The constructivist conception of learning

The principle characteristic of constructivism is in its view that knowledge, both everyday and scientific, is a construction shaped by its context. David Kolb (1984) has studied experiential learning theory and process. ln practical terms, he is one of the early constructivists, as he defines:

"Leaming is the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience" (Kolb 1984, 38).

Analysis of this definition by Kolb leads to following critical aspects of the learning process:

• the process emphasizes adaptation and learning as opposed to content or outcomes,

• knowledge is a transformation process, being continuously created and recreated, not an independent entity to be acquired or transmitted,

• learning transforms experience in both its objective and subjective forms.

The concept of learning can mean the basic assumptions made about the nature of the learning process, or the scheme formed at individual level about learning that directs the activities of a teacher and an educator. A dichotomic (paradigmatic) division into concepts of learning is based on either empirical-behavioristic or cognitive-constructive approach.

Furthermore, a humanist concept of learning, among others, can be distinguished. lt emphasizes in particular the importance of experiential learning.

To understand learning we must understand the nature of knowledge, and vice versa. As a matter of fact, conceptions of learning and knowledge are very hard to separate from each other, when the research is based on a constructivist approach. Philip Candy (1989, 98) reflects the conceptual assimilation when he presents the following assumptions of constructivist thought:

• the "subjects" of research should be considered as "knowing" beings,

• human beings can attend to complex communications and organize complexity rapidly,

• human interactions are based on intricate social roles, the rules governing which are often implicit,

• locus of control resides within the subjects themselves, and complex behavior is constructed purposefully,

• forms of negotiated understanding are integrally connected with other human activities and

• people participate in the construction of reality.

The idea of transformation of experience and knowledge, presented by Kolb and Candy, has been developed further by Mezirow (1991 ). Mezirow presents a new way of approaching the learning of adults. He describes the processes through which an adult can free himself of restraining ideologies, ways to observe things and psychological obstacles. He also offers an inside view of the skill of teaching adults, in which the reflecting of the teacher and the understanding of the learner·s background have great importance.

According to Mezirow, the theories concerning the learning of adults have lacked a central element - meaning perspective - and interpretation on how the meaning perspectives are constructed, evaluated and redesigned. He thinks a theory of transformative learning is needed to explain how an adult learner gives meanings to his own experiences, how he structurally constructs his experiences, designs meanings for things and solves conflicts of meaning. These issues can be understood only in the framework of adult development and social objectives. Mezirow also uses the concept of situational learning. By this he means the change that takes place in our way of interpreting situations. lt includes giving value to phenomena that occur in different situations and choice-based decision-making that occurs as a result. ln these processes we can further develop our ability to deal with our experiences so that the meanings we give to them function even better in relation to our operating environment.

ln his theory Mezirow examines two important issues:

1. How an adult can free himself of established models of thinking and thus function and renew his own learning - the question is therefore about change in its original meaning.

2. The objective of change are methods that aim for self-reflection and transformative learning.

The achievement of the objectives of transformative learning should be measured by comparing the students' original structures of meaning to the structures of meaning that have changed as a result of learning.The transformation theory is based on specific constructivist assumptions. A conviction is that meaning exists within ourselves rather than in external forms such as books and that the persona! meanings that we attribute to our experience are acquired and validated through human interaction and communication.

Mezirow (1991, 70 - 94) differentiates three major aspects of learning:

• instrumental leaming: to control and manipulate the environment,

• communicative leaming: to understand the meaning of what is being communicated and

• emansipatory or reflective leaming: to understand oneself and one, s perspectives.

