Chapter 3 The Theoretical Framework of the Study
3.3 The constructivist theoretical framework
The constructivist theoretical framework provides a basis for understanding how human beings integrate new knowledge into existing cognitive structures and then make sense of that knowledge (Ferguson, 2007). Studies that use constructivism as a theoretical framework set out to answer questions on how people construct knowledge in a particular setting, and the effects of people’s behaviour and those they interact with on knowledge construction (Ferguson, 2007). For example a study conducted in
Midwestern, USA by Hand et al., (1999) examined junior secondary school students’ responses to the implementation of a constructivist approach to the teaching of science. Findings of an open-ended questionnaire and semistructured interviews show that students were more actively involved, had more discussions, practical work, and more fun. The constructivist teaching and learning strategies led to greater understanding of concepts. It was seen that students were more active in the learning process. They had an opportunity to see and control their thinking, constructed correct knowledge, and were more confident in their understanding of science.
Similarly, the evaluation of Math Wings project in the USA (a programme to improve mathermatics teaching and learning which uses a constructivist approach to teaching) has shown positive results in a number of different school districts. Comparison of schools using the programme effects to matched schools that did not use the
programme showed positive programme effects on standardised tests. The children in the programme schools did better than those in the matched schools. The tests focused on basic skills as well as higher-order skills (Madden et al., 1999).
On the other hand, not all studies show positive results though. One USA study looking at the implementation of a science teaching reform programme that used a
constructivist framework reported no effects on either achievement or pupil attitudes to science. While research that used data on the level of implementation of the
constructivist teaching within the same programme likewise found no effects (Shymansky et al., 2000)
31
Constructivism has been a major theoretical influence in contemporary science education. It is an epistemological theory which defines the nature of knowledge and understanding Guba and Lincoln (1994) and from an epistemological point of view constructivism is a theory of how we gain knowledge and is used to explain how we know and what we know (Von Glasersfeld, 1996). Educators’ beliefs about how people learn (i.e. their personal epistemology) whether verbalised or not, often help them make sense of, and guide their practice (Lorsbach & Tobin, 1993).
3.3.1 Constructivist learning process
Constructivism considers learning as a construction of knowledge by individuals. In this theory of learning it is acknowledged that students may bring prior ideas to
instruction (Von Glasersfeld, 1996). In science education, the students’ prior ideas may be in conflict with scientific knowledge being taught, and hence, would affect the students’ conceptual understanding (Scott et al., 1994). Knowledge construction is viewed as an active process, and social interactions among students are central in the construction of knowledge by individuals (Von Glasersfeld, 1996). Where students have some prior knowledge or concepts, such knowledge is crucial to the students’ understanding of the new information or concepts (Cakir, 2008). Therefore, the teaching and learning process should be an active negotiation to process meaning which involves finding out and engaging with students’ ideas wherever possible (Carr et al., 1994; Scott et al ., 1994).
The constructivist theory of learning has its roots in Piaget’s cognitive and Vygotsky’s social cultural perspectives on teaching and learning of science. Piaget’s cognitive perspective on learning, regards human beings as an active, independent meaning- makers who construct their knowledge, as opposed to simply receiving it (Moore, 2000; Piaget, 1975).
When individuals construct knowledge, the new information is either integrated into the existing understanding, a process Piaget calls assimilation, or if the new
information contradicts the existing knowledge, restructuring of knowledge occurs to adapt the new information in a meaningful manner, which he called accommodation process. In this cognitive view of learning, human beings achieve a balance between assimilation and accommodation through their interactions with their physical and
32
social environments, and Piaget called this process equilibration, or self-regulation (Moore, 2000). From a cognitive perspective, equilibration entails comprehension of science concepts. Therefore, to assist students in the learning process the teacher should be aware of students’ existing knowledge and any cognitive conflicts that students may experience, so as to engage them in meaningful activities. Such activities should help students to work with their prior ideas during the teaching of the scientific concepts being explored in the topic in order to resolve their conflicts and enhance conceptual understanding (Posner et al., 1982). Ausubel (1963) also promoted the cognitive approach to learning from what he called meaningful learning. He emphasised that, prior knowledge or existing schemata are of central importance if the learner is to meaningfully acquire new information or concepts. Ausubel postulated that meaningful learning occurs when new information is subsumed by existing relevant concepts, and these concepts undergo further change and growth (Novak, 1998). Therefore, effective instruction requires the teacher to choose important or relevant information to teach, and to provide the means to help students relate this information to concepts they already possess (i.e. existing schemata).
Vygotsky’s socio-cultural perspective of teaching and learning emphasises the process of social interaction in one’s construction of knowledge. In this view learning occurs when the students interact with people who have additional relevant knowledge (Vygotsky, 1978). For Vygotsky, language is a tool that a student uses to construct knowledge during social interactions with others in order to develop a personal understanding, i.e. students need to talk with their peers and the teacher in order to articulate their prior ideas about a concept, or their explorations made in an
investigation, to clarify their thinking and correct their misconceptions (Driver et al., 1994; Osborne, 1997).
According to Vygotsky, students have two levels of development: the actual
developmental level that refers to the already mature mental abilities which enable the student to solve problems independently, and the potential developmental level that refers to higher mental functions that are not yet mature. The student can use these higher mental functions to solve problems only with the help of an adult or a peer who has more relevant knowledge than him/her. The difference between these two levels is
33
what Vygotsky calls the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). The ZPD is accessed through student-teacher interaction or cooperative problem solving with peers (Liang & Gabel, 2005). From this perspective the teacher can help students understand scientific concepts by assigning challenging tasks and engaging students in small groups and whole class discussions with the guidance of teachers through scaffolding, i.e. allowing students to perform tasks that would normally be slightly beyond their ability without that assistance and guidance from the teacher (Duffy & Jonassen, 1992). Eventually, a teacher can withdraw leaving the student under full control of the newly constructed extension of their knowledge. Therefore, the knowledge is personally constructed in the process that is mediated by social interaction (Driver et al., 1994; Windschitl, 2002).
Although the term ‘constructivism’ encompasses a variety of theoretical positions and has mainly been applied to learning theories, focusing on ‘learning’ as a conceptual change Driver and Oldham (1986) and to curriculum development and teaching, mainly in science (Osborne & Wittrock 1985). It also provides some clear pointers towards teaching strategies that might assist students in conceptual reconstruction Hodson & Hodson, 1998), such as:
i) Identifying students' views and ideas;
ii) Creating opportunities for students to explore their ideas and to test their robustness in explaining phenomena, accounting for events and making predictions;
iii) Providing stimuli for students to develop, modify and where necessary, change their ideas and views;
iv) Supporting their attempts to re-think and reconstruct their ideas and views.
Students’ prior conceptions and social interactions with teachers and peers are very central in the constructivist theory of learning. The assumption is that students use prior conceptions as a foundation for the new knowledge and during interaction with others, students use their previous ideas to negotiate for the meaning of what is being taught (Carr et al., 1994; Driver et al., 1994; Cakir, 2008). Therefore, working with students’ prior experiences and using active teaching and learning strategies are fundamental classroom practices in the constructivist teaching and learning process.
34