―Adopting a social constructivist understanding of how children learn has significant consequences for assessing their learning in the classroom‖ (Coll & Martín, 1996, p. 138). As a result, Conner (1999b), distinguishes learning from this perspective (social constructivism) and sees learners as active constructors of their own understanding and learning. For instance, sometimes learning is influenced by what the learner currently knows and
the context in which both learning and assessment take place. More details given by Coll and Martín (1996) inform that students construct certain meanings on the contents in so far as they concurrently make sense of it and the process by which students manage to make sense of what they learn is directly linked to the affective and social contexts of learning in schools. To differentiate constructivism from social constructivism, Gipps (1994) explains that from a constructivist view, learners learn by actively making sense of new knowledge, making meaning and mapping it in to their existing knowledge map/schema, whereas the social constructivist view sees learning happening within a shared social context. For example, learning in schools takes place in a social context and the nature of this social milieu has a profound effect on the way students‘ learn (Earl, 2013).
Many researchers support social constructivism when developing theories for authentic assessment such as assessment for learning, as this theory puts emphasis on the role of others and all forms of social interaction in the process of constructing knowledge and understanding (Pritchard & Woollard, 2010). Among these researchers who favoured social constructivism include Berry and Adamson (2011), Black and Wiliam (2009), Adams (2006), and Pryor and Torrance (2000). For example, during the process of developing ‗a theory for formative assessment‘ Black and Wiliam (2009), adopted constructivism and meta-cognition
and they further noted the process of formative assessment reflecting very general principles of learning, particularly social. As a result, Berry and Adamson (2011) also recommend social constructivism to be integrated within the learning tasks and advise teachers not to separate assessment and learning activities.
Likewise, Adams (2006) echoes the theory, ―within a social constructivist perspective, assessment seeks to consider how and why pupil positions do not successfully mediate into the social domain; that is, how and why pupil responses do not ‗fit‘ with current socially agreed interpretations‖ (p.252). For instance, the discursive nature of social constructivism calls attention to the need for students to be given time to talk openly, where the teacher‘s role is more towards listening and observing the students. Black and Wiliam (2009) further discuss the theory of social constructivism and the significance of incorporating it in educational assessment and they provide guidance on how teachers could create learning within such context.
Emphasizing this theory, Torrance and Pryor (1998) indicate classroom assessment process within a social constructivist framework is accomplished by teachers and students through social and pedagogic interactions. Likewise, in another study, Pryor and Torrance (2000) have shown how the classroom assessment is socially situated and constructed with many examples. Furthermore, Pryor and Torrance (2000) conclude
the study:
Assessment is not an activity that can be done to children but is accomplished by means of social interaction in which the practices of the participants have a critical effect on outcome. The outcomes of assessment are actively produced rather than revealed and displayed by the assessment process. (p.126) In a social constructivist classroom teachers and students, perform different roles while regulating learning and assessment. Hence, the teacher‘s role is based on mostly that of a ‗reflective agent‘ to make learning more effective (Pollard, as cited in, Gipps, 1999). As such, classroom teachers are the people responsible for setting up classroom tasks and obtaining responses from their students. Moreover, it is the teacher‘s duty to provide opportunities for the students to make them active in nature. In such circumstances, ―this role is dependent on sensitive and accurate assessment of a child‘s needs and places premium on formative assessment of pupil understanding‖ (Gipps, 1999, p. 373). Thus, the students learn from authentic assessments where the socially situated nature of learning is for the individual child to acquire knowledge in social action (Gipps, 1999).
However, it is to be noted that the responses from the students might sometimes be difficult to interpret and they can become quite vague to
the teachers. Similarly students might also face problems in sensing the teacher‘s behaviours or the agenda and struggle in the classroom to make sense of what is being asked of them (Pryor & Torrance, 2000). To help students in such dilemmas Coll and Martín (1996) recommend to conduct meaningful activities and tasks so that teachers can discover the degree to which the learning has taken place.
Usually, primary teachers should have a wide knowledge of their students concerning the way they learn and issues related to assessment. For example, efficient teachers always teach from a constructive perspective, which manages to regulate the variety and intensity of help given to each individual student. Hence, through this theory, teachers‘ create goals and focus on individual students learning needs by helping the learners to develop deep understandings in their interested subject area. In these circumstances, it further helps teachers to build learning habits that aids the students‘ future learning (Coll & Martín, 1996; Richardson, 2003). Filer and Pollard (2000) also agree class assessment is based on teachers‘ understandings and knowledge of their students; this also includes a range of social as well as academic settings and activities. For instance, the teachers‘ observe students everyday interacting with peers and other adults in the classrooms or at other activities in the school. Consequently, these interactions help them to build learning habits that aids their future learning. In order to make learning more effective in such classrooms,
Adams (2006) suggests the following recommendations for teachers:
Focus on learning not performance;
View learners as active co-constructors of meaning and knowledge;
Establish a teacher–pupil relationship built upon the idea of guidance not instruction;
Seek to engage learners in tasks seen as ends in themselves and consequently as having implicit worth;
Promote assessment as an active process of uncovering and acknowledging shared understanding. (p. 247)