Reflection is the central dynamic in intentional learning, problem solving, and validity testing through rational discourse. Although the transformation of meaning schemes (specific beliefs, attitudes, and emotional reactions) through reflection is an everyday occurrence, it does not necessarily involve self-reflection. We often merely correct our interpretations. lnstead, the transformation of meaning perspectives always involves critical reflection:

"Perspective transformation is the process of becoming critically aware of how and why our assumptions have come to constrain the way we perceive, understand, and fee/ about our world; changing these structures of habitual expectation to make possible a more inc/usive, discriminating, and integrative perspective; and, finally, making choices or otherwise acting upon these new understandings" (Mezirow 1991, 167).

ln the application of the constructive conception of learning, the pair of concepts meaning perspective - se/f-directedness becomes a metascientific watershed. lt is possible to study how individual meanings, schemes and perspectives of meaning are constructed from observations and experiences. lt is aisa possible to study how on the basis of self-directing an individual can direct the construction of reality in himself. An entire/y different issue is what is natura/ and even possible to humans. This belongs to the philosophical basic questions in both education and leadership.

The latter concept, self-directedness, refers to an ideal view of human beings that requires a certain viewpoint in the philosophy of science: a positive and growth-emphasizing perception of humans. ln fact, this kind of perception is one of the basic components of the new leadership training program. The basic training materia! for everyone in the FDF who is to be trained a leader deals with the human characterization through three-component division into rational, control-emphasizing and growth-emphasizing characterization by Ruohotie (1995).

The constructive conception of learning sets new requirements for any organization or training program applying these principles. Constructive learning process is tied to the respective environment and culture. The quality of social interaction in learning process contributes to the process in which the individual meaning perspectives are constructed.

According to Rauste-von Wright and von Wright (1994), educational planning should cover aisa the conditions under which the constructive conception of learning can be applied as a function of change in individual meaning perspectives.

The basic assumptions of the constructivist approach emphasize three concepts.

Constructivity means that knowledge and cognitive strategies are constructed by the learner, and that learning involves qualitative restructuring and modification of schemata.

Active epistemology refers specifically to the belief that learners should be seen as active, intentional individuals who are primarily responsible for their own learning. Menta/

representation is related to problem-solving tasks, and is believed to reflect the idea that the manner in which knowledge is represented aisa determines understanding. (Lanka 1997, 20.)

Reynolds, Sinatra and Jetton (1996) have reviewed the development of the constructive concept of learning. They analyze five different approaches to understanding knowledge acquisition and representation. These approaches are behaviorism, schema theory, social

perspective theories, connectionism, and situated cognition. These approaches are described as lying on a continuum running from an experience-centered view of knowledge acquisition to a mind-centered view, with a more interactive view in the center.

(Reynolds et al 1996, 94.) As presented in Figure 3, 1 prefer to visualize these approaches in another form.

Figure 3. Five approaches to the concept of human learning.

The philosophical question of the origin of knowledge is not addressed in this study. As Lanka (1997) notices, there has recently been a debate among educational psychologists about the nation of constructivism. This debate centers around the nature of knowledge in the philosophical sense, that is, whether we can speak of "absolute" knowledge independent of human construction. ln my study, constructivity will be approached from an educational perspective. From the leadership point of view the emphasis, in general, is on how leaders and followers construct their reality and the implications that this has concerning research and learning for leadership.

Each of the approaches presented in Figure 3 has definite strengths and has illuminated different aspects of human cognitive activity. The behaviorist perspective provides many insights concerning the acquisition of lower-order skills and the control of human behavior.

The problem is that there is no room for any organizing or framing function of the mind in this approach. Thus, behav·iorism offers systematic tools for planning and managing education (Heinonen 1989, 70 - 73), which may be one reason for its success.

Connectionists model neurona processes that allow insight into complex processes such as pattern recognition. Connectionism has similarities with classical associationism: back propagation represents an additional, internal process that goes beyond the simple relation of sensory experiences. Associations can be formed between units based on experience or on the propagation of activity through the network (Saariluoma 1992, 25 -30). Connectionism is associationism with an intelligent face.

Social perspective theories bring the entire social environment, including culture and society, into the center of the cognitive equation. Theorists in social constructivism whose notions of knowledge are consistent with the early scholars, such as Vygotsky and Mead, suggest that the mechanisms of individual thought are first engaged through interaction with others and then become internalized. The process of internalization has played a much less significant role in the modern research agenda in comparison to that of the sociocultural context. ln the theory of cultural learning by Kruger and Tomasello (1996) the importance of social cognition is emphasized. ln cultural learning the child does not learn from the adult's actions, but the child learns through the adult's perspective in a truly intersubjective fashion. The theory is based on understanding others as intentional, mental and reflective agents. The three types of learning are imitative, instructed and collaborative. (Kruger & Tomasello 1996, 369 - 372.)

Situated cognition is relatively recent theory that attemps to account for how one learns in a conceptual environment. Theory notes the importance of close interaction between the environment and the cognitive agent and the importance of mental models in problem-solving situations. Situated cognition emphasizes both the processes that occur in the mind, as well as the affordances within the environment that contribute to the formation of mental models. The situation and the frequency of engagement in the situation as variables in knowledge acquisition are seen to be important.

Schema theory emphasizes the role of the mind and how knowledge interacts with incoming information. Schema theory allows the mind a greater role than other modern theories of knowledge acquisition. The mind, in the form of schemata, allows an individual, s knowledge to interact with incoming information to form new interpretations.

The role of experience is acknowledged as well, because it provides the raw materials from which the mind forms schemata. The schema theory is interactive, but the emphasis is on the mind and internal processes of information representation, organization, and framing (Rauste-von Wright & von Wright 1994, 15 - 19).

As illustrated in Figure 3, the phenomenon of human learning can be approached from many conceptual directions, with number of research methods. The question is not, what is right or wrong. The question is, are we able to constructed a synthetizising framework in order to utilize all of these theoretical approaches. This is the core idea of the critical constructivist approach:

" .. although each of these theories has merit in explaining certain aspects of knowledge acquisition, no approach adequately addresses the issues of consciousness, self-awareness, and se/f-reflection .... what is required is a conception that embodies the sophistication of the computer metaphor with the added ability to evolve, fee/, and adapt - in short, a bio/ogica/ metaphor".

(Reynolds et al 1996, 93.)

According to the critical constructivist concept of learning, even one simple concept, phenomenon or thing can be interpreted, analyzed and understood in many different ways and this is what happens in connection to learning. When studying the results of learning, one should concentrate on finding out what kind of interpretations have been taken in.

Aisa, learning as well as teaching is always connected to the environment it takes place in (Patrikainen 1997, 256). This environment is an entire context from micro level to macro level: from the level of a single emotion, ·situation and a choice of words through social interaction to a wider cultural context. Rauste-von Wright and von Wright define:

"Leaming is a se/f-centered process in which the /eamer se/ects, interprets and analyzes information based on earlier information and experiences. This process has always been connected to the situation and culture. The interactive process and the schemes of the /eamer form the basis of new structures of meaning^11• (Rauste-von Wright & von Wright 1994, 15.)

Purposeful learning, i.e. learning to learn, is a skill that must be developed alongside

11normal¹¹ learning. Because developing as a leader is a comprehensive growth process, the emotional dimension of an individual's personality has to be fully taken into consideration in research. ln addition to metacognitive capabilities, a leader absolutely needs meta-affective capabilities as well. Further on, everyone can develop his/her skills of learning and thinking. The best learning methods are usually simple and on the whole they share one common feature: they encourage the use of all areas of intelligence as well as all senses to speed up learning. Looking at social change, many say that it is

increasingly important to understand and control how to learn, rather than what to learn.

(Dryden & Vos 1997, 8 - 12.)

Today among the central questions of research is the interaction between a student's skill of conceptual thinking and learning behavior. ln her study, Venkula (1988) ends up analyzing the model of the cyclic development of activity, knowledge and attitudes. By this she means that the said dimensions and above ali the development of an individual in these areas is a complex cyclic process in which factors constantly influence each other.

For example, an individual's own activity and the feedback he receives on it have an effect on the individual's thoughts and the capabilities of conceptual thinking in a process-like manner. Venkula writes:

11As a result of experiencing competence that occurs with actions, skil/s as we/1 as attitudes and knowledge change¹¹ (Venkula 1988, 224).

The critical constructivist approach to learning in the context of leadership training emphasizes, that the theoretical framework has to include all the approaches presented in Figure 3. Beyond this, the framework should consider carefully the affective dimension of human functions as a part of all learning in leadership.