooks.	Uses primary sources, manipulative materials, and diverse resources.
Learning Process	Based on repetition and rote memorization.	Interactive, builds on prior knowledge, emphasizes understanding and application.
Teacher’s Role	Disseminates information; teacher is the authority.	Facilitates dialogue, helps students construct knowledge; teacher is a guide.
Assessment Methods	Testing for correct answers, product-focused.	Includes student work, observations, diverse perspectives; process is as important as product.
Nature of Knowledge	Knowledge is inert and fixed.	Knowledge is dynamic, evolving with experience and understanding.
Student Interaction	Students primarily work alone.	Students primarily work in collaborative groups, fostering social learning.

Key Elements of Constructivist Teaching

Several essential components are crucial for implementing constructivist principles in teaching and lesson design. Drawing from research by Baviskar, Hartle & Whitney (2009), these include:

Elicit Prior Knowledge: Learning is most effective when new information connects with what learners already know. Therefore, lessons should begin by activating and eliciting relevant prior knowledge. Techniques include pre-tests, informal discussions, and warm-up activities that encourage recall of existing knowledge. This step is crucial for building a bridge between the known and the new, facilitating effective knowledge construction.
Create Cognitive Dissonance: Design tasks and problems that challenge students’ current understandings and assumptions. Knowledge construction is spurred when learners encounter novel problems that don’t fit neatly into their existing schemas, prompting them to revise and expand their thinking. Challenging activities encourage deeper engagement and critical thinking.
Apply Knowledge with Feedback: Provide opportunities for students to apply newly forming knowledge in different contexts, coupled with constructive feedback. Encourage students to evaluate new information critically and refine their understanding. Activities such as presentations, group discussions, and quizzes (used formatively) can facilitate this process by allowing students to compare their evolving schemas with new situations and perspectives. Feedback is essential for guiding and refining knowledge construction.
Reflect on Learning: Offer students structured opportunities to reflect on their learning journey and articulate what they have learned. Reflection solidifies understanding and promotes metacognition. Activities might include reflective journals, presentations summarizing learning, or creating tutorials for peers. These activities allow students to demonstrate their constructed knowledge and deepen their understanding through articulation and review.

Constructivist Learning Activities: Examples

Here are some examples of classroom activities that align with constructivist learning principles:

Problem-Based Learning (PBL): Present students with complex, real-world problems that require them to investigate, collaborate, and apply knowledge to find solutions.
Project-Based Learning: Engage students in extended projects that require in-depth exploration of a topic, culminating in a tangible product or presentation.
Inquiry-Based Learning: Encourage students to ask questions, investigate topics of interest, and develop their own understanding through exploration and research.
Collaborative Projects: Design activities that require students to work together, share ideas, and learn from each other, fostering a social knowledge construction environment.
Hands-on Activities and Experiments: Provide direct experiences with materials and phenomena, allowing students to learn by doing and making connections through active engagement.
Discussions and Debates: Facilitate classroom discussions and debates that encourage students to share their perspectives, challenge assumptions, and construct knowledge collectively.
Case Studies: Use real-life case studies to present complex situations that students must analyze and solve, applying their knowledge in practical contexts.

These activities shift the focus from passive reception of information to active engagement and knowledge construction, aligning with the core tenets of constructivist learning theory. By implementing these strategies, educators can create richer, more effective learning environments that empower students to become active learners and critical thinkers.

References

Abbott, M. L., & Fouts, J. T. (2003). Constructivist Teaching and Student Achievement: The Results of a School-Level Classroom Observation Study in Washington. Technical Report.
Ayaz, M. F., & Sekerci, H. (2015). The Effects of the Constructivist Learning Approach on Student’s Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis Study. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 14(4), 143-156.
Bada, S. O., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66-70.
Baviskar 1, S. N., Hartle, R. T., & Whitney, T. (2009). Essential criteria to characterize constructivist teaching: Derived from a review of the literature and applied to five constructivist‐teaching method articles. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 541-550.
Cetin-Dindar, A. (2016). Student Motivation in Constructivist Learning Environment. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(2).
Hein, G. (1991). Constructivist learning theory. Institute for Inquiry. Available at: http://www.exploratorium.edu/ifi/resources/constructivistlearning.html.
Kim, J. S. (2005). The effects of a constructivist teaching approach on student academic achievement, self-concept, and learning strategies. Asia pacific education review, 6(1), 7-19.
Saunders, W. L. (1992). The constructivist perspective: Implications and teaching strategies for science. School Science and Mathematics, 92(3), 136-141.
Semerci, Ç., & Batdi, V. (2015). A meta-analysis of constructivist learning approach on learners’ academic achievements, retention and attitudes. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(2) doi:10.11114/jets.v3i2.644
Siemens, G. (2014). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age.
Travis, H., & Lord, T. (2004). Traditional and constructivist teaching techniques. Journal of College Science Teaching, 34(3), 12